Originally posted by danilopI don't know why I never thought to use that notebook feature. But you must not have used the analyze board to play that last game ahead or you should have seen he could have escaped to d3. I say that idea too a couple moves earlier, but did not put much thought in to see if it would work.
I usually have 30 games going on simultaneously. I make tactical blunders more often than I should, especially when I try to play on my phone (terrible idea).
This recent game is particularly hilarious. I dropped a pawn in such a ridiculous fashion that my only option was to resign out of shame:
[pgn][Event "September 2012 Banded Duel 1800+"] [Site "h ...[text shortened]... checks. I've got nothing.}1-0
[/pgn]
"...until I started using RHP's built-in notes system."
I've always relied on my memory to recall what was going on.
I usually write the moves down right away in a notebook and flick through them OTB.
This book is nearly full, think I'll ebay it. 😉
The game is just the bare score, no notes, ideas, (it was an unrated friendly) so
not sure what I was thinking.
If some are happy with 30+ games then so be it. When I did it I was OK as
I was up for it. But being in the mood I think is important (to me anyway.)
Think 20 max is just about right to give your opponent a good game and not
just rush through the motions.
I have some bad OTB games where I made the mistake of playing when
not up for it. I cannot switch on the brilliance like a light switch.
Not up for it and I toil to win technically won games, I must have some panache,
it's expected of me and I expect it from myself.
The trouble is when the brilliance is on I cannot switch it off and I sac the entire chess set. 🙂
Also we all have Indian Sign positions. Positions we don't feel too at home in.
Two Rooks v a Rook and Knight and a pawn or two.
I'd rather have the Rook & Knight. That's panache territory.
Originally posted by MarinkatombSeems many here say 30 is reasonable for cc, neither too many or too few.
I think 30 games is quite reasonable. There are a number of factors to consider, most importantly, what time controls are we talking about? 30 games with 21 days per move is 30 a month (pretty much) where as 30 games with 1 day per move is considerably more taxing. The issue is time per move. I play 50 odd games at 7+ days per move. That's 50 moves per week. Even on a busy week, that's easy to fit in..
The time element was something I had forgotten,
as naturally you could argue that more games can be played by people who play 21 days per move...
however I'm sure many people prefer to play shorter, quicker games, so a middle ground is often most desired.
I personally like to play 1 day per move with 3 days timebank...
I'm currently playing 6 games as a non-subscriber, however I am considering pushing the boat out.
Wanted to just say something about the game Robbie posted...
no captures until move 20?? I don't remember ever seeing that lol
Also danilop, you play around 30 games and you say you "make tactical blunders more often than should"
Perhaps you are of the same mind as Dewi, playing here (on RHP) mostly for practice,
and reference points for mistakes made,
accumulating invaluable experience to take with you for OTB games?
Also GP...
yes, clearly 12. ...Nd3+ was the better move... HOW could you miss it? 😛
Thanks for all your posts, some thoughtful insights provided.... keep em coming.
Really RJ?... Cardboard and sticky notes? Lol
Originally posted by 64squaresofpainI think GP missed 12...Nd3+ because of psychology. I believe his previous move was made so he could move 12...Nc7 and when you prevented that he was psychologically not prepared for a different move with his knight. So it took a little while to disguard that move and in the meantime he saw that 12...Ba6 prevented his opponent from castling. Bingo! No need to think more at that time.
Seems many here say 30 is reasonable for cc, neither too many or too few.
The time element was something I had forgotten,
as naturally you could argue that more games can be played by people who play 21 days per move...
however I'm sure many people prefer to play shorter, quicker games, so a middle ground is often most desired.
I personally l hts provided.... keep em coming.
Really RJ?... Cardboard and sticky notes? Lol
As for the cardboard and sticky notes, I am still adjusting to the modern age of high technology and the sticky notes was an advancement for me. Ha, ha. 😏
P.S. Don't forget I am a redneck.
Hi 64.
Looking at again.
12..Ba6 is OK. I'm a classical player and rarely like to have one piece but doing
all the spade work. It's also trappy, I'd do it again.
I think the positon I got was OK for Black.
I simply missed White playing 18.Nc4 after my 17...Nxc1.
It happens.
I did not lose any sleep over it, I used it as one example of how I can play
if for some reason I'm not in the mood. Especially after a tactical over sight.
I'm sure others on here do as well. perhaps they don't recognise it.
Hi RJ.
What are talking about me playng 12...Nc7 that's illegal?
Normally I would value a 2200 player's contribuition.
Infact I would listen to anyone's contribution.
However if I want your opinion I'll plug in Fritz.
I think the most games I ever had going concurrently was somewhere near 800. This only became a problem when I couldn't get on for a couple days here and there, and I would end up timing out (happened a lot, not proud of it). Managing the games mentally wasn't too big an issue. I was around an 1800-1900 player even playing so many games. I actually found that it helped my game quite a bit because I was able to see and remember patterns very quickly, since I filtered through so many making my moves.
It isn't for everyone, obviously, but if your brain can handle it, go for it. Might find some interesting results.
Originally posted by GalaxyShieldHey Josh, how long you been back? 🙂
I think the most games I ever had going concurrently was somewhere near 800. This only became a problem when I couldn't get on for a couple days here and there, and I would end up timing out (happened a lot, not proud of it). Managing the games mentally wasn't too big an issue. I was around an 1800-1900 player even playing so many games. I actually foun ...[text shortened]... , obviously, but if your brain can handle it, go for it. Might find some interesting results.
Originally posted by MarinkatombHey Marinka, just started playing again yesterday, so not long. 🙂
Hey Josh, how long you been back? 🙂
Good luck with that, greenpawn. Your brain probably will turn into water 😉. Like I said, it isn't for everyone. I was able to store positions away in my brain fairly well, so it worked for me. Obviously it was a build-up to that point (I didn't just start playing hundreds of games, I played more and more and built it up), so I don't know what results you will find.
I realize what I said earlier may sound ludicrous and ill-advised, which it probably is. Just meant to share my experience, not necessarily encourage people to break their brains. 🙂
Originally posted by GalaxyShieldHey welcome back, you gonna subscribe again? 🙂
Hey Marinka, just started playing again yesterday, so not long. 🙂
Good luck with that, greenpawn. Your brain probably will turn into water 😉. Like I said, it isn't for everyone. I was able to store positions away in my brain fairly well, so it worked for me. Obviously it was a build-up to that point (I didn't just start playing hundreds of games, I ...[text shortened]... Just meant to share my experience, not necessarily encourage people to break their brains. 🙂