For example, last night I played a game against a club member whom I have played numerous times. He is very difficult to beat because he rarely makes tactical blunders and he has a good flair for positional play.
We played a King's Indian and rather than face the Bayonet Attack I decided to play the ...exd4 version. I wanted to get a solid position on my own terms rather than to deal with the typical kingside vs queenside motif in the KID.
I had achieved what I felt was a playable position when I got the idea to play ...h6 and ...g5 in order to limit the scope of his dark squared bishop. I knew that doing so would create something of a weakness on f5, but I said Fischer's famous quote to myself..."You gotta give squares to get squares." The problem of course was that I wasn't really getting any squares in return. And my initial goal to lock down the kingside from the dark squared bishop wound up just being superficial.
So I am hoping that if I start working in some positional themes along with the tactical work that I will begin to take that next step towards 1800.
To that end I am trying to decide whether I should read How to Reassess Your Chess by Jeremy Silman or Strategic Play by Mark Dvorestsky.
Here is the game:
To read more about my triumphs, tragedies, and overall methodology please visit my blog at http://ontheroadtochessmaster.blogspot.com/