- Joined
- 20 Jan 07
- Moves
- 24604
18 Feb 10
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWell Robbie, whatever works for you. Unfortunately i've tried a lot of the pigeon holing type study of master games myself and found a lot of it very nice but just not at all beneficial for my game. The problem is that particuar games are chosen by authors in order to fit whatever idea they have for a chapter and a lot of the time the relevance is only very loose. I actually started to think for myself and found that when i looked, a lot of the games chosen to represent a theme would have fitted far better under a different heading!
i dunno, i am studying master games which highlight some aspect of middle game strategy. i think it is good for one can recognise the basic conditions and plan accordingly. for example at the moment i am looking at direct attacks on the king and the different types of positions which may arise and the dynamics which made those attacks successful. fact i dont really like it when the game is decided by a tactical combination to be honest 🙂
Psychologically i also think it's bad to try and isolate such a beautiful creative game into positional themes. I found myself a lot of the time trying to classify just about every game i played into some sort of category. I was not able to see simlpe tactics at the board.
I know what you mean about the beauty of a slow positional crush such as exerted by Karpov or Botvinnik. However, to play like that you need extreme tactical vision. Those guys saw it all. two of the finest tacticians ever. They couldn't play that slow positional stuff without being. They refined their positional technique on the back of their extraordinary vision.
You have to be able to play like Anderssen before you can play like karpov. In reality almost all chess games at club level and a lot higher are decided by tactics of one form or another. I should know, i'm a keen OTB player and have spent quite a bit of time getting crushed by hackers at my club while i looked for some positional theme!
However these are just my opinions borne out of my own experiences. I wish you all the best with your studies.
18 Feb 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThis post highlights good study.
i dunno, i am studying master games which highlight some aspect of middle game strategy. i think it is good for one can recognise the basic conditions and plan accordingly. for example at the moment i am looking at direct attacks on the king and the different types of positions which may arise and the dynamics which made those attacks successful. ...[text shortened]... fact i dont really like it when the game is decided by a tactical combination to be honest 🙂
------------------------------------------------------------
Many of the master games on Chessgames.com are annotated. Playing through
master games works for some - playing through endings works for others -
Tactics training still for other players. Do what your comfortable with and what you
enjoy, or its all just a waste of time - as you won't retain any of it.
-GIN
18 Feb 10
Originally posted by Talismanmmm, i myself dont really differentiate between these different areas for they seem to be intrinsically linked, thus what it really, at least to me anyway, comes down to is a recognition of the dynamics within a position. It may be tactical, a weak back rank, removal of the guard, a mating combination etc that is the definitive feature, it also may be a positional one, creation of passed pawn, seizure of an important diagonal etc, its also may be strategic, how to attack a pawn wedge, how to blockade, how to trade down to an advantageous endgame etc etc. Thus these elements seem to me to be all intrinsically linked and if we are to try to master chess, need to at least, on some level to be understood.
Well Robbie, whatever works for you. Unfortunately i've tried a lot of the pigeon holing type study of master games myself and found a lot of it very nice but just not at all beneficial for my game. The problem is that particuar games are chosen by authors in order to fit whatever idea they have for a chapter and a lot of the time the relevance is only very ...[text shortened]... just my opinions borne out of my own experiences. I wish you all the best with your studies.
i really understand what Talisman is saying though, why dont those hackers believe in the aesthetics of the position? Why must the flower bed by subject to a maniac with a chainsaw saw? because its realpolitik of course 🙂
18 Feb 10
Originally posted by Nowakowskii hope to be studying defence, counterattack, prophylaxis soon, 🙂
This post highlights good study.
------------------------------------------------------------
Many of the master games on Chessgames.com are annotated. Playing through
master games works for some - playing through endings works for others -
Tactics training still for other players. Do what your comfortable with and what you
enjoy, or its all just a waste of time - as you won't retain any of it.
-GIN
19 Feb 10
When I started playing (a bit over 5 years ago), I found the tutorials in Chessmaster 10th Edition extremely helpful. For me they were definitely a lot more helpful than any book could have been at that point. They allow you to learn the basics very quickly without much of an effort. (From then on, it's work, and I lost my motivation rather quickly, so it pretty much stopped there for me...)
And of course it helps to play a lot of games.
21 Mar 10
Originally posted by KnowTheLedgewell look at instructions for chess by clicking site map then introduction
Hi this is my first post here. I was wondering if anyone could recommend me some resources such as books or sites. I am a new player and have only played enough games to know the basics, and a few openings. I have recently been playing about four games a day against either a human or a computer. For the most part I lose and am looking for ways to improve my game. Any suggestions?