Temposchlucker

First AI try  From the tactical problem set of 1430 I have absorbed 251 problems (22%) since May 5th. This means that 1.4 problem per day is a realistic speed op progress for me. The Woodpecker method goes at a speed of 1 problem per day, if I reckon well. So nothing abnormal here, just going 1.4 times faster. Which is not so strange since I'm retired. The 7 circles of hell is almost identical to the Woodpecker method and was administered at the same speed. I become tactically stronger, I can feel that. Absorbing 251 problems should already lead to a measurable effect Elo-wise, I guess. But immediately the two other holes in my bucket start to leak much more: positional play and endgames. So I decided to start with a positional problem set too, next to my daily tactical routine. Why positional play before endgames? Mainly for the following reasons: Poor positional play shows itself in excessive time and energy usage in the beginning of the middlegame, when the position doesn't ...

 When you limit yourself to a fixed amount of 1430 problems and try to get deeper instead of broader, you can't help to start noticing new analogies every time. A combination can often be divided in a trivial part and some accidental extras. The trivial part is not going to gain you wood, but the accidental extras might do so. White to move r1rn2k1/3q1ppp/5n2/2b1R3/p1NB4/P2Q1N2/5PPP/1R4K1 w - - 0 1 #144. Fressinet, Laurent vs. Dorfman, Iossif chessable 1001-chess-exercises-for-club-players Let's first have a look at the trivial part: White to move Within the position you can recognize a knight fork. "Usually" such fork would gain you an exchange. But the attacking square is covered by the black defender Bc5. You can remove the black bishop by sacrificing your rook for it by 27.Rxc5 Rxc5 .  White to move You invest an exchange to remove a defender in order to be able to execute a fork to gain an exchange. "Normally" that would level out. But it are the "...

 [disclaimer] You will often see positions that I have used before. But since my insights are new, that very fact is not relevant. Since I repeat them all the time, I can't remember that anyway. White to move 3r3r/1pk2p1p/2p1p1p1/b2n1q2/3P1P2/P1PQ3P/2BB2P1/3R1R1K w - - 0 1 #241. Van Dijk, Harold vs. Polak, Alexander Chessable course  1001-chess-exercises-for-club-players What is this combination made of? The main ingredients are two discovered attacks, who function side by side and are influencing each other. discovered attack of c3 and Bd2 against Nd5 and Ba5 (blue arrows) discovered attack of Bc2 and Qd3 against Qf5 and d2 (green arrows) Notice the unusual target d2. It is in fact a defensive target. You might think, "duh, 20 scenarios is not much", but it are these kind of subtle differences that make the study worthwhile. Targets can be anything! White to move It al starts with the first discovered attack. 1.c4 threatens two targets, the black Bishop and Knight. It i...

A combination must be judged by what the total of subtasks accomplishes.This means that worrying about the price tag of an isolated subtask will only distract you.  White to move r3rk2/2pb3Q/2q2bp1/2n1p3/1pP1P3/1B2RN1P/P4PP1/3R2K1 w - - 0 31 Salgado Lopez, I. vs. Granda Zuniga, J. Quito 2012 Chessable 1001 Chess Exercises for Advanced Club Players. White has sacrificed a bishop for two pawns and an attack 31.Nh4 Bxh4 32.Rf3+ Bf6 What has white accomplished, and what has been the price tag? Goal: clear the f-file for the rook Price tag: a knight Means: Nh4 threatens mate in 1 Rf3+ is with check Rf3 pins the bishop The point is, that the moves are measured in time . As long as you gain time, there is no need to evaluate the price tag of the individual subtasks. Follow up 33. Rxd7 an exchange sacrifice. Threatening mate in 1 33. ... Nxd7 35 c5 opening another LoA (line of attack). Threatening mate in 1 Goal: opening a LoA Price tag: An exchange Means: Rxd7 threatens mate in 1 c5 th...

 Why would you even think of Rxe5 instead of Bxe5+? White to move 1r2r3/p5pp/2nk4/1R1pp3/P2P4/2P3B1/3K2PP/4R3 w - - 0 1 1.Rxe5 introduces the following duplo attacks: discovered attack Re5 plus Bg3 against blacks King and Re8 (loading the battery) skewer Bg3 against black King and Rb8 Furthermore, if black takes on e5, he puts himself into a pin (another duplo attack). So apparently, the application of duplo moves is stronger than the straightforward short-term threat Bxe5+

 The tempo battle is the most overlooked part of the chess literature. A combination exists of standard scenarios that are stitched together by threats. A threat provides you the time to do whatever you want while keeping the opponent busy. Since May 5th I'm working on my problem set of 1430 puzzles. I use the Trick in order to get the job done. I noticed that my opponents start to blunder more. I noticed that back in 2004 too, when I had my first rating boost of 250 points. My opponents began to play worse. I had not the feeling that I was playing better. Nowadays, opponents rated 100 to 400 points higher are blundering pieces against me. That doesn't mean that my rating will boost immediately again, but it feels like a beginning. There are two serious holes in my bucket that I'm not working on currently, endgames and positional play . Since I manage to screw up games where I'm a piece ahead or two pawns, there is still work to do in that area. But I'm not worrie...

Let me continue with the previous position, Yet one move further, after 1,Nxb7 Qxb7 White to move 3r3k/nq4pp/p4p2/1p2p3/4P3/2P2N1P/PnB1QPP1/R5K1 w - - 0 2 I can imagine that I reach this position by logical reasoning and see it before my minds eye. How should I proceed? Somehow I have the feeling that producing more word salad from this point onwards is not very effective. How does System 1 learn? Is it enough to describe what the position is about? Or do I need to invent the description all by myself? In other words, must I approach this from the study room or from the training room? I'm of course addicted to the study room. But the document that I produced there (see the previous post) seems to be sufficient as guideline for the description of this position. Robert gave a lot of examples for karate and stuff that seem to imply that there comes a moment that System 1 must just follow the instruction (while System 2 must shut up for a moment). This seems such moment.