Yeah that's normal, and not even necessarily a bad thing. Engines may show you the fastest win, but sometimes fast also means riskiest.
I guess to improve to area you could work on tactics and review the lines the engine shows you.
Have difficulties ending with lots of pieces on the bord
Sort:
My problem is ending prematurely 
Dec 31, 2019
0
#4
Sartradjm skrev:
My problem is ending prematurely
Do you mean you resign?
Dec 31, 2019
0
#6
Chebyshevv skrev:
Yeah that's normal, and not even necessarily a bad thing. Engines may show you the fastest win, but sometimes fast also means riskiest.
I guess to improve to area you could work on tactics and review the lines the engine shows you.
Thanks!
I now use the online training courses and analyse the game, both what the software at chess.com shows the best suggested move, and I "try again" on my blunders and mistakes.
I have accepted that sometimes my "blunders" are not blunders, but instead a slower way to win in the end and totally correct for someone like me with a rating of arund 600, but I also put even more effort in analysiing the blunders and mistakes that were real mistakes, meaning they were actually bad, and not just not optimal. What I mean is the difference between having a +7 advantage and making a, for the computer, irrational move with a pawn etc, and the difference of making a move that loses you a piece, severly worsening your position or something else that leads to the opponent gaining strength and ultimately checkmating or winningn +3 or +5 worth of pieces.
Jan 1, 2020
0
#7
Im a beginner with blitz a bit over 600 after 50ish games.
My Response:
I’m guessing either you really like to exaggerate,or you are talking about both chess.com games and other games on either OTB on another site. In either case 600 blitz is better than some who begin at chess. I know someone who started at 400 blitz, and he got to 800 blitz without doing anything special. You can just play games and analyze them when you are done and you will get better. If you want to get better even faster do 30 minutes of tactics a day. You will notice improvement after consistent practice over a three week period. If you want to gain more rating in a shorter amount of time watch a video from John Bartholomew on climbing the rating ladder and a video from his famous chess Fundamentals daily and take time to remember the ideas behind the moves played. Also take note of the types of mistakes being made at your level. If you want to improve even faster buy Logical chess move by move and go over one annotated master game a day. If you want to get even better faster get Silmans endgame course and start doing those and stop at the appropriate level before you dig deeper.
I checked out your games and noticed that you play 4-5 different White Openings. You probably should only be playing 1 right now to lessen the amount of theory you have to memorize. The object is not to memorize openings right now as you are only a beginner, but it’s customary to look up the opening you played with either a chess opening encyclopedia or a repertoire book and see where your game deviates from the mainline or see if you played a side variation or whatever. Dan Heisman suggests you make your own opening journal on these. You only want to include an actual opening journal if you lost due to trap in the opening. This is the cheap way to learn openings, if you can somehow find a free resource to check your opening with.
You wrote:
I find it hard to end things with lots of pieces left. I want to trade most of the pieces and have an advantage in later stages. When analysing the games the computer suggest me to move more agressevly (and sometimes telling me of missed wins) that I can not see how to execute and instead I find myself wobbling around forever (with a +3 och +7 advantage) trading pieces and clearing the bord so it gets "easier" to checkmate.
my-response:
I didn’t come across games where you lost in this way so I don’t know exactly what you are talking about. I also can’t tell if you are exaggerating orif you really played games like this,just not on chess.com.
I can only guess that a game like that started out as usual with mutual blunders until your opponent did a huge blunder like lose his Queen fora rook or minor piece. I can say you might of tried to checkmate him but he was able to build a fortress, and of course all this was done while you both missed tactical shots. Of course I won’t know if I am right unless I see a game like this, which you claim to have played.
the key is to train your mind to stop missing stuff. As you might have already guessed.
you wrote:
If the game has 45 moves the analytic software on this site may show that I had total control (like the graph showing standings is 100%, on totally top on my side) after 20 moves and into the end, but it took me another 25 moves to win. Is this normal? How can I improve?
My response :
I can’t it and paste here on my iPad this should have been added earlier I already answered this.
You Wrote:
It may work now but I think that when I improve or play against harder competition they will be able to come back even if I would have +3 or +6 advantage, since it takes forever for me to checkmate and they may do something wise and "recover".
My Response:
Don’t worry about that. Just train your mind to play the best possible move all the time by coming up with a list of candidate moves and your opponent replies to each one and pick the route you like best. When you make mistakes you need to correct them by studying the right moves and try to play those instead if something like that happens again. You can’t do this playing blitz. You’d need at least 30 minutes with a 30 second increment. The way to get better is to gradually make blunders less and less. To do that just do all that I said to do here.
Jan 1, 2020
0
#8
suunnistus wrote:
Chebyshevv skrev:
Yeah that's normal, and not even necessarily a bad thing. Engines may show you the fastest win, but sometimes fast also means riskiest.
I guess to improve to area you could work on tactics and review the lines the engine shows you.
Thanks!
I now use the online training courses and analyse the game, both what the software at chess.com shows the best suggested move, and I "try again" on my blunders and mistakes.
I have accepted that sometimes my "blunders" are not blunders, but instead a slower way to win in the end and totally correct for someone like me with a rating of arund 600, but I also put even more effort in analysiing the blunders and mistakes that were real mistakes, meaning they were actually bad, and not just not optimal. What I mean is the difference between having a +7 advantage and making a, for the computer, irrational move with a pawn etc, and the difference of making a move that loses you a piece, severly worsening your position or something else that leads to the opponent gaining strength and ultimately checkmating or winningn +3 or +5 worth of pieces.
it’s thinking like that that could hold you back possibly. I have no way of verifying what you say is true because you don’t give examples. All I can do is guess that you are making a bad misconception. Most of the time you won’t be able to capitalize on a blunder made by your opponent if you don’t seize the opportunity the very next move. It seems you are saying that if your opponent makes a blunder it’s okay if you don’t seize the initiative because you will ‘Win anyway’. That might be true if you where already ahead in material, but if you continue to miss later shots it makes it easy for your opponent to come back into the game by a blunder by you. Remember at this stage you and your opponent are making multiple blunders per game,so you can’t afford to take it lightly when you miss a tactical shot.
Jan 1, 2020
0
#9
I have no memorized openings, I just do things that feels good as should be good and I have learned in the tutorials. Like pawns to center and activate bishops and k
nights. So there is so "memorising openings" going on but yeah maybe I should pick one and stick to it.
No im not loosing that way (with computer showing a "not bad" move where nothing bad happened as a blunder. But I got some input from another player in a different thread where I moved my rook 1 step and conputer software marked it read and wanted me to move my knight. Answer was that without moving the knight the opponent could have used a 3-4 step tactic and won material. But realising that was beyond my and my opponents level. But yeah you are right in that even if it works now, better ranking players will see and execute those.
suunnistus wrote:
Hi,
Im a beginner with blitz a bit over 600 after 50ish games.
I find it hard to end things with lots of pieces left. I want to trade most of the pieces and have an advantage in later stages. When analysing the games the computer suggest me to move more agressevly (and sometimes telling me of missed wins) that I can not see how to execute and instead I find myself wobbling around forever (with a +3 och +7 advantage) trading pieces and clearing the bord so it gets "easier" to checkmate.
If the game has 45 moves the analytic software on this site may show that I had total control (like the graph showing standings is 100%, on totally top on my side) after 20 moves and into the end, but it took me another 25 moves to win. Is this normal? How can I improve?
It may work now but I think that when I improve or play against harder competition they will be able to come back even if I would have +3 or +6 advantage, since it takes forever for me to checkmate and they may do something wise and "recover".
I take it that "to win" means "to checkmate".
In more advanced games, when one player, for example, has successfully won a hanging queen for little compensation, the game is considered "won" by the player having the queen (at least in the eyes of the Chess.com analysis) because he/she is expected to win the game. Usually, my interpretation of "win" is being on a great winning evaluation which I am able to convert to a full point easily, even if I have yet to bag in the point.
Having said that, it may not necessarily take just a few more moves to land a checkmate. Sometimes, it can make many more turns before the checkmate is actually delivered, but in practice, many opponents resign before the checkmate stage.
Take this position for example.
A fairly decent player can tell that White is winning in this position, but I don't think the checkmate will come anytime soon.
Hi,
Im a beginner with blitz a bit over 600 after 50ish games.
I find it hard to end things with lots of pieces left. I want to trade most of the pieces and have an advantage in later stages. When analysing the games the computer suggest me to move more agressevly (and sometimes telling me of missed wins) that I can not see how to execute and instead I find myself wobbling around forever (with a +3 och +7 advantage) trading pieces and clearing the bord so it gets "easier" to checkmate.
If the game has 45 moves the analytic software on this site may show that I had total control (like the graph showing standings is 100%, on totally top on my side) after 20 moves and into the end, but it took me another 25 moves to win. Is this normal? How can I improve?
It may work now but I think that when I improve or play against harder competition they will be able to come back even if I would have +3 or +6 advantage, since it takes forever for me to checkmate and they may do something wise and "recover".