The Truth Hurts (PSA for Beginner-Intermediate Players)

Mostly agree. Nobody asks "can I be an NBA player?" having just picked up the game. Most NBA Players started playing when they were kids and then got good (and grew really tall). If your attempt to become a GM is conditioned upon the likelihood of actually making it, you're bound to fail. Unless you're really, really intellectually tall, so to speak.

Of course I'm simplifying, as I'm sure you're aware. A lot of the necessary positional concepts to improve at that level do get picked up by osmosis just by playing the game and training tactics, but of course a bit of theoretical and positional study can't hurt.

Of course, I was only joking! I didn't mention Lichess just so that readers would not go and try out what they're offering. I myself use both sites plenty.

Since this is turning into my personal rantspace, I guess I'd like to ask the nobody who's reading this to not keep creating "New Topic" posts for stuff that should be resolved in the notes section. We do not need to be flooded with training partner requests and AMAs by untitled players. You are not special, you are Rufus and Doofus and NN.

Seems like people are creating new topics to advertise their coaching and/or clubs now smh

💯

i have a doubt let us say that i am in a chaotic position so what is the best way to prevent a blunder as that is one of my biggest problems

+lichess ratings are not inflated by a lot for eg my rating on lichess is 1250 in rapid and blitz and on chess.com it is 1000-1100 on so like 150 and my peak is 1200 so they are basically the same

If you are in a chaotic position, you will blunder more often than if you are in a boring, solid position. That's just how it goes. You will blunder less if you get better at wide and deep calculation, but even grandmasters will blunder in the most complicated situations.

There are ways to avoid ultra-sharp complicated positions in the first place: As Mr. Miyagi says, "Best way to avoid punch...No Be There!" Certain openings and structures are more prone to tactical battle than others, and you can often avoid complications by playing solidly and trading off a bunch of pieces. Usually things will get very complicated when both sides are maintaining tension, and often the first player to release the tension will get a worse position. But if you feel it necessary, sometimes accepting a compromised position is worth resolving complications, especially if you're low on time.

As for calculating better, that often comes with experience. Don't handwave and move on general principles or play moves without considering your opponent's responses (that would be hope chess). You want to consider multiple candidate moves, including checks, captures, threats, and other positional features like loose/hanging pieces, discoveries, pins, guarded pieces, etc. The better you get at tactics, the more tactical themes you will be able to identify and consider.

Another way to prevent blunders is to play prophylactically. If your opponent's Rook is on d8, it's often a good idea to move your Queen off the d-file, even if there are multiple pieces between the Rook and Queen; lines can open up unexpectedly and you may forget certain features when analyzing more dynamic parts of the board—you could find yourself at the receiving end of a long combination involving an unstoppable discovered attack! Similarly, if a piece is attacked and guarded multiple times, it can become vulnerable to removal-of-the-guard tactics. Often, it's a good idea to simply retreat instead of having to recalculate the capture sequence turn after turn.

Sure, having a good pressure opening is good, but is it a better use of time than, say, practicing tactics? Since practicing any element of chess will have diminishing returns, there's probably some breakeven point at which developing your repertoire is useful even for an intermediate player. But as an int-adv club player myself, I play the most solid, non-combative repertoire and it works great.

These recommendations always strike me as odd. How can anyone recommend specific openings as if they're one-size-fits-all? How are you to know that the improver who reads your comment will enjoy positional QG games as White but sharp dragons and KID's as Black? It's just speculation and based on stuff you enjoy.

I learned all pawn structures by switching openings so I disagree that you will learn by sticking to one opening. Play all openings you don't know. Scared of the French then play it yourself. I haven't gotten around to Sveshnikov Sicilian or the Indian defenses yet but I played them on the other side so I learned how to deal with those pawn structures.

i think that sicilians and KIDs are meant for 2000+ players, if you want to be solid against 1.d4 you could use 1.d5 or the neo-grunfeld both work pretty well. the KID is very complicated and if you don't know what you're doing you get squished

Of course learning a variety of structures will make you a better all-around player. I don't disagree that playing a variety of openings will give you that, and in fact I often play openings outside of my repertoire in casual games for that reason. But I think what you're getting at is that openings can be good for your overall chess if you study them in a way that elevates your overall game rather than memorizing lines of theory.

Of course, if you stick with one repertoire your whole life, your weakness in unfamiliar pawn structures may not show up all that often because you never reach them!