Slow down and redo

 I follow a two-track policy. Working on unearthing a set of coherent positional ideas on the one hand, while training tactics in accordance with my new method on the other hand.

The positional side is very exciting, and I go from surprise to surprise on a daily basis. I play about two to three long OTB games per week, and I get a lot of feedback from that. After playing with no clue for about 23 years, it is pleasant that I now actually learn something from my games.

How are the tactics going?

Sofar I have done about 75 tactics from the set of 1000 that I'm working on. I do one new tactic per day. From time to time I take a break, and just repeat what I have learned so far.

The main takeaway from this, is that my way of looking at tactics, is totally changing. My tendency to use trial and error is declining, while my logical approach is building up. Take for instance the following position. At first, I was in doubt whether I should keep this complex position in my problem set. But after redoing the problem a lot of times, I slowly get rid of the tree of analysis. The tree of analysis is replaced by the most principled variation, guided by logic.

Diagram 1, white to move

r3rk2/2pb3Q/2q2bp1/2n1p3/1pP1P3/1B2RN1P/P4PP1/3R2K1 w - - 0 31

Salgado Lopez, I. vs. Granda Zuniga, J. Quito 2012

  • 31. Nh4   clearing the square f3 for the rook with tempo
  • 31. ... Bxh4
  • 32. Rf3+    Notice how impossible it is to find the previous move with trial and error
  • 32. ... Bf6
  • 33. Rxd7     The black queen is overloaded and can't take back.
Diagram 2. Black to move
  • 33. ... Nxd7  clearing c5 and making c4 mobile
  • 34. c5      clearing the diagonal and threatening mate in 1
  • 34. ... Re6 stopping the mate threat for now
  • 35. Bd5    chasing away the defender of the rook which prevents mate
  • 35. ... Qa6
  • 36. c6        blockading the Q from defending the R
And black resigned.

Notice how logic pruned the tree of analysis to a manageable single branch. Of course you have to calculate afterwards whether there are any leaks along the way. But with only trial and error you would never find this within a reasonable amount of time.

Comparing positional play with tactics

If I make an educated guess, I would say that the positional knowledge will be responsible for 10% of the progress of any player while tactics will make out 90%. Based on my experience the past half year. Yet it is not a choice for tit or tat. The one cannot do without the other. Result = what x how = positional knowledge x tactics.

Slow down, and redo what you have already done.



Comments

Chessbase PGN viewer