Don't give up. I looked at two of your most recent games where you played the Sicilian. You won one and lost one and were doing well in both.
Why not just take the offered piece? He had nothing to follow it up with. Then you could enjoy your nice lazy piece up endgame.
This one was good too. I see nothing to complain about.
Play the Caro-Kann. Its Very solid. Somemone consider it "drawish", but the truth is that usually the endgame its even favourable for black ( due to the better pawn structure).
Seems exacly what you are looking for.
You gave away a piece on move #7 in the first game. Until you stop doing that, it doesn't matter what opening you play. Beginners spend far too much time worrying about openings. You are likely to be out of book by move 5 or 6 every time, so the only thing you need to be thinking about are the principles of the openings.
Watch this video:
http://www.chess.com/video/player/opening-principles-explained
You gave away a piece on move #7 in the first game. Until you stop doing that, it doesn't matter what opening you play. Beginners spend far too much time worrying about openings. You are likely to be out of book by move 5 or 6 every time, so the only thing you need to be thinking about are the principles of the openings.
Watch this video:
http://www.chess.com/video/player/opening-principles-explained
What game are you talking about? She didn't lose a piece on move 7 of either of the games I posted. Until you stop making random comments, people won't be able to make sense of what you are saying.
Jimmy: Thanks for the link, but I'm not a stone cold BEGINNER - I know all about 'pawns in the center, develop your pieces, castle, knights before bishops, don't trade pieces for no reason', and I'm pretty sure that's evident from the example games.....my problem isn't that I open ...e6, ...h6, ...f6, ...Qa4 and say "EAT QUEEN AND PAWNS SUCKER!!!!" It's that I don't always like the positions I'm getting when I DO develop my pieces and castle.
notmtwain: Thanks for the feedback and the encouragement. It could well be that the answer is to get back on the horse and try not to fall this time. I have played many Sicilians that I am happy with, and my experiments with playing a classical ...e5 have been disappointing to say the least. The first game you showed was a painful loss....I remember faceplanting on the keyboard when I realized my mistake. It was clear by my opponent's play that he simply did not know what to do when I stopped the mate attempt on f6...his moves became slow, and I came up with the idea that I wanted to trade queens FIRST and then snap off the knight - but this wasn't possible...I had simply made up a tactic in my head that didn't exist on the board.
Alison
Did you watch the video all the way to the end, or are you just assuming that you "know all that stuff"? I do not mean to be rude, but your rating is that of a beginner. You might think you know some things, because you have read them, but your rating is telling a different story. I think you should watch the video. all the way to the end.
Of course, there is 98% more to chess than the opening principles, but it's a good start to know them.
1...e5! and mainlines! Most are just sensible developing moves.
Of course, there is 98% more to chess than the opening principles, but it's a good start to know them.
Agree...at her rating, basic principles are all she needs, and that is my point. Worrying about studying openeing with a rating under 1000 is pointless.
OK, let's look at the game I lost from an opening principle perspective
It looks to me like I played a very reasonable opening with principled moves. Maybe snagging the pawn and putting a bishop off sides was greedy - but many good players snag free pawns. Maybe developing the rook before castling was irresponsible, but it was a fabulous rook.
I study hard and practice a ton.......that doesn't necessarily translate into rating points, but I feel like I need to work on the mistakes I AM making not review mistakes that I am NOT making.
1...e5! and mainlines! Most are just sensible developing moves.
+1. After a few games you will know how to get good positions against the few gambits, and if white doesn't play a gambit you just have a position. I've crushed alot of quite strong players (1900+) by simply developing and having a plan.
Great example of why you should be paying to attention to issues other than the opening. Make a list of the main cause of your loss for your past 20 NON-blitz games, and you will know what to study. If it is not openings, as you say it is not, ask yourself why you think you need to spend more time studying them.
Moments like 23 Nd5... that's the point. If you make mistakes like that it can erase 40 moves of logical positional play, without even forcing your opponent to be creative.
The thing about 11...Rc8 is that you can play it anytime -- there's no particular urgency to do it now (if you ever did need to play it, you could just play it at that moment, with no issue). On the other hand castling (here) is something that you will want for sure; there's a 100% chance basically that castling won't turn out to be wasted. ...Rc8 will probably be a move you will want, but I wouldn't be as certain about it as castling -- there's always that risk that you will want to do something but it turns out you can't because your rooks aren't connected, or there is some problem with your king on the e file, or whatever.
Still I don't think those kinds of decisions make much difference for the most part. It's still mostly about not blundering, because of what I said in the first paragraph :)
OK, let's look at the game I lost from an opening principle perspective
It looks to me like I played a very reasonable opening with principled moves. Maybe snagging the pawn and putting a bishop off sides was greedy - but many good players snag free pawns. Maybe developing the rook before castling was irresponsible, but it was a fabulous rook.
I study hard and practice a ton.......that doesn't necessarily translate into rating points, but I feel like I need to work on the mistakes I AM making not review mistakes that I am NOT making.
A good game, besides a few ?? moves Black played well (White certainly made it easy).
To the OP:
I don't think you had a correct assessment of the position when you played 11. ...Rc8. At that point in the game, after winning two pawns, you should only be thinking about one thing: consolidation. White's only chance to avoid losing is to whip up some attack on your King, who is still in the center. Therefore, there is no reason to wait to play g6 Bg7 and 0-0, since waiting only gives White a chance to set-up some sort of attack (which is what happened, although you were still winning.)
At your level, there is no reason to learn opening theory, since, for example, memorizing all of the defenses after 12. ...Qe5! in the Polugaevsky Sicilian Najdorf is just a waste of time. You will never reach those positions and will not understand what the hell is going on (I certainly don't, I don't play the Sicilian though, fortunately!). Just the absolute basics (get all your pieces out, king to safety, figure out a plan, and don't give anything away for free) should be enough to beat weak players. So in conclusion, ditch the Sicilian until you're strong enough to understand it, and probably 1. ...e5 is the best way to learn chess.
Looks to me like you may have BYP syndrome--too much attention focused on general principles and not enough attention paid to the concreteness of the position which may be causing you to overlook tactical considerations both offensively and defensively. My suggestion would be for you to study basic tactics intensively.
Looks to me like you may have BYP syndrome--too much attention focused on general principles and not enough attention paid to the concreteness of the position which may be causing you to overlook tactical considerations both offensively and defensively. My suggestion would be for you to study basic tactics intensively.
Yes, this was a problem I had -- cost me lots of points. All of that ability to think generally will pay off, but only after you stop making simple mistakes.
'BYP syndrome' - lol - I have a strong record against BYP....for whatever that's worth :) - but I definitely understand what you're saying here - reading chess books and playing good chess aren't the same thing, and getting the two mixed up is a fault of mine.
Still, I am not a fan of the premise "Lower than 1600, don't study opening theory" - because playing the same type of position consistently and knowing how to operate in a particular common middlegame or ending pawn structure *IS* important. By playing moves that I understand and use regularly, I can get to the same crossroads and NOT make the same mistake again. I'm learning to think holistically about chess - the opening isn't really about developing and castling, it's about creating the structure you want to play with for the rest of the game, and that structure is not inconsequential just because my rating is low...
So I've never played e4....at least not since I was a little kid. Against e4, I've gone through a ton of ideas as black, but I've never been satisfied totally. I started with the French, but it felt cramped - I like more space. After that I switched to Alekhine's defense which is great fun as a blitz sideline but not really a practical weapon in the day-to-day. A few months of running my horse in circles and I moved over to the Sicilian - opening theory posterchild of millennial era chess. I've learned my lines, I play them reasonably, and I push b5 like a champ, but these ultra-sharp madcap beatdowns - where great at times - are not really what I'm looking for in every game.
I'm thinking that I sometimes want to equalize and draw with black against e4 - find a nice quiet position where I can develop my pieces and wander around until my opponent gets bored, trades everything looking for an attack that leads nowhere, and lets me win a king and pawn ending. Perhaps we can suggest sensible, drawish positions to play against e4 when I don't feel like insane, prison-shanking Sicilians?