Temposchlucker

 The past weeks I have been busy to evaluate my conclusions and to ponder about how to continue. I get to the same conclusions over and over again, so I will give it a go. The problem is, that I hypothesize a sweet spot in my approach, while I have no idea whether such sweet spot actually exists. My focus is the area where a kingside attack is prepared. On the one hand it is easy to get lost in the myriads of variations which can be used to describe a kingside attack, on the other hand it is easy to debit some trivialities that are too general to be useful. Like "a knight on f5 is worth 4 points", or "a pawn on e5 is worth an extra piece". The problem is that I don't get much help from chess authors, who tend to choose for one direction or the other. In order to try to focus on the sweet spot and not to get lost into the variations, I will try to base my conclusions on the lines of attack. After all, we know that a line of attack ends on a square in the vicinity...

 The chess clubs have begun! I play at two clubs. So I'm getting feedback from my OTB games again. This picture emerges: I suck at the opening My middlegame is great I suck at the endgame I suck at the kingside attack In the opening I tend to give my opponent too much opportunities. I don't feel at ease at all in the opening. This is my remedy: I analyze all my openings, and add a solution to my opening database. Usually one move at the time. I register my openings in the chess openings wizard, and I will train them before my next tournament. Which will be in december. If this works remains to be seen. But at least this approach has a minimal time investment. In the middlegame I often manage to adjust the mistakes I made in the opening to some degree. Usually I can build up a lot of pressure. There still is a lot of work to be done in the middlegame though. Activate my pieces Restrict my opponents pieces Exchanges Development I'm working on those with the aid of some course...