Expert Advice

Hi Royals..

This is the section where your games doubts and questions may be cleared by Experts ( 'Expert' I mean)

by Reemorto
Rotterdam Holland

Well, the team leader asked me, Sajay (I like him!): "if any person has any questions about openings, middle game, end games conducted, planned strategics in play, and the tactics as just a tool to reach set goals strategically!, well, you may ask me, and I explain all in words and some moves!...but never ongoing games I explain!....and never send me private messages(!)...just post your questions on this thread! I will enlighten those, will enligten chess isues, gives you the more insight!...and never ask me who I realy am, please do not, just post your questions, I answer them deeply....I am not a chess teacher...but if I can help you, I do...and this is only for people of the Royalchess Group...I hope you appreciate my very kind guesture, well the Group Leader Sajay asked me, was difficult, but ok then....Sajay, I grant you the honor! Warm regards, Peter

dear peter,  to start with..

How we should aim in games?

1.) To forcibly move to achieve win, or

2.) wait for the opponent to make a mistake and capitalise on that, or

3.) make good moves and see if it works in our favour

YOurs....sajay

Hoi Sajay, as to your question, to begin: "a player has to have the right state of mind!!! So important!!!!!...what is that, right state of mind you would ask? Well, be confident, objective! Positive! And never ever be afraid of any opponent! Such would destroy ones objective views!...so be open with thoughts and analysing!! allways

Secondly, allways play games and moves plans realizing your opponents see all!! (know all plans, see all)...does not matter what level, but never underestimate any opponent in chess!...I call it "playing aganst the board!"= not some opponent, you make your plannings based on the fact that your opponents are real good, seeing all also! Meaning in fact: watch objectively at the board position! and totally ignore your oponent re fear, what he is, who he is, ELO etc. 

Third: Agressive play???? Such is for beginners....the right course is: "PLANNING A STRATEGY"!!! and let tactics work for you as just a tool to reach strategic goals set. I often saw people giving "check"????...but so what?, no purpose at all on  the longer term for the strategics plannings! Such is the very core of chess! Just develop in a harmonious way (pieces working together, all being part of 1x planned strategy!...and then 1=1=3!!!!)...such is the core. So attacking too fast? No...build out, develop harmoniously! And if your opponent comes attacking too soon? Well, he will be eaten/absorbed by you!

So the answer, harmony in developing your pieces (1+1=3)...watching "tempi"! also! And just go for positions that are almost equal...but very complex! Such games almost never draw. Due to complexity!

Last I give you this one: WC Match Karpow-Kasparow game 4 12/13 September 1985....you can google it...see how patient Karpow plays? He has the fish on the hook, takes 63 moves to drag it in, but the fish could never escape!, was matter of time (moves) Karpow knew that...and he totally beated Kasparow!!! Such is the core of playing chess.

Kind regards, Peter

I got that match.. hope this is it. Pardon me in chess i am really novice and really not able to pick that 1+1=3. is it symbolic term?

Yes, that is the game, Karpow played it "patiently" taking his moves(!)...in a deep strategical/positional way (=core of chess!)....see how many moves he made with his Queen!...the fish bringing in at the end...but well...I opine that also Wasili Smyslow. Dr. Lasker and Prof. Dr. Max Euwe would have played the same way as Karpow did...brilliant game! Enjoy the beauty of it! ARTS! But what is exactly your question here, Sanjay, my friend? Ask me, I enlighten it.

Hoi Sajay, term 1+1=3 means in fact "Synergy"...also known used term in business...meaning when all harmoniously working together! (in chess, the pieces) the total (collective force) get stronger...thus 1+!=3 Also Fisher showed much of that in his brilliant games!

Kind regards, Peter

no should not ask questions on a GM game... infact i can hope to copy the initial moves and play in my games. ... the GM way.

but thanks for one very important piece of advice.... i have already absorbed it and put into practice... "playing aganst the board!"= not some opponent...

I have to disagree her Sajay, you stated: "no should not ask questions on a GM game" Why should one not "question" moves made in any GM game??? Allways question if a chess-player has some doubts and questions, such is the way leading to higher insight and knowledge.I allways had my questions! And if 100 people saying somthing is white, and me thinking "it is black" than I boldly ask them "why don't you all think it is in fact Black instead of White?"Explain to me"...so allways question, realy.

When I was very young my father send me to chess-club (I did not even want to!)...first evening I was defeated by introducting experienced player 8x times! Me having lost positions, the experienced player seeing my sorrow face, he suggesting to me: "let us turn around the board now, I play your position as from now (was lost)...and even then I lost my games! Will never forget that. And then we had Hans Bouman there in Blitz games, in the beginning he was allways winning of me, and he allways "grined at me" and he had long front teeth, I much disliked him! Said to my father: "I quit there" My father said no, you go on! And he gave me 2x chess books he himself bought just after WWII, from the hand of Prof. Dr. Max Euwe...a big one and a little book, I started reading the little one "Oom Jan leert neefje schaken" (collectors item now)...when my parents sleeping I sneaked out to below the kitchen and started reading in the night, about Paul Morphy first...games, Andersen, was entertaining book, kind of way written as "interesting game Morphy played but now aunty comes in with hot chocolate milk" that way that book was, little book.

Anayway, I worked also the big book, I got inspired, and I went stronger and stronger, and that Hans Bouman, well, I showed him all the corners of the 64 squares later, he had no chance at all. Chess, well all about inspirtion, and you all realize to be never ever be afraid of any opponent, does not matter how strong they are! Go for it as vibrant, knowledge absorbing people/players objectively! Such brings the real depth and insight, fast.

And last, do not ever think that a person first has to study chess for ten years, reading 300 books to become strong player, such all depends! Well, such benefits for sure, but such is not a rule for sure.I have known players never studying at all, becoming very strong players! Chess is for a very important part "you projecting your feeling for the position on the 64 squares...feeling the natural harmony of the pieces!"

Many years ago I learned of Mir Sultan Khan (history)...and he never even studied openings!!! So legendary (google now it Wikipedia, India player)...and he beated several players in tournaments who later became World Champions! Mir Sultan Khan later disappeared, back to India...such an enormeous gifted and talented player that was!..I will never forget such...due to that I went to be a strategical/positional player many years ago (before that I had when very young very much fun with all kind of gambits, Kingsgambit, Volga-gambit, Morra-Smith agmbit...still use them in my Blitz for fastness play)

So, my advice, for those realy interested, google Mir Sultan Khan (even our former World Champion Prof. Dr. Max Euwe was stating in his book: "the way Mir Sultan Khan played the chess, that touches the very core of chess!" and Euwe meant positional/strategical play)

rgds, Peter  

really an inspirational one. thank so much peter..

and you know what i feel i am made for chess... even my mail id have that 64.. i never thought it mean 64 squares.  I take your words if  one doesnt need 10 years reading 300 books... i can also try to do the same... thank you so much indeed

for my friends.. i am quoting wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mir_Sultan_Khan;  

Malik Mir Sultan Khan (1905 – April 25, 1966) was the strongest chess master of his time from Asia. This manservant from British India traveled with Colonel Nawab Sir Umar Hayat Khan ("Sir Umar"), his master, to Britain, where he took the chess world by storm. In an international chess career of less than five years (1929–33), he won the British Championship three times in four tries (1929, 1932, 1933), and had tournament and match results that placed him among the top ten players in the world. Sir Umar then brought him back to his homeland, where he gave up chess and returned to his humble life. David Hooper and Kenneth Whyld call him "perhaps the greatest natural player of modern times".   Although he was one of the world's top players in the early 1930s, FIDE, the World Chess Federation, never awarded him any title (Grandmaster or International Master).

Yes, very good Sajay! Indeed. In fact Mir Sultan Khan according to Prof. Dr. Max Euwe was indeed the greatest talent gifted player of those times (facts, History)!...and he never ever studied openings (he played on feeling the positions, feeling the harmony of the pieces working together) while he was playing the very best players those times!!! Imagine! Brilliant, ARTS!, games he played, yes, so remarkable, it touched me when reading of him in one of Euwe's books, section "laveren" wich he opines is the very core of chess! Mir Sultan Khan's performings, his very strong opponents were amazed! That man was unknown and came out of nothing...and then later he completely vanished again......Mir Sultan Khan! (I learned of him some 25 years ago, I was amazed! influenced my own chess)

When should we exchange pieces? what are main things (i know there are lot many) keep in mind in an exchange?

it may be a very wide question... but many a time i fear the opponent might exchange my pieces so i used to take it first.  But in standard games it is seen that they are not usually exchanged. why?

Never fear anyone exchanges pieces, just look at the resulting positions beforehand, what will remain? Your pieces having good (or even full harmony) then you are ok. And after many pieces exchanged, then there remains the end-game! Those are complex, but you can also fully outplay your opponent there (often happens that way). I often experienced OTB tournaments players going in full attack against me, but so what? I just "play against the board" and I calculate their attack also...and often I notice with the right defence that attack will hold after 8 or 10 moves...but at that time my opponent has a real problem: since his pieces are not "well located/placed"! no harmony of his pieces anymore (would cost him many tempi to relocate his pieces, but that time he does not get from me)...and then you go in swift attack yourself, beating him. So, be never ever afraid of some player going in attack in early stage, stay objective, playing against the board, cool so to say, calculate yourself (and use your feeling for the position on the board, while making calculation!)...and later counterattack swift, winning. Hope this enlightens it.

And you yourself only exchange pieces when benefitting your position in either a tactical or strategical way (...for instance, you exchanging your weak Bishop against a Knight of your opponent that is strong...or could become very strong in next moves).

Very many games (most games) are just won in resulting end-game positions! Realize that. So, focuss also on endgames also, realy. There are very many books about chess endings, I myself, when I was young, begam with J. Awerbach, later reviewing books of Paul Keres, but also on internet is very much info about end-games, also this site provides very much info about it, so alll is there.

Kind regards, Peter

Thank you much for posting this Sajay! Well, Mir Sultan Khan, story about him goes even far deeper, he was a servant, and when they sailed to England Khan had to adjust to chess regulations European style, see, in India 1st move of a pawn was only 1x square!...in Europe 1st move may be 2x squares, so Kahn had to learn that, during his sailing trip to Europe! Amazing!!! And why did he play chess?? To kill his time, amazing! Such a natural talent....he won of both Aljechin + Capablanca (both as we know went later World Champions!)...what must they have thought?? Who the hell is that "nobody"???? Coming out of nothing. Mir Sultan Khan had no knowledge of openings or any knowledge chess theory! But Aljechin had! and Capablanca had state of the art knowledge! Armed to the teeth(!), so to speak...yet at that time being convincingly beaten by Mir Sultan Khan!! What a natural giant that was! Again, changed many years ago my views about chess totally, he played at that time against the strongest players of the World!, when I learned of Mir Sultan Khan! Yes he was not given a title, well, India colony of UK, and they were glad he went away!, not playing chess anymore.

Sajay, strong players nowadays all know about Mir Sultan Khan! I will never forget him!

Prof. Dr. Max Euwe has named him as very important(!) in his book: "Het Middenspel 3" chapter 13 "de Indische variant van het laveren: Sultan Khan" 

See game Sultan Khan-Capablanca (Hastings 1929/1930) Sultan Khan winning in 65 moves! So beautiful! Capablanca must have thought something as: "jee, was is happening here?!"

I am not great with fen and so, maybe you can post that game, it not, no problem.

Mir Sultan Khan forgotten??? Never!!! Tribute to him:

ohhh no not him again, he haunts me!!!! No, this is the tribute:

i wonder how he can play like that!

Yes, Sajay, that game! Changed my insight in chess 25 years ago (at that time i was still having great fun with all kinds of gambits!, but that game changed all). Prof. Dr. Max Euwe ( former Dutch World champion) selected that one for one of his books to illustrate the "very core of chess" we Duch call it "laveren", I do not know the English word, anyway, it means "carefully/patiently building out your strategical plus, just taking your moves, fish on the hook, the fish cannot escape, if well played. Beautifull game played by Khan: rooks stronger (positionally than the Queen), though takes many moves (so what???), seems as nothing of the position realy changing, but position was slightly changing each move made by Khan! See how harmoniously his peaces work together! Is chess science or arts? Obviously both!

Also Wasili Smyslow was great at playing such a deep strategical/positional way:

He played very, very, strong elite play till high age, giant he was, also. Prof. Dr. Max Euwe said about Wasili Smyslow: "you played a game with him, many moves, and one tends to think while conducting the game there is no danger, no real action, and then at once one sees what is rely happening in a positional way and one looses" yes, beautiful such is!

Some additional advice: when one is reviewing great games played, do not "dive from the beginning in all kinds of long-move lines of analyses" no, just go relatively quick through a game and see how the players "let work together the pieces" and enjoy the see strategy behind the moves, such gives the far more inspirationdoing such. Having done so, second round you go in more depth analyses. And an annotation in words(explaining the plans) I find far more valuable than all kinds of lines, since written words "explains the essence behind it all, the plans". When I annotate games I do mostly in words and some moves as guidance. That way you keep your "helicopter-view" while reviewing games, and all in an inspiring way.

Hoi Sajay, ok, post it. Normally I watch such in late evenings or the nights for just fun/hobby/distraction, since I need only sleep 4 hours at the most.  Sometimes I will reply instantly, and sometimes some day later, depends on what I prefer doing. rgds, Peter 

This is the one i was referring to... ! i couldnt foresee  44........Rg2+.. there i lost control