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 quiet. At that moment I start to use time. I come in time trouble and have to draw or even worse.
The average length of my games is about 25 moves. That is extreme short. What I'm gonna say now may sound very weird. But if my average game length was 75 moves, I had 3 times as much chance to outplay my opponent tactically.
So I must learn to move fast in quiet positions. Which brings us to the question: "must that be a PMS-certified-move?"
The answer is: probably not. If it is a mediocre move that just keeps the game going, that's probably good enough.
But I'm just not able to produce conscious a mediocre move! If my candidate move isn't good enough, I go into hibernation untill I have found something better.
So if I have to learn to make any move just to keep the game going, I prefer that it is a PMS-certified-move.
And that's how it is. I have tasted the potency of positional insight, and I want more!
Margriet and I have finished Yasser's book and we are now playing thru the games of Capablanca, commented by the master himself.
If I make a move, I always had the idea that the possibilities were infinite. That if I would move a knight to the rim, that there would always come a moment that I could bring it back to the center.
But in practice that possibility is non existent most of the times. Every move excludes heaps of possibilities. That's why every game is so different. Have you ever played two games that were close lookalikes?
Study of pawn play lifts a tip of the veil and shows what you are excluding with every pawn move. How you can rule out the possibilities of the opponent while increasing the possibilities of your own.
There is a lot of work to do.
We started with the excellent book "Pawn structure chess" of Andrew Soltis. Hattip to Sancho.
To learn to move in quiet positions we do the strategic modules of PCT. I'm busy with module 2 and have an error rate of about 70% the first time. Which gives enough room for improvement:)
The Order of Battle
1 hour ago