Tuesday, October 23, 2007

In theory are theory and practice the same. . .

But in practice they are not.
























Be concrete.


Blue Devil showed in a nice game 3 times what the greatest problem is with positional play (sorry Blue). He created an outpost that he could not maintain, he preserved the bishoppair in a position where it is worthless and he created a passer he could not maintain.

While I'm doing the third strategical module of PCT, I realized that I must choose between different theoretical advantageous positions all the time. Making the same mistakes as Blue. Time and again the little yet concrete advantage supersedes the vague theoretical advantage that maybe in the future sometimes will yield fruit.
The choice between the beautiful outpost for the knight on f5 in the neighbourhood of the enemy king but without the help of other pieces and the much less beautifull outpost on c4 where the knight does something less spectacular e.g. fixating a weak pawn at a6.

Or on another note, I must create an ugly backward pawn while preventing an enemy bishop to beam as a laser in my position right now. While I'm writing this, I realize it is the choice between what is now and what is maybe in the future. The little advantage now supersedes the big advantage in the future, since the future tends to be very uncertain in chess. The ugly backward pawn can maybe in the future cause an unfavourable endgame, but that beaming bishop is now threatening my position.

I have to get used to this way of looking at things. Pragmatism rules!

9 comments:

  1. that's exactly why having a plan is so crucial. it's not enough to 'gain' a positional advantage like a strong outpost, but the knight needs to actually do something there. the opponent is not just going to willingly bring that knight something to attack, they're gonna do just the opposite, increasing the impotence of that piece by as much as they can. same thing with doubled pawns, which are not a weakness by their own right. they're a weakness only if they can be attacked (without wasting huge amount of tempos, as they have a cost also!) or they prevent you from doing something. often they prevent the attacker from doing something! if you don't have a plan how to make it a weakness, you're just wasting time.

    I run into things like these a lot against lower rated players (1500-1600's), but the higher rated players never do the same mistake. they always have a plan. "a bad plan is better than no plan at all" as they say.

    I often get murderous attacks because a lower rated player thought he was 'creating a positional weakness' by doubling a pawn. I have a game going on against a 1750 player, where I dropped the queen, but I still have a forced draw + loads of attacking chances because he made the mistake of 'creating a weakness' by doubling my pawns. that's how powerful things those are.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Very well said. I should tattoo this on my leg.

    In honor of DK's birthday, let me add, "Bravo! You are the most brilliant person in the blosophere, and if I said your previous post was the best ever I was wrong. This is the best thing said in chess ever, perhaps with no exceptions but close to Wormwood, and even Robert Pearson on his wonderful blog, and we must always make room for the gentle thoughts of likeforests. Also, you may not know that from time to time I post long blog posts going into topics in great detail, and I think that they will not disappoint."

    ReplyDelete
  3. LOL.

    But for serious chess improvement you have to learn how to ignore birthdays.

    ReplyDelete
  4. LOL

    i'll get you all back, mark my words, we will even the score.

    :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. BDK, you forgot to mention Yasser.

    Nice Post... Whether your a Silman-nite, Heisman-monk, or follow Rowson-ism, or Nimzo-tology ... or even mash it together in some form of unviversalists belief of middle game strategies... there are always caveates to these things we tend to follow dogmatically. ( here boy... here!)

    THe only way to realy break out of this is EXPERIENCE.

    Play more, theorize less.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Be concrete.
    Awfully close to what I would say. And, perhaps closer to what I mean that what I say! :)


    - Tacticus Maximus

    ReplyDelete
  7. Great post and easy to understand, now that you use patzer friendly language for once! ;)

    ReplyDelete
  8. ""Bravo! You are the most brilliant person in the blosophere, and if I said your previous post was the best ever I was wrong. This is the best thing said in chess ever, perhaps with no exceptions but close to Wormwood, and even Robert Pearson on his wonderful blog, and we must always make room for the gentle thoughts of likeforests. Also, you may not know that from time to time I post long blog posts going into topics in great detail after long walks with GM Seirawan, and I think that they will not disappoint. Planning is very heuristical, and not unrelated to complex adaptive systems, and La Vita Nuova captures this pre-quattrachento feeling before the flood of modernity."

    ReplyDelete