CATEGORY OF MOVES, CATEGORY OF POSITIONS and OUR MISTAKES (Reasons and Solutions), Method of Training

****************************************************************************************

Michop
May 29, 2024
To help you (and me ) with our discussion, I summarised all our discussion with my amends.

(I try to keep short but is impossble )

As starting point, we tried first to understand/see BIG PICTURE by assessing the general situation : "what is happening during a chess game?", "which faces does a chess game show to us?", "what are the main challenges related to the chess game generally and to us, specifically?!". We did mainly 2 things so far :

1. We defined and classified "type of moves" : CATEGORY OF MOVES

2. We defined and classified "type of positions" : CATEGORY OF POSITIONS

And we are still discussing on/trying to find the best :

3. METHOD for finding best move/continuation in a reasonable time (1 to 2 years), as MAIN TOPIC of discussion...

*****************************************

CATEGORY OF MOVES (by their strenght, in positive or negative way or by their specifity) :

1. "STRONG MOVES" :

a. "Best (or Brilliant) move" = the move which allows quicker win (either by a) checkmate; b) material advantage; c) positional advantage or d) equalization from an inferior position (forced draw) AND counters best all of them against opponent!

b. "Good (or common sens) move" = a move which does not allow an immediate win, but does not cause an immediate lose neither (still holds the position solidly for further opportunities : the chances for win still remain).

2. "WEAK MOVES"

a. Blunder (opposed to the Best/Brilliant move) = a move which causes an immediate lose.

b. Mistake (=Inaccuracy and/or Miss, negatively equivalent to Good move) = a move which decreases or misses the chances of an immediate win or causes "slow lose". The chances for win is "thin", "we are dependent on our opponent's likely mistake" now...

3."BOOK MOVE" = a move following general principles (opening rules, middlegame patterns and/or motifs, endgames technics...), which cannot be qualified as strong or weak : it's just THE move to be played in a particular line (like, Steinitz or Berlin variations moves in Spanish : it is a term used to qualify generally the opening moves btw).

4. "INTERESTING MOVE" = a move which generates some opportunities, without worsening the position ("trap moves", "surprise moves", "novelties" etc.), "helping" opponent to commit a "potential mistake" or forcing him to burn his time to find out correctly its sens.

5. "DUBIOUS MOVE" (negatively equivalent to interesting move, i.e., a "pseudo interesting" move) = a move motivated by its apparent (but in reality false) "attractivity", resulted from "shallow calculation" and/or based ONLY "on the hope" of opponent's mistake. (To be) used ONLY as a "move of last minute"/escape and/or ONLY in a blitz game and in time lack.

***********************************

CATEGORY OF POSITIONS

1. "FAMILIAR POSITION" (the positions that WE HAVE SEEN before)

1.1. "We know it" : all is clear. We have no difficulty at all to SEE & EXECUTE THE IDEA with 100% correctness and "blitzschnell"!

1.2. "We know it but..." : we know what is about (the idea) and how to execute it. Only : we do not remember nicely the move order. We just need to refresh our memory, "reproduce" the correct line in a reasonable time and by not mixing the move order. Slightly more time consuming than 1.1, with lesser risk of committing mistakes.

2. "UNFAMILIAR POSITION" (the positions that WE HAVE NOT SEEN before)

2.1. "Some clues" : the situation is somehow unfamiliar/new to us but we are able to identify the "main idea" (C, M or P), as the attack - or threat - is visible but a bit "foggy" with "multiple choices"). We need extra time to find the best move as we have to calculate different&multiple options and to be even more careful than in 1.2 in our calculation (as the risk of committing mistakes is even higher here).

2.2. "No clues" : a complex position, "everything is frozen". We need to "create the best continuation" from "scratch", by making a correct assessment of the position based on our knowledge so far (and/or by finding the similiarity with a known topic). This is the hardest case : very expensive time-consuming as we have to consider more options and to calculate more moves and where the risk of committing mistakes is highest.

*******************************************************

NairobiCC

May 26, 2024

1. In my opinion, our definition of best move is incomplete. It is biased by the fact that we implicitly assume that one side already has an advantage. We have defined the best move as one allowing to win the game, increase the advantage or equalize from an inferior position. What we didn't consider is the majority of balanced cases where the best move is one not worsening the position. Because of that, we are permanently lost in front of we call 'frozen' positions. So I came to a simpler definition of best move: "Best move is the one that doesn't worsen and preferably improves the position"
2. One way or another, we relate 'best move' with position. And the decision on best move is whether the player who plays the 'best move' foresees a positive change of balance. Making a decision on best move needs assessment. Assessment needs elements to compare. Those elements necessarily have to be inside the position.
3. Our question "How to find the best move?" remains the same. Here there is also a different approach. Our classification of "familiar / unfamiliar" positions is a first attempt. As we know, the number of different positions is huge and unattainable for humans to be familiar with all of them. But there are shortcuts. Instead of focusing on positions I find it more convenient to focus on elements. We already know many tactical elements (forks, skewers, pins, attraction, deviation, ...). And we need to learn also estrategical elements. For sure the number of elements is considerably lower than the number of unfamiliar positions. We need to focus on recognizing elements in every position and use them to improve or not worsen the balance. What do you think?

Allow me the following analogy: Let's compare a chess position with a sentence. Think of a chess position where we look for the best move as a sentence with a missing word. Let's take for example Albert Einstein's work. One of Einstein's sentences stands in front of our eyes with a missing word.

How to proceed to find the missing word?

Read and memorize his sentences from every one of his books and articles?
Learn about Einstein's life and work?
Both tasks are hard. Which one will be more profitable?

Michop
May 26, 2024
Now, you are asking the most important questions my Dear! That is all my purpose : how to find the most profitable way (to better assess a position but to improve, generally speaking, which also means the same)...

I would rather compare to a "puzzle game" where you are invited to assemble the missing parts, one after another. And more you do, quicker you are. "More you do ping-pong better you ping-pong" my Dear, we know that

And of course, the main question here is "How to find the best move?!" than category of moves that we did (it was mainly to have a better picture of the situation and try to understand what we are opting among different options and why?!).

I think our CMP method was/is a tentative/good starting point. I think when one proceeds by order (from his side and then from opponent's side"), the things are getting a bit clearer than in the beginning. Generally, the first two are "a bit easy to detect/assess" as they are more "concrete". Comes then the last, most difficult one (P). ..

NairobiCC
May 26, 2024
Then the task will be not to be familiar with positions, but to be familiar with those elements. Being familiar with them will help to reduce time. Do you remember when you started to use a hammer to hang a picture? I'm sure that you hit the finger more than once. I'm also sure that now you are familiar with the use of the hammer.

Michop
May 27, 2024
When you say "Then the task will be not to be familiar with positions, but to be familiar with those elements" for example, yes and no. For me, it is almost the same thing : to be familiar with a position means for me to be able to see and apply those eleements fast and correctly. If this is not the case, then it means "there is a problem somewhere" and that is what we need to name/address...

(we discussed it before : it sends us to the other main question : "are there any position we are not familiar with"?! I was assuming that "yes". But if we argue the opposite, then, as said, we have to name the probleme (why we still keep hiting our finger then?! ).

To cut the long history short, for me, we are familiar with those elements, the question is not there. The question is when it comes to apply them correctly. So, main 2 questions to be addressed here :

1. "Why we are still missing the better moves/continuations (frequently), despite all we know about chess"?!

2. "What can be done to at least reduce its number"?!"

Let us concentrate ourselves and our energy to address this main issue than to lose our time in definitions (especially "category of moves" : it is enough to make a game review on chess.com to see all these categories for example. Which does not help us to address our issue & mark 1mm in our progress! ).

There are some positions (and situations!) where we are/everybody is doing these inaccuracies and blunders. That is something to be detailed if we want to "cure the illness", and not the "symptoms" .

Nairobi CC :

May 27, 2024

Our two recent positions give us an example of what we are trying to achieve. Despite being completely different positions, they share a common element: Pair of Bishops

In this one, that element is important for White and Black strives to trade them.

In this one, bishops are the key element and it allows Black to have the initiative.

Dear friend, we are making progress. Instead of dealing with a myriad of different positions, we have greatly reduced the question to a handful of elements. Being familiar with them is our task for finding the best moves.

Michop
May 27, 2024
Sorry to say that but I don't find our last 2 posts are "sharing the same element" ...

Bishop pair ok, it is common but don't think the problem is to be addressed the same way. In my position, there is a clear material advantage (2 pawns up) and the "shortcut" would be just try to keep it (and consolidate it by capturing even the 3rd, c5 pawn, which is also possible soon, to make the advantage even bigger/decisive). If you play 1...g5 for example, you have not even to deal with this topic... (which does not mean you won't win with 1...Nd7, but differently/with another motive and apparently "not shorter way").

Your position is more to deal with Strategy I would say (to get off Bishop pair : I call it Creating Weakness). This is even a must, as Black is also a pawn down...

In another word, you will win my position with or without Bishop pair, this is not a must. While in yours, you will loose if you don't get off your opponent's Bishop pair advantage immediately...

Let's "not lose our sight". We have only one/THE most important question, which we are trying to address : "HOW TO FIND BEST MOVE(s)/CONTINUATON in any given position?!" (or inversely, "How not to do inaccuracy/blunder?!).

And the subsequent question : "Why we are missing them then"? (if we assume that we are missing). "And what can be done to reduce its number"?!

These are for me the only relevant questions for us to think about, discuss and address correctly. Only this can allow us to "start to progress". All the rest is just to (help us) to address this main issue better! That is my understanding.

Michop

0
#2
"Familiar" and "unfamiliar". It is to deal with English maybe and we have to come back to our original "naming" maybe : "TO KNOW", better resuming than "being familiar". Don't forget :

KNOW = HAVE SEEN IT BEFORE + REMEMBERING + ABLE TO APPLY/USE IT in a reasonnable time and preciseness.

(I do the similarity with "learning biking" with my students. If one is missing one of those elements, he/she cannot be qualified "biker", even though he/she "knows very well how a bike is biked, theoretically"! .

Then, there are professional bikers, amateur bikers, etc.

Michop
May 28, 2024

Yea, that is it. But all the refinements that we are doing with our discussions and definitions are not helping me to find 3. Nf6+ and following moves as you noticed (I found only 2, not even 3, after like 10-15 minutes of assessment in 2 attempts!!).

So, 1st "upgrading step" would be maybe to push our calculation further than to 2 moves each (ideally till 5 minimum), after identifying 3 candidates?! Because it is generally the case. After just 3 to 5 moves in every positions, we are transposing to 1.2 positions generally, everything gets clear... (Clear Vision )

So yea, if you tell me why I did not find the best continuation in that position (and you 1...g5 in my last puzzle), and what would be the way/method, than we will be helping each other A LOT! . Let`s not look for the "accused" too far. It is there! It is exactly by addressing the issue in/with this particular example right now that we will probable able to find the origin of the problem (so, the way to correct it too), I am now convinced!!!

So, why do I have "headache" Doctor, can you tell me?! Can you "diagnose" my "illness" and propose the adequate treatment Doctor?

Michop
May 28, 2024

About CMP: Let's laugh a bit

It is actually a very easy method. According to my chess lessons, there are minimum 48 Checkmate Patterns, 20 Tactical Arms and around 10 Strategical elements. We just need to assess all these one after another in less than 5-10 minutes because we will need another 5-10 minutes to assess all these from opponent's side too!!! .

And about "up to 5 moves" method again. It is easy to say. The problem is not actualy "calculation till 5, 6 or 10 moves", rather "which candidate to opt finally, after calculation?!" (because even after calculation, they all seem still "unclear" : if it was clear, of course we would go for it and that would be easy/the best continuation. Or, in another word, we are opting one candidate finally, after calculation, because we BELIEVE it was the best but it is revealed - more than once - that it was NOT! It is there the REAL PROBLEM / BIGGEST CHALLENGE!).

(once one is showing it to us/after clear vision, it looks like so easy - it makes feel one dumb! - but IT IS NOT!!! It was one of the many possible options that we were not sure about at all, just 3 moves before!!) . Actually, "3 moves out of 33, before!"
Michop
May 29, 2024

3. METHOD

(i.e., what&how to do to find best move/continuation quickly and/or not to commit blunder/mistake also so quickly ?)

Still on. For the moment, we have only discussed (but not detailed) the "CMP" method.

Is the best?! Is there other ones?

Can the questions like "In which particular situations are we committing more inaccuracies?!" help us to build a broader approach/method?! Etc....

Michop
May 29, 2024
Lastly.. A small amend to your last comment

NairobiCC :
I want to propose a way for generalization the method in two steps:

The best move in positions 2 (2.1 or 2.2) is the one that allows to transpose into positions 1 (1.1 or 1.2)
Once completed step 1, the best move will be easier to find

Once completed this step, there is no need for the best move my Dear!!! . It is done/gone, All Clear now!!

That is the only step, that's all we are trying to do. To "downgrade" 2 to 1 (as if they were 1.1 at best and 1.2 at worst). As if we are trying to find our path correctly even though we were not in this particular jungle before, remember .

And the "method" is always the same : we are always looking where the juicy mango is, where the nasty snake can be hidden and where the "so long waited see" is?!
NairobiCC

May 29, 2024

I have something to tell you. It could make you happy or sad. Let's see. Some days ago I informed you about an interesting post about "Chess reasoning". It was the first article from a long series that the author is writing on lichess. He has recently released the fourth part. And his preliminary conclusion is that the decision-making process in chess doesn't depend on principles or rules. It is driven by INTUITION!!!

That result may help or disturb us in our humble task of finding the METHOD for finding best moves (!?)

What do you think? Do we need to redirect our task towards refining our intuition? How is possible to refine intuition in chess?

**************************************************

June 19, 2024

Dear Friend,

Allow me to go "directly to the point" here. We have discussed about "big picture" ("type of moves", "type of positions" that occur generally in a game, CMP method...) and we had some interesting ideas&conclusions (including "our challenges there", to some extent but not inclusively). Those helped us to advance. But the "core" of the problem is still there, waiting for answer : "all these" are ok, but HOW TO UPGRADE finally our level?! By doing what exactly, as more efficient & beneficial?! Let's try to summarise this - to me the most important thing to discuss&finalise - too.

I won't open here to the discussion the "obvious stuffs" : our current situation, which will not/never(?) allow us to be a GM. That we have to work more on theory, practice more, etc. We know that we cannot. Or to some extent only. So, the idea here is rather to "try to do our best adapted to our situation", try to bring 1 or 2 "positive things" that can still allow us to upgrade, even little.

I will try to go through the "main stuffs" and choose the most direct/shortest way for that (I hope so), by posing 3 main questions :

1. WHAT? (what are the mistakes we are doing?), by "naming" some of our common/general problems directly)

2. WHY? (the reasons/the circumstances where they happen/what does it mean?)

3. WHAT SHOULD BE DONE?/what is the solution?

Feel free to add, amend or correct, this is open to discussion. We can do a general list/summary later, after discussion...

You got me I think why I felt this need. Because I think, once again, it is there that the "secret"/the key to "our problems" layes. Avoiding this by other discussions and/or other ones' position/game analysis won't resolve it that much. It is up to us to attack directly/remediate this "tumor", nobody else! Our last puzzles and the way we approach them, the mistakes we are still committing is another reason for this need. And I wanted to share it before summer break to leave us some time for - long but constructive - reflexion...

So, let's go for THE TOPIC to be discussed & finalised for our upgrade...

Training with Mischa

Super Admins