Temposchlucker

Yesterday I mist another mate in a clogged up position. Can you find the mate in 92?

I was able to reconstruct one of the positions from last saturday. I just grabbed a pawn (with white) from b5 and my opponent played Ra8-c8. Mousetrapper was right: there IS a winning tactic. Solution [ 1.Bf6 g5 2.Qh3 Rg6 3.Rxh7 will do the job . ] These were the kind of positions I got in 4 times out of 4 last saturday. Still I got only 2 points from it due to time trouble. What can I learn from this? I have great difficulty to visualize these clogged positions. CTS hasn't this kind of positions. So I must use a different problemset and try to train this. But is my conclusion right, can white head for a winning endgame too? BTW my opponent sacrificed a knight and got away with eternal check due to time trouble at both sides. Picture of the tournament (180 participants)

GM Loek van Wely has won a horse at the Remco Heite chess tournament .

Yesterday we participated in the 34th ERU Goldcup Cream Cheese Rapid Chess Tournament among 180 other players. I always use that to find out where I'm standing and to adjust my training for the Corus tournament. I'm not quite sure how to interpret the results. I played four g/30 games against equal rated opposition and I scored +1 =2 -1 I totally overplayed all players in the opening. In the middlegame they were quite paralysed and deprived from any space. Every move of any piece but one would result in mate or loss of material. But they were good defenders and moved just Rb1 and back to a1 waiting for me to finish them off. Since all my pieces but one were needed to maintain the pressure, I didn't know how to continue, so the time started to play a big role. And that was costing me points. But how to interprete this? My opening play is clearly pretty strong, but I have trouble to finish them off. They all said they were lost and that I could win earlier, but I don't a

Nezha asked me the following: Tempo - Is this what you've done: 1. Study tactics for 3+ years 2. Then learn "basic" positional play. However, i've always assumed that you already know basic positional play. Or there is something different from this book. Like it presented the material more clearly, etc.. (For example, I read Euwe's book and it left my head spinning. It was too soon that time. I could'nt follow the lines) Nezha, you miss the main point. I already knew basic positional play. As all experienced amateurs I knew about holes, outposts, bishoppair, double pawns and the like. As everybody I felt it as a revelation when confronted for the first time with this material. As everybody I was disappointed when I got the bishoppair after a long struggle and then lost it within two moves by a stupid knight. I just lacked the tactical skill to work with positional idea's. First: tactics . After a long tactical training, I'm now pretty well able to reac

Today I used 2 hours to analyse a chessposition for a RHP-game. Afterwards I had the feeling I had only scratched the surface. I lack a good method to dissect a position. I ordered the book of Karpov "Stellungsbeurteilung und plan", but it is out of stock. If I can't analyse a position within 2 hours, then a move in an OTB game with only 3 minutes time at average can be called "near random". First I have to learn to analyse a position "at all". Then I have to learn to do it within 3 minutes.

Law of J'adoube: tactics flow natural from good positions. But what is a good position asked Nezha ? In order to find out, I did some experiments today. Most opponents of equal strenght are about equal in tactical skills. If they are not, one can outwit the other. The only thing that is needed is a complex position. No matter if it is better or worse. That's why a better player can give a knight beforehand and still win the game. If you are of equal strength, and of equal tactical ability, you can win if you have for instance superior endgame skills. In that case you need a quiet position that is likely to trade off pieces and reach an endgame. If all skills are equal, tactical, positional, endgame and the like, then a good position would make the difference. Today I let two engines play together: Toga II and SOS. From those is Toga to be known as the stronger engine. Toga won all regular games. I think that a better position is related to the amount of space every piece has. I

I fired up a few studygames at RedHotPawn. Boy, that's a fun way of playing chess! It is really a relaxed idea to have 3 days for one move. I'm trying to play in Capablanca style. Capablanca wasn't known for his great opening knowledge, but he used to play simple and healthy opening moves. I'm struggling with old habits in trying to do the same. In one of my games I allready play one of my pet gambit lines in stead of inflicting my opponent with a double pawn. It is difficult to keep an helicopterview and not to get lost in interesting complex variants.

Since I'm in the middle of learning a new approach to chess it's evident I have to play more. Next saturday I wil play in a rapid tournament. I'm thinking about correspondence chess. Anyone an idea what are good sites?

This evening I tried to ape the style of Capablanca in the opening. It's evident I'm not used to that since after the opening my pawn structure was heavily compromised. I started an attack, but since I hadn't sacced my usual pawns, those nasty little things stood in the way. At move 30 I missed a tactic to win a pawn. Despite my drills I'm still having trouble with knight forks. In the end when we were both in time trouble I missed the draw. It's evident that I lack endgame experience too. Alas I wasn't able to reconstruct the last 5 minutes since the caretaker wanted to close the building. You can find the game here .

Say you play with white a common variation of the Ruy Lopez: 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.O-O Nxe4 6.d4 b5 7.Bb3 d5 8.dxe5 Be6 9.c3 Be7 10.Re1 Nc5 11.Bc2 Bg4 12.Nbd2 O-O 13.Nb3 Ne6 14.Qd3 g6 Then you find yourself in this diagram: diagram 1 Let us suppose the game went on, and that in some way White, by playing one of the Knights to d4 at the proper time, forced the exchange of both Knights, and then afterwards both the Bishops were exchanged, and we arrived at some such position as shown in the following diagram. diagram 2 Now we would have here the case of the backward c-pawn, which will in no way be able to advance to c5. Such a position may be said to be theoretically lost, and in practice a first-class master will invariably win it from Black. After a few moves the position may be easily thus: diagram 3 The Black pieces can be said to be fixed. If White plays 1.Qc3, Black must answer 1...Qd7, otherwise he will lose a pawn, and if White returns with the Queen to a3 Black

To do the strategical modules of PCT, you must be pretty determined. For some reason it's much heavier than tactical problems. I'm almost half way now and I'm beginning to like it. The first half though was far from easy. Not that the problems were too dificult. Ok, the first time I was going thru the problems I made 50-70% mistakes. But after the provided explanation of the problems, most of them became clear. It's just that it takes more time before I squeeze some fun out of the process if I compare it with tactical problems. But I'm starting to enjoy it now. I have "learnt" (= repeated 6 times) 294 of the 720 problems. The method of PCT comes very close to the method of the 7 circles we use. I have a confession to make. You already guessed it of course, but I'm a convert to the positional approach to chess. Which immediately raises an important question, "is the method of the 7 circles applicable for learning positional chess?" If you wou

Actually I wanted to forget about my last game. But there is a very interesting moment in the game. After terrible opening play I entered the middlegame with a pawn down. I have played thru a lot of games of Capablanca lately. He is a space addict. He acquires as much space as possible with every move. Until tactical posibilities seem to appear out of the blue. I was probably lost before move 18. But at move 18 I started to ape the style of Capablanca. My opponent had clearly no idea what I was doing. It's remarkable how much space I gained within only 3 moves. The character of the game changed totally within these 3 moves. It looked like magic! You can find the game here .

I hate to play against those 13 y.o wonderboys! He played the French. Why do those boys always play the French? I played the Alapin Diemer gambit. After ill-treating the opening in a terrible way I gave him the chance to trade off a lot of pieces and I was left a pawn down. Mentally I already had agreed to trade the rooks and the queens further in an attempt to hold the draw in an endgame with bishops of different color. At move 14 I had no idea how strong he actually was because I had done all the (miserable) work by myself. Then you feel punished! I mean, I'm overhauling already my repertoire to make it more solid, but I can't do everything at the same time and now this! I remembered the style of Capablanca and I started to squeeze him out. I even resisted a schwindle which would have given him a chance to penetrate at my side of the board. I forced his pieces to the back two ranks. And indeed, the tactical opportunities came all by themself! Just by diminishing the territory

Pawn Structure Chess of Andre Soltis is really an excellent book. It explains that there are about a dozen different pawn formations. Different openings can lead to one and the same pawn formation. The book describes what the plans are for both sides for every formation. It really gives a deeper insight. While studying the book I use it to revamp my openings. I have a few holes in my repertoire and the book assists me to fill them. For instance I have played the classical dutch defense in the past. With little success. I tried to revive it with the aid of the book. And although I failed to do so, at least it I understand now why I had so little success with it. I tried to accomplish the wrong things in the opening. For realisation of the right plans in the dutch you are dependend of positional mistakes of your opponent. If I was a grandmaster I should try to change the opening according to the logic of the pawn structure. But that is way beyond my capabilities. Yet:) I have played the

Update: Please all welcome our newest Knight Karpyan . May his pieces stay longer with him than his girlfriend! If my insights change 180 degrees every half hour I'm very happy with that. It means that my insight is growing. It's just a matter of not to be bound at a certain opinion, no matter how true it might look at a certain moment. At the mean time I realize that you as reader of my blog have you be very flexible. I appreciate your patience! It's Blue Devil who is to blame. He asks such good questions! Blue Devil asked if it is true what MDLM said (free citation): At class level the tactical opportunities DO appear out of thin air. So Positional, Middlegame, Strategic ( PMS ) play is NOT required at class level. This was my comment: very good you ask this question again! I'm much better in tactics than I was before the circles. But it doesn't pay off, ratingwise. The reason is that I often reach a good position, but that at a certain moment the position is qu

The method that MDLM used can't be flawed, since his result is a proven fact . But what about the method he advocates in his book Rapid chess improvement and his articles 400 points in 400 days? The program he describes there lasts 127 days and is aiming at adult class players. You can expect a rating improvement of 127 points if you do this program. The Knights Errant have done or are busy with this program. If you look at the average result of the graduated knights , the landmark of 127 points is exceeded by far. So statistically the method he advocates in is book and articles isn't flawed either. But. . . There are a few other things: 1st. Not every knight managed to increase 127 points. I, for instance, started with 1701 points and have now 1743 points. For that improvement I needed about 640 days. I did 7 x the problems of step 3-5 from TCT (=7 x ca 1500) I did 7 x the 1359 problems of George Renko And I did 7 x the problemwindow of CTS, (7 x 10,000; gaining 120 rtg points

Train like an animal. Eat like a horse. Sleep like a baby. Grow like a weed. I always had the feeling that there was something missing in the method of DLM. I have done the circles 7 times or more for different types of problemsets. It gave me the feeling that my motor was running at full throttle. But the car didn't go. It was evident that there was something missing between the motor and the wheels. Something that DLM forgot to tell us. Either because he didn't realize the importance or he just didn't know. I have searched for about a year what that could be. Now I have found it. Almost just by accident. Well, not really of course, because I tried systematically. What I mean to say is that I hadn't predicted it nor anticipated it. My approach to chess was very unbalanced. You can compare it with the situation in agriculture before the discovery of fertilizer. After farming the land for centuries the land was totally exhausted. The structure of the ground was extr

The book of Yasser gave me a lot of insights about pawn play. Although my knowledge is still in it's infancy I was very amazed about how fast I crushed my opponent at the club tonight by using only "soft" positional means. White is somebody who plays the French defense for more than 40 years. The last months he plays everyday against Fritz with the WHITE pieces, forcing Fritz (at full force!) to play the French Defense with black. He told me he wins from Fritz often lately. I played with black the Scandinavian, what transposed into the French. Usually this is VERY slow for black. With my new acquired positional insight though I put him simply off the board in 23 moves. He clearly had no idea what I was doing. You can find the game here . Man, this positonal stuff is going to give me lots of fun!! I have to apologize to J'adoube: the French defense is NOT for old men. I just advice beginners to start with more open games, to get the hang of kingside attacks and gambit

It's difficult to find your way in the chess development jungle. There is an abundance of good advice, often contradictory. If you follow every piece of advice you are busy for aeons, prabably ending up as a solid mediocre player. . . What I'm doing, inventing every wheel of my own, isn't little work either, but at least I avoid double or contradictory work. What is gained on my path is gained forever. A good teacher, be it via a book or alive, would be an enormous save of time, but finding a good teacher is as difficult as finding your way in chess land. I have read hundreds of chess books, I learned a lot from them, but there wasn't much consistency in the matter. Good players are often not good teachers. Because they forget to tell you what is self evident to them, or because they have no idea why they are so good since they learned it at a young age. Good teachers often lack a good vision. To have a good vision, you have to dare to stand up against stronger players