Temposchlucker

In the beginning, there can be only one goal  From the start position, there can be only one goal. Attack the King! For the simple reason, that there is no other weak target in the enemy camp that is slow enough and vulnerable enough to go for. In order to attack the King, you must create the LoA's towards the focal points near the King, and towards the defenders of those LoA's (lines of attack). Where are the focal points There are three places where the King can be, in the middle, castled kingside and castled queenside. This means, that your attackers must be flexible. Chess is a game of multi purpose moves. If you fulfil two goals with one move, and the enemy can only defend against one with his next move, you are making progress. Creating a landscape of pivotal points In the opening and the middlegame, you work on creating the LoA's. You have to have a plan for every piece. How is your rook on a1 going to participate in the attack? Do you need a rooklift via a3-g3 towar

 Now the dust starts to settle I can describe the way to acquire tactical skill in the most simple way: Learn the 50 most frequent tactical motifs (mates, tactics and preliminary moves) by heart. No matter the method. For instance: use ChessTempo select batches of max 30 problems per motif repeat them until you know them by heart. Typically at least 20 times per motif do it slow by using system 2. Speed is for testing system 1, not for learning . Say at least 3 minutes per repetition. Let chess logic (system 2) be your guide. select the problems that are 5 ply deep 30 x 50 x 20 x 3 = 90,000 minutes = 1,500 hours is needed for a complete tactical overhaul, but you can focus on the most frequent motifs  That will cost you 30 x 32 x 20 x 3 = 57,600 minutes = 960 hours which covers 80% of the most frequent tactics that occur in real games. We already knew that TINSTAAFL , but with 3 hours per day you can outplay anyone tactically within a year. So that is a work in progress. When you plug

 Robert said: "Only when we have identified the PoPs, filtered them, and identified the various lines of attack to those PoPs, then we can begin figuring out the FUNctions that each attacker/defender plays and then how those roles can be modified to our advantage. Our intuition (System 1) guides us through the process so that we focus on the SALIENT features, ignoring everything else (at least initially). I think of it as “drilling down” into the details from the vulture’s eye view, using the PoPs, LoAs and FUNs to guide me as to where to bury the beak and claws." I propose another approach. The PoPLoAFun method emerged from analyzing puzzles. Where you have no prior knowledge of how the game went. In this situation, you need the vulture's eye to lead you to the salient points. But when you conduct a game, things are different. Especially when you use the approach I derived from the AoA. There is only one target at the beginning of the game. The King. It is logical to go

 In order to attack the enemy King, we must learn to SEE the LoA landscape (lines of attack). A mate is most of the time delivered by a Queen, on a square nearby the enemy King. Assisted by a piece of some sort. The square on which the Queen delivers mate, is called the focal point. Let's not be bothered by semantics, I like the term, and it is more commonly known than PoP (point of pressure). From the focal point we trace back to the attackers, which delivers us the LoA's. A LoA is the line of attack from attacker to the focal point. It consists of ranks, files, diagonals and crooked lines (for the knight). The LoA can contain pivotal points, where the line of attack changes from direction. We need to know how many attackers can be added to the attack, and how many tempi they need to reach the focal point. Further we need to SEE what de defenders are. The defenders can interfere with the LoA's or the focal point. Diagram 1. White to move r3r1k1/1qp1bppp/p2pb3/1p5N/4P3/P2Q3

 In the start position, only one piece is vulnerable: the King. For the simple reason that the King is vulnerable by default. It is the only target in the start position. It is reasonable to go after the King's throat from move one. That is what the Art of Attack is about. Of course, an attack might provoke your opponent to create other weaknesses. Other targets may arise. The natural secondary targets are the pawns. When there are pawns that are vulnerable, it might be easier to go after them at the moment that the King hunt peters out. After having acquired a few tactical skills, the next step is to apply them for a King hunt. The Art of the Attack provides a guide for this. I lack a gene for art, so I don't know about the art part, but the system that Vukovic provides for the kill, has a lot of resemblances with the PoPLoAFun system. His focal point is the same as my PoP (point of pressure). Vukovic does his theory no favor with a somewhat complex nomenclature. But his focal

  Game 2: Overall question:  At what point(s) did you feel like you had no plan or even an idea of how to proceed? After move 57. It were the last 5 minutes and I didn't need to write the moves anymore. I totally outplayed him in 5 hours. This is what Stockfish thinks: But since I had to THINK in order to come up with a PLAN, I used too much time, allowed his king to walk towards his pawns, let him conquer mine and let him shove his pawns towards promotion. When he promoted, I gave up in disgust.  Please note: my comments are based on my impressions and may be totally off the mark. It is virtually impossible to get inside someone else’s head regarding their thoughts during a game. It’s sometimes difficult for me to even figure out what’s going on inside my own head! [Event "Computer chess game"] [Site "STUDIE-PC"] [Date "2022.11.29"] [Round "?"] [White "Tempo"] [Black "Kees"] [Result "0-1"] [BlackElo "1971&q

 Robert said: PART I: This is my “stream of consciousness” review of your first game. I’m not criticizing your play; just trying to figure out what was going on in your mind as you played. My interest is in trying to see (if possible) potential deficits in knowledge/skill that we may share. I have never played this opening with White, generally preferring a more traditional Queen’s Gambit approach with the potential to attack on the queenside with a minority attack rather than a piece/pawn attack on the kingside. I have no idea how far into the opening you had studied/memorized this variation, but it seems you had a better feel for it than your opponent. After move 3 I was out of book In this first game, Black’s plan (7...Nh5; 8...Nxf4) to exchange off the WBf4, doubling White’s f-pawns (and also opening the e-file for White and creating a pawn break on f5) seems dubious to me because White has completed development and is prepared to begin active operations. Back still has to get his