25 Jan 06
Originally posted by RahimKWhat good is having endgame knowledge? If your playing someone your rating, and they spent their time studing tactics, and you spent your time studing endgames, you will win when it gets to that phase.
To me that get your pieces out and connect your rooks is general stuff which every person should learn first. I don't consider this positional stuff. To me positional stuff is when a bishop is good, knights are good in such positions, control of key squares etc... That is positional to me.
Endgames are important but I don't think they should come before t ...[text shortened]... tactics? Chess is 99% tactics. You remeber that saying? I'm sure everyone has heard it.
This is technique.
Build a solid foundation, then get into the structure.
Beginners wil remember when they got crushed, and learn all about tactics.
How can they learn good technique?
I got decent by playing the hustlers in the park. They were all about tactics. When i went to play tournaments, thinking i was sooo good, i couldnt break 1300.
Picking up a good book on fundamentals, was how i got better
25 Jan 06
Originally posted by GrandmousterIf the game goes into the endgame. The endgame is not gauranteed. Your telling me that if you are up 2 minor pieces and you go into an endgame you would lose to someone with better endgame knowledge? At the 1500 or below I doubt it.
What good is having endgame knowledge? If your playing someone your rating, and they spent their time studing tactics, and you spent your time studing endgames, you will win when it gets to that phase.
This is technique.
Build a solid foundation, then get into the structure.
Beginners wil remember when they got crushed, and learn all about tactics ...[text shortened]... s sooo good, i couldnt break 1300.
Picking up a good book on fundamentals, was how i got better
As for playing against hustlers. I never played vs them before but from what I've heard about them, they are all about the tactics. And playing vs them you would pick up on their tactics and learn tactics that way.
I don't know how all you guys learnt to play. But I picked up a book just to learn how the pieces move and every since then I have been reading books to get better and wacth all the Dvd's and lectures I can get my hands on.
I know some of you learned from parents, or in the park or just by playing over and over but not me.
I've read 2 positional books, 3 endgames book, and couple tactics books, and several stragegy books and watched lots of roman dvd's.
From all those, the tactics helped me get to 1500 the most.
25 Jan 06
Originally posted by RahimKIf your in an even position, going into an endgmae, or even slightly worse, you can win, because you have more knowledge.
If the game goes into the endgame. The endgame is not gauranteed. Your telling me that if you are up 2 minor pieces and you go into an endgame you would lose to someone with better endgame knowledge? At the 1500 or below I doubt it.
As for playing against hustlers. I never played vs them before but from what I've heard about them, they are all about the ta ...[text shortened]... watched lots of roman dvd's.
From all those, the tactics helped me get to 1500 the most.
Again, my point, and ill keep repeating it, is learn good chess first, before getting into tactics. You might even get a feel for tacics, by playing, and from lots of master games.
It may seem like tactics can improve your game, and they will, but what this does is make bad habits.
At what point will the technique come in? after hitting the wall, because tactics can only get you so far.
I believe this is why russians study the endgame first, then tactics
25 Jan 06
1 edit
Originally posted by RahimKi may have a crappy rating here, but i like to think im a student of the game 😉
Not true. Lower rated player can still teach you stuff. Look at Kasp and his helpers. Roman D, the guy from the Dvd's used to train Kasp, Karpov and others and he like 2500-2600.
I got to 2000 on ICC playing 15 min games. Here i just dont have the patience to look for good moves, hence my lame rating ;(
25 Jan 06
Originally posted by GrandmousterWhat rated players are you talking about? People over 1500?
If your in an even position, going into an endgmae, or even slightly worse, you can win, because you have more knowledge.
Again, my point, and ill keep repeating it, is learn good chess first, before getting into tactics. You might even get a feel for tacics, by playing, and from lots of master games.
It may seem like tactics can improve your game, an ...[text shortened]... s can only get you so far.
I believe this is why russians study the endgame first, then tactics
Surely a player under 1500 who doesn't know tactics won't be able to hang in there with a player under 1500 who does know his tactics. The game will not reach an even position. Under 1500 blunder and therefore tactics are more important for their level then endgames. I never seen any of the games from over club with under 1500 player reach an even endgame. One side is always down material because of a tactic.
25 Jan 06
Originally posted by GrandmousterHelp learning the sicilian. Facing it as white and playing it with Black. I tried is couple of times in OTB but couldn't get my pieces out fast enough and after getting crushed by masters I gave it up. But I want to learn it since its more aggresive and gives black more chances to win compared to 1.e4 e5.
Post some questions, or even a game, and will see what we can do 😀
25 Jan 06
1 edit
Originally posted by Grandmousteryou can't run if you don't know how to walk first. and the first thing about chess for a beginner, is learning to see the board. I think many people make the mistake of thinking that learning tactics is about being able to do deep combinations. it's not. that's how you learn, not why you learn. the why you learn is to be able to see all the pieces, their potential moves and interrelations, completely, accurately and fast.
...my point, and ill keep repeating it, is learn good chess first, before getting into tactics. You might even get a feel for tacics, by playing, and from lots of master games....
you can learn it by doing lot's of problems, playing a lot of games or analysing a lot of games. only the thing is, a set of tactical problems is a concentrated way to train your vision, because every position has tactics. more bang for the buck. (the downside being you don't get the connection of how you end up in such situations.) -in games, you have maybe one or two situations a game where you even need to use your 'tactical visualisation'. but because those situations make or break the game (for a beginner), no amount of positional excellence will do you much good there.
blitz is mainly about tactics, there isn't time for anything else. the time for stategic thinking in blitz is created by being fast and accurate in tactics. in CC however, it's completely the opposite. tactically weaker players are able to compensate their tactical shortcomings by using more time.
about the endgame. it's a lot of theory. it'll take a lot of time to study and practice. but before you get into any kind of decent level in tactics, you'll almost never reach endgames. you crush, or get crushed. although everything you learn is always good for you, my opinion is, the time is better spent in tactics until you start reaching endgames without having dropped pieces.
about taking tips from lower rated players, it is possible a 1300-player is very good at endgame theory, but is held back because he drops pieces. and a 1700 might not even have touched endgame theory. it's clear the latter should listen what the former says. the same goes for any area of theory. but how could you know the 1300 really was better? beats me. maybe if he can prove his point?
25 Jan 06
Originally posted by Grandmouster1) If you are a student, why are you trying to teach? Especially people higher rated than you...
i may have a crappy rating here, but i like to think im a student of the game 😉
I got to 2000 on ICC playing 15 min games. Here i just dont have the patience to look for good moves, hence my lame rating ;(
2) Echoes of Powershaker, anyone?
25 Jan 06
2 edits
Originally posted by welsharnieWhy are you a troll? if you have nothing constructive, or intelligent, dont say anything. Your just trying to push my buttons. Im going to ignore your post from now on
1) If you are a student, why are you trying to teach? Especially people higher rated than you...
2) Echoes of Powershaker, anyone?
25 Jan 06
1 edit
Originally posted by wormwoodYes, the russians know nothing about chess?
you can't run if you don't know how to walk first. and the first thing about chess for a beginner, is learning to see the board. I think many people make the mistake of thinking that learning tactics is about being able to do deep combinations. it's not. that's how you learn, not why you learn. the why you learn is to be able to ld you know the 1300 really was better? beats me. maybe if he can prove his point?
I would copy the teaching habits of the dominating power in the game, over a few non-masters here.
Go ahead, learn tactics till your blue in the face.
This is only one part of the game.
If one where to really understand the game, instead of looking for a pin, skewer, combo, on every move, then they wouldnt be worried about tactics.
Like i said, tactics happen because a person makes bad positional moves.
I didnt say dont learn only tactics, i said learn more about fundimentals. before.
I see everyone knows it all, so you keep your views, and i'll have mine
25 Jan 06
Originally posted by GrandmousterYou seem to like calling people 'trolls'. Before you do that, you should take a step back and have a look at yourself...
Why are you a troll? if you have nothing constructive, or intelligent, dont say anything. Your just trying to push my buttons. Im going to ignore your post from now on
You have recently:
* Accused someone of cheating, when everyone else posting in that thread (most of them stronger players than yourself) recognised that there was no way he was cheating (regardless of the fact that you then were talking about someone else without our knowing this for the end of the thread).
* Started a thread about your 'intuitive queen sacrifice', which really was not 'intuitive', barely a 'sacrifice', and didn't really do much for your position.
* Started a thread offering advice to players, when you really aren't in a position to be offering advice (such as offering advice to people higher rated than you).
* Repeatedly accuse everyone who disagrees with you of being a 'troll', even if everyone there is doing so, using your 'experience' to give you a divine right to overrule what everyone else thinks. Some people have more first-hand knowledge of some situations than you do, which is more relevant than any aping of what you heard from some GM you played blitz with once.
* Claim you would be higher rated if you had the patience to think over moves properly. If this is the case, please do your opponents the courtesy of spending a little more time on your moves. If this is too boring for you, go back to playing blitz, that's what it's there for.
I argue with you more than others because I tend to disagree with what you are saying. You seem to be the one 'trolling' around here. By all means feel free to ignore my posts, but i will continue to post whenever I feel it necessary.