10482 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
I recommend an excellent game collections of grandmasters' games.
1000 The Best of the Best by Chess Informant
What are the annotations like? Suitable for Class D players?
Not really : they use a languageless system of symbols.
And you can enjoy the incredible depth and beauty of the game.
Yes, @ScorpionPackAttack, thanks for sharing your analytical process with us. Nicely done!
As a low-rated player myself, and in response to the original thread title, I think the question is whether or not to study games at all. I think most of us, including much stronger players, would argue that studying games is desirable. If not, then what?
So assuming that game study is good, especially your own games into which you have already put some analytical effort, then the question becomes is it better to study bad games or good games. Most agree that playing (and hence studying) games with lesser ranked opponents is not helpful in raising your own bar. (Yes, you need to know the patzer traps, etc.)
That leaves only games played by competent players. While you (and I) may not completely understand the reasons for all the moves, nevertheless it does built a mental database of attack ideas, defensive formations and other helpful things. If the games are annotated by the players themselves, then the effect is (or should be ) accumulative. As you rise in ratings, you play better competition and you either plateau at your level of capability and understanding, or you continue to refine and improve.
So perhaps the answer is that if you believe you have reached the end of your own capabilities, then you might argue that study of better games is a waste of time. I don't know of many players who resign themselves to that self-imposed level of competence.
Any game can be instructive: even blitz is or a low quality because you can learn to punish superficiality or calculation oversights. High quality games such as GM correspondence (and OTB at standard time controls) also have obvious instructive benefit, and one can note things such as potential tactical threats being prevented before coming to fruition, how the center effects play, color complex weaknesses, overall plans, etc.
Game collections annotated by players themselves such as "Capablanca's Best Games" or whatnot are excellent, though the ideas and plans are spelled out for the reader, which is always useful.
As far as plateaus go the higher one goes the harder it is to rise in rating: If one is around 1000 then arriving at 1400 will be the fastest and easiest 400 points a person will ever gain. Learning basic endgames, influence of the center and the kinds of centers, and of course tactics will bring someone there, and studying games greatly helps with those.
Games collection books that look at the kind of mistakes commonly made by amateur players are also useful, imo. A good example would be Dan Heisman's recently published The World's Most Instructive Amateur Game Book.
Odds of drawing the same color???
by fireflashghost a few minutes ago
Free Will vs. Determinism in Chess
by einstein99 5 minutes ago
Kings Indian Defense
by XPLAYERJX 8 minutes ago
Is there a link between performance in chess and general intelligence?
by BlackLeopard-1 13 minutes ago
What openings can i use against the computer3- HARD ?
by Fiveofswords 13 minutes ago
Who's your fav in the Top Ten?
by himgouree 20 minutes ago
Where are the grandmasters on the forums?
by kleelof 25 minutes ago
Stuff Non-Chess Players Say
by dragonair234 28 minutes ago
Ashley's Million-dollar chess tourney - but bring your own clocks
by Petrosianic 32 minutes ago
10/20/2014 - Anand - Radjabov, Linares 2009 Analysis
by Easeland 33 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!