Chess suddenly gets a whole lot tougher after 1800.
In my own opinion, it is good to find an IM/GMs that you really identify with. Kasparov and Karpov for example have strikingly different styles; it makes sense to study the one that you feel matches you the closest rather than both.
Endgame technique get increasingly important and need far more attention than previously.
hallo
Santoy_UK hat geschrieben:
"Chess suddenly gets a whole lot tougher after 1800.
In my own opinion, it is good to find an IM/GMs that you really identify with. Kasparov and Karpov for example have strikingly different styles; it makes sense to study the one that you feel matches you the closest rather than both.
Endgame technique get increasingly important and need far more attention than previously."
I find both styles interesting. I think that attacking chess is more complex and much harder. I do not really know if I am rather an attacking or positional player. Do you know a good book to endgame technique?
Again, this is only my opinion, I am not strong enough to be a coach. It is most important to know your own style.
The best way is to simply try everything: attacking, hyper-modern, open, closed, and see which you enjoy the most and return the best results. Since I started playing online a few months ago, I have discovered what a great tool the opening explorer is to show what percentage wins you have. I wish I had it years ago!
Many people want to emulate Tal but in reality, it is the last thing they should be doing because their tactical visualization is not good enough.
Once you get to realise where your strengths and weaknesses are, you can refine who and what you study.
Before online chess, I used Chess King phone apps which are excellent but a good start is to work through all of the drills here.
I will choose Karpov. I think I can learn much from Karpov. He played positional chess and he played many endgames. As you said endgame technique gets very important. Therefore I choose Karpov because he played more endgames than Kasparov since Kasparov won many games in the middlegame because of his attacking play.
But I still learn tactics daily. I will search an intermediate tactic book and solve one hour per day tactics. I think about Perfect your Chess written by Andrij Wolokitin and Wladimir Grabinski. Then I will analyse one game of Karpov and when I have still time I will work with books of Yussopow (his nine books).
I went from like 1940 to 2117 in one year and the main reasons for that were playing openings that fit my style (played the KID for a few years and scored maybe one win with it lol), doing tactics at least on a weekly basis (I was too lazy to do that every day) and learning endgames (mainly rook endgames). Also during actual OTB tournaments I only focused on the game at hand and not the overall standings, and just wanted to play well rather than stressing too much about winning. I don't really have specific book recommendations I'm afraid, I just work(ed) through my endgame ones and I wouldn't be able to tell you which ones are significantly better than others.
How does one play zero games and be rated 1600 in all categories?. PS try to win from Leela chess engine
When you register with chess.com, you are asked what your playing strength is and your initial grade is set accordingly. Rating swings are high initially so that new members find their actual strength quite quickly.
My starting grade was 1800 but if it was actually 1400 or 2200, it would find the new level within 10 games or so.
Hello,
I am a teenager who has a strength of 1750-1800 Fide Elo. I want to reach 2100 Elo in one year.
I want to improve as much as I can in one year and I can definitely train 14 hours per week. I play two long online games per week. Do you know some good books for players 1800++ or books in range 1800-2100 (for tactics, endgames and positional play).
I also thought about analysing grandmaster games but I am not sure which player I should choose (Karpov, Kasparov, Alekhine, Rubinstein, Capablanca etc.).