Would anyone perhaps want to play me and provide some analysis or tips during or after the game?
Probably been asked many times before...
Sort:
Nov 1, 2017
0
#23
mjharris77 wrote:
Would anyone perhaps want to play me and provide some analysis or tips during or after the game?
I sent you a game request.
Nov 1, 2017
0
#24
FishEyedFools wrote:
mjharris77 wrote:
Would anyone perhaps want to play me and provide some analysis or tips during or after the game?
I sent you a game request.
I've accepted as well as the request by GOP.
).
Nov 14, 2017
0
#26
One thing I've noticed is that when playing the computer for example and I get stuck so ask for a hint, is sometimes I'm like why is that the best move? Especially if it's just moving a pawn or something. Or the king even if it isn't threatened or attacking anything? Seems strange to me but probably not to others.
Also, this'll probably sound like a ridiculous question, but how can one be certain they are in fact improving, and not just stagnant or staying at the same level (or even getting worse)? Is there such a thing as a correct and or an incorrect method for practice?
Nov 17, 2017
0
#27
Hey mj (there it is again),
I think your last question was about "silent moves". This are those moves they seem to have no reason but they can appear in two kind of positions.
In tactical situations this can be a waiting move, because the opponent has a kind of "Zugzwang" and will lose his defense at his next move. Or the king is moved to another square, so the opponent can't force a counterattack.
In positional play, it also can occur as a waiting move. And as a 'general' rule, when you got your pieces to their best squares, but the position seems to be closed, you have to move your pawns forward to burst the position. This includes to get your King to a safe square where he doesn't obstruct your plans.
How to find the best way to play in such positions is much of experience and a bit of training. This as an example: https://www.chess.com/lessons/course/279
I hope this answer could help you.
Greetings.
Nov 17, 2017
0
#28
Thanks. I did think that it was because if you're happy with your position then it acts as a waiting move forcing your opponent to move to weaken his position.
I'll check out those lessons as well thank you 
Nov 21, 2017
0
#29
In the early stages of chess there is a lot to be said for just avoiding blunders until the other guy makes one and then taking advantage of their mistake. A simple technique to practice this is to imagine the position after you would make your move and ask yourself if this move is a blunder how would my opponent beat me. When they make their move ask yourself if that move is a blunder how can I prove it.
Nov 21, 2017
0
#30
I do blunder a lot. To be fair if I had the money I think I'd get some kind of a coach because whilst it's great having unlimited tactics and lessons not knowing exactly what to focus on is kinda annoying. And I think having a master as a coach for example would really help with that. Has anyone any experience with coaches? Of course it's hypothetical because I can't afford one, I'm just curious as to whether they're worth it or have worked? It just amazes me how someone could for example go from 1000 to say 1700 in a year, if that.
Nov 23, 2017
0
#31
ghost_of_pushwood wrote:
"Recently it has become fashionable to believe that communications between juniors and outstanding grandmasters is all that is needed to solve our current deficit of young talent. The growth of those who will one day take our place is lately considered impossible without a permanent guardianship of tutors. Nevertheless I wish to state firmly that many of our best grandmasters, including me, have grown up in the war and post-war years, when everybody had to study on their own."
--Tigran Petrosian
Again, beware of this whole business of Needing a Coach. I suspect it becomes something of a status symbol and something of a crutch with a lot of people (as though having a coach means you won't have to work as hard on your own). And after all, I became an NM myself without one.
When did you become a National Master? 
And that's the thing is I understand it takes a lot of hard work I just kind of feel like I need some sort of direction other than merely playing hundreds or thousands of games. 
check out GM Smirnov's video's especially the old videos.He has a degree in psychology and he focuses on beginner's building block
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vFtUZo86JI
Nov 24, 2017
0
#33
DeirdreSkye wrote:
I tried to challenge you for a training game but your settings didn't let me.
I think I have it set to friends only since I got challenged by a complete stranger so was a bit weirded out.
I'll check out those videos, thanks. What exactly do you mean by building block? Or do you just mean as in the inability to learn and improve?
Nov 30, 2017
0
#34
Thanks again to DeirdreSkye for the game. I do seem to currently be on a losing streak however, but I've a tournament starting tomorrow and others starting sometime in future.
Nckchrls wrote:
Only 22? I think you underestimate how good your chess can possibly be!
To get there I'd suggest considering two main ideas. Firstly, chess games are lost rather than won. Secondly, when playing good chess, being a single pawn up greatly increases your winning chances and significantly decreases your losing chances.
Practically, I might start with some middle game principles stuff. My favorites were books like Fine's middle game book and Evan's New Ideas in Chess but they may be out of print. I read Silman's Amateur's Mind and Reassess and they seem as good but I'd guess there are plenty of others available as well. The aim is to be well grounded in middle game principles.
Probably also want to dip lightly into endgame and opening principles. With a focus on openings you play. The aim here is to be able to at least get to a reasonable middle game out of the opening most of the time and to at least have some idea how to finish off a won end game.
And of course, probably spend some time on tactics. But I wouldn't emphasize them too much at the expense of getting really comfortable with the principles.
The most important thing might be that you want to take away a lesson from every game you lose. Since games are lost, if you know when and how you goofed up and learn how not to make the same mistake ever again, you should lose less and less the more experience you get and remember. I recommend a game diary which lists the date, opponent and reason for the loss. Might also want to review the diary routinely to be reminded of the ways you might be prone to lose.
This kind of plan can help you stay motivated in two ways. Hopefully, you will lose less and less. Which is nice. And, over time, you will also greatly increase your understanding of "good chess". Which allows you to increasingly appreciate how much masters of the game employ art in their craft.
That's some great counsel there!!
It hit me like a double exclam thunderbolt when you said most chess games are lost rather than won.
I never considered that before, and by jove, I think you're right! This tells me something very useful.
Thank you.
Dec 14, 2017
0
#36
Right now I'm currently finding that I'm doing (reasonably) okay at daily chess but at rapid games (15+10) I do far worse. And I'm not struggling for time as I always have plenty of time so maybe I play too fast I don't know. I do find that I seem to blunder more and maybe I need to play slower however it feels like people are more aggressive in rapid compared to daily, trying to get quick attacks or mates that I have to deal with and potentially mess up. For the record my current rating for daily is over 200 points higher than my rapid, and I've won more than I've lost with daily (though some are due to opponents timing out). With rapid however I've lost more than I've won. Interestingly for both I do better as black it seems, no idea why though. And as for blitz and bullet, I only play those if I'm bored or in a hurry since I can't really handle anything faster than about 10 minutes each. Also, I have about a 50 50 ratio with the easy computer in rapid and I've not yet won against the medium computer. I think the record is currently 16 losses and 1 draw. :(
you might like chesskid.com's gold membership because it is cheaper then chess.com for unlimited puzzles, the videos are mostly for beginners, (not as good as me -under ~1000 USCF or ~1100 chess.com) and the articles are good but not as many as them as chess.com. please let me know if this post is against the rules of this website. PS; chesskid.com is owned by chess.com
Dec 22, 2017
0
#38
It's an option though I've already paid for diamond membership here which lasts until November 2018. Plus the videos might be too basic for me. I'm still not sure exactly what to improve on, probably just reducing blunders and calculating better (when to play moves and in which order etc, and avoiding traps).
There are two types of learning experiences. For things like starting a car engine, if I explain to someone who knows nothing about it how to do it, almost instantly they understand what to do. But for things like playing chess well, there is a huge gulf between knowing the governing principles of the game and being able to put them into practice. In my own case, I have recently learned a huge amount about the basic principles of chess strategy and tactics, but this additional knowledge only seems to weigh me down when playing chess, and my chess performance just constantly grows worse. At some point knowledge should turn into competence, but it is not clear how to propel this transformation in chess.
Fish I feel like I know all that already. I appreciate the advice but it feels kind of obvious, yet I'm still blundering. Also I feel like it's all well and good learning standard openings but often I'm playing against a computer or a human and they will be aggressive in the openings forcing me to respond. They might target my kingside or my f7 f2 squares so I have to react accordingly rather than necessarily developing my pieces as I'd like. Failing that I still reach moments where I'm unsure what to do or I'll feel like I've no decent moves.
After looking at your games, you may think you know that stuff already, but your play shows that you either dont, or you dont follow the basics. I looked at some of your games, and they all show that you arent following opening principles, youre dropping pieces, and missing simple tactics.
Oh right. What would you suggest I do to prevent that? It's rather worrying in my opinion that I'm not even aware of this.