Q+A for beginners(and everyone else)

Chess studies with 8 to 12 pieces are called a Meredith.

Not sure offhand if they're endgame studies or chess compositions.

Lol

Computer says i should play Nxe5.

I pkayed exd5 figuring i could gain some tempos on the queen, but that gives up any advantage and blacks slightly better for reasons i dont understand.

What would you recommend and why.

I would say that Nxe5 is better for those reasons.

Thanks, i guess i get to eager to draw the queen out in the opening. I play the scotch whenever possible, so ill remember this.

Is it possible for more advanced players to be able to see if a certain move is an "inaccuracy" or a "mistake" or a "blunder?" I am not very good, but I try to plan ahead in order to prevent these types of mistakes, but no matter what, they seem to happen naturally.

Of course the higher your rating, the easier is to spot blunders from lower rated player.

The higher your rating, the more patterns you know, and at a certain level, start to understand positional considerations. Get high enough, you'll even start getting into the theory of pawn formations. (As opposed to just memorizing the pawn formations of your pet lines.) Not to mention a firm grasp of endgame theory.

In a way, kind of; but still not quite the same. As with any great amount of practice (into anything), you get more of a feel for what is going on. "Blunders" are easiest to spot because it is a terrible move that usually drops at least a piece, or hangs mate, or something huge. "Mistakes" and "Inaccuracies" however, are much tougher for anyone to identify. True, that the best players can often identify a "mistake" or "inaccuracy" because they sense that a better move was available to them: but first we must understand what exactly makes a move a "mistake." The computer definition of "blunder", "mistake" and "inaccuracy" is simply the computer calculating what it believes to be the "best" move and then comparing that move to other options. When the other options are x-amount of centipawns "worse" than the "best" move it is labeled as "blunder", "mistake", or "inaccurate." Therefore, all evaluations are only compared to what the computer calculates as the "best" move, but that move may not be "best" ("horizon effect" for computers is an obvious counter-example). Furthermore, a computer "blunder" might be a crushing move that is still winning, but not "best" - the human player (even GM players) may opt for the "non-best" crushing move for several reasons (often times simplification, easier to play/time trouble).

In short, when one understands chess better: they are more likely to sense better move from worse ones and get a feel for just how "worse" those moves may be (sounds similar to "blunders", mistakes" and inaccuracies"). However, a human interpretation may not be in accordance with the computer's judgement of the situation.  

Innacuracy often are positional considerations. For example, your opponent it trying to attack your king on a diagonal.

Say your playing black. Do you move a pawn from h7 to h6, or the pawn on g7 to g6?

Can be hard to decide, since it could be 5 or more moves before that decision becomes obvious if it was right or wong. It might get to the endgame before you know if it was the correct decision.

Is this good? I open with pawn e2 to e3 Then bring my queen from d1 to e2

I probably ain't too qualified but I'd say that isn't a good idea cuz when you're playing e3 the only piece you're readying for development is your light squared bishop. Which is also the very piece you're blocking when you're playing Qe2

Wull seems like heaps of new players would learn reasons why rather than just memorize positions, honestly

Patterns and understanding the reasons where pieces shpulg go are linked very closely together

But a total explanation of how to read a chessboard is best explained by the book Reassess Your Chess by Jeremy Silman. It's primarily targeting the 1400 to 1800 USCF segment of the market.

That being said, even players that have had even a couple lessons on chess will be taught some very basic patterns, so when the play chess, they will be drawn to those patterns like moths to a light, and to do that, they  will reason out where to put pieces to make it happen.

Ok awesome, yep if I pay all my other bills then Silman will be the first cab off the rank

Please someone let me rent his main book off you for 3 months xD

Right now on thriftbooks, you can get Reassess Your Chess for under $5. I wouldn't reccomend the Workbook on top of it, unless you feel you need it after going through the first book at least once.

Spend $10 on an order and Thriftbooks has free shipping.

Yah I need to read his other one first

He has a book on strategy that might be of interest. I think it targets lower rated players, maybe the 1200 to 1600 range. Rank beginners can learn a lot from Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess. Perhaps that's the gold standard for beginner level tactics on the printed page.