I think you should play chess the way you enjoy it. Also, I think you are doing very well for someone who pays little attention to theory.
No theory no cry
Sort:
smiley15 wrote:
I tend to play on theory for the opening and some of the middlegame, and the endgame, and focus my somewhat weird tactical ability whenever possible. I am sort of like Marshall, able to trick my way out of troubles. Here's a sample game from one of my tournaments, where I screwed up utterly, then managed to regain material equality through tactical tricks.
What kind of time frame is this played over?
RC_Woods wrote:
I'm guessing around 2 hours for both players!
seems like odd moves for that kind of time. I must admit move 9? I Think for white confuses me. I love the white bishop in the queens gambit - why offer it to be taken?
Conzipe wrote:
To me studying theory is the most enjoyable part of chess, in fact most of my chess skill comes from just learning about different openings.
I had a maths buddy like. I wonder if it is to do with brain function. I have learning difficulties, and the part of your mind that is supposed to help with chess player doesn't really work very well for me. So perhaps I just play in a different way.
@smiley #3 He really let you off the hook. Instead of 18...Be7 he could have played Bd6 and he wins more material from you. Also plausible were 18...Qxa4 or ...bxa4 and he simplifies while up a piece. After you play 19.Qc2? -- am I missing a tactic, doesn't (...Qxa4) your N just hang?
Even that last sac, 24.Nxe6?!... Obviously fxe is bad & you're attacking his queen. You can't count on him to gift you his queen -- so, how to answer 24. Qc4. He threatens to win material unless you either exchange queens (to a losing endng) or whip up a true mating attack. I don't see the mating attack. 25.Qd2 Qxe6 26.Qh6 Nh5! and White is busted I think. I guess he was too busy staring over his glasses to see the right moves 
-- Even though the intial sac Bxh7 probably I thought it showed a real tactical creativity on your part. I wish I could spot more tries like that.
Dec 12, 2010
0
#8
MAttos_12 wrote:
RC_Woods wrote:
I'm guessing around 2 hours for both players!
seems like odd moves for that kind of time. I must admit move 9? I Think for white confuses me. I love the white bishop in the queens gambit - why offer it to be taken?
I'm not basing that on the moves. Actually I think it is very hard to determine the time for a game by the moves, perhaps almost impossible.
2hr is just quite standard for OTB games, that's all I went with :).
I find myself wondering sometimes why people put such a focus on theory. I have only ever purchased theory books as a form of penitence after a bad tournament defeat and I must confess to never getting passed the first page of any of them!
Now, I'm not IM or GM, or even a good chess player, but it 'real life' I managed an acceptable 1850 or so, and did acceptably in the odd tournament. I figure that there is good scope for just 'learning on the job', loose horribly, ask the other guy why!
Perhaps I am misguided here, but it seem like everyone else puts much more focus on theory and it just doesn't seem so much fun so I wonder why?
Ps
I Realize that I may now be inundated with invite to play me against me, so people can try out their well versed theory lines and prove me horribly wrong