Studying chess making me a worse player?

Perhaps, a human would play 3...c5.

 

Very likely, that would have been way more interesting! 

Edit: Just thinking, wouldn't still 4. Nf3 be a good answer still? If 4 ...cxd4 then 5. Nxd6 and 4 ...c3 then 5. Nxc3.

4...c3 is not helpful at this point.

5 Nxd6 would be risky.

Haha, oh sorry, I meant 5. Nxd4, my bad. But yes, I'm double thinking that one... because then ...Bc5 black takes complete control of the center. But 4. dxc5 Bxc5 doesn't look much better...

Of course, White does not have to play 3 e5.

Replying to the original post, I can totally relate. Being a complete newbie, I picked up chess two years ago, in my late 40s. I picked up the rules, the principles and advanced steadily, but lately have deteriorated again.  Kind if folllowing a Dunning-Kruger curve. The more I learn, the more I know how little I know.  I think I may also be trying to do too much too fast, having fallen down to the low 800s again.

Thanks for this excellent thread and the good avice, everyone!

That's very interesting @geirwaaler, glad to know I'm not alone in this situation (albeit I'm sorry that you are in the same position too!) and I think that the Dunning-Kruger curve is an excellent fit for this. Anyway, I think that the advice given in this thread really helps and taking it should help us both at improving our game!

Being around my level, please feel free to add me as a friend and we can play some unrated games to see how we do!

@SpiderUnicorn Why would I need to memorise so many openings at my level? I'm not saying it would not come handy to be a living openings encyclopaedia, but aren't other things more important right now to play satisfyingly?

Aye, such a thing happens more often than it should.

When beginners don't know what's happening on the board, some try to figure it out. They may be right or wrong in their conclusions, but they're thinking. When beginners read a book or something, some assume it contains all the knowledge they need to figure things out and try to apply such knowledge to every situation. In a way, it's like going to a party full of people you don't know, then you hear someone is called Paul, and from there on you start addressing everyone (men and women) as Paul.

@Nicator65 You are so right and that is an apt comparison. This is something that I'm experiencing now while reading books, though I admit that it seems that it's slowly helping. Hopefully in some months I'll be able to say that I'm satisfied with the results!

Think it this way. When you study something in chess, more than the memory of the fact you should try to clarify the reasons behind the fact. From there you can compare with what you have on the board in front of you, and decide if your knowledge applies or not. As simple as that.

i find that if i spend too much time on the tactics trainer alone my game suffers a bit

if i incorporate studying tactics from a good book then it is much better

the key is that tactics flow from the position and in a tactics problem the position has already been established

in our games we have to build the positions ourselves

in addition to the books, i would humbly suggest a video series by “im squarology” aka daniel tapia

if you search and then check his youtube you will find a short series on the “chess tactics antennae” book by emmanuel nieman

this book was recommended by my chess coach when i explained similar issues i had with “tactic tunnel vision”

the book and the videos stress the importance of “signals” (king safety, piece alignment, loose pieces, overworked pieces, etc) which- when present, and especially when 2 or more signals are present in a position then it should be the time to examine for tactics

it is more of a thinking/playing process that you try to develop for your whole game

check it out

also- check videos on some master games (morphy, fisher, etc) with analysis (ben finegold has some good ones)

now, after addressing the tactics tunnel vision, it is a common process that your rating might suffer in the short term if you are truly studying more

it takes awhile for us to internalize, process, and execute the new material

dont fret
just keep playing and doing post game analysis

i guess somethings can't work sometimes:

or:

you might get frustrated because the opening was changed that might prevent somethings in books

So many helpful answers! Let me try to reply to all of them:

@Nicator65 This is something that I'm realising slowly. When I started reading books, doing puzzles, etc. I focused only on what was the goal to achieve, not all the circumstances surrounding it. Though I still don't have that whole perspective of the board and the plays, I'm fighting that urge of looking at one single point and I'm trying to see the big picture. I admit that this is quite complex for someone who never had previous experience "learning" chess, but it's a fun challenge.

@daxypoo It's a hard one to keep a balance between what you study and what you play. It seems that one affects the other, and not always positively, but on a bad way. I like the idea of "signals", this is something that it's happening more and more often as I play. Sometimes while I am in a game and I see my opponent making a move, something snaps in my brain, like a signal, and I see perfectly what I have to do. Sadly, this kind of inspiration only comes on my attack and not on the defense, which is something I need to address too. I'm taking note of your recommendations to check them out!

@Sleepingpuppy I like your choice in board theme hehe. It's true that opening variations while you're playing on autopilot are really troublesome. Thankfully I don't have enough opening theory in my head yet to get to that stage, but I admit sometimes I throw away full games when my opponent throws a strange variation at me. Good point to take note of.

Thank you all of you for your kind advices! They are certainly helping a lot and my game is improving a lot thanks to them. It's only a shame that I can't focus properly with what is going on around the world, but I can feel everything improving steadily, and great part of it is thank to all of you.

I can tell you one thing that most overlook. Confidence. When you have that you will play better. Trust me. If you keep doubting your abilities you will also be doubting your moves.

Studying chess is like eating. You can't run a race after a large meal, but you need to eat in order to make the body grow. I find the same thing with chess. My OTB play often improves after I leave off studying for a while. My big problem, along with over confidence, is that I feel I can "take study" to a game with me. There's no substitute for actually "being there" when the game's taking place...

I am guessing that you may have become really efficient at the way you were playing before, like a well-oiled machine - push that f4, knight moves forward, go for the fork, sacrifice there, push for time, wham bam thank you m'am.  

However when you learn more, suddenly you are seeing more things and in a different way, and wanting to find the actual best move rather than a one that's "good enough". For example the fight for the central squares. But if you start thinking a lot about central squares and whether this  move is really correct, you may be taking an imbalanced amount of time for it relative to what you have on your clock. Also you're doing something new, and doing something new always takes time to get right. You could be misunderstanding ideas or just not be used to them. You will have to train to integrate the new aspects of your game into actual games, you might also need the tactical edge to your game to come back if you have been thinking in a positional sense for a while.    

@Disinclination Very true. In my (short) experience, I often play a few games against the computer to build up some confidence, even if I lose, and then I play against normal players. Usually playing against someone way better than you builds confidence and then you face opponents of your level with way more confidence.

@Ziggy_Zugzwang I'm very interested in checking how do I play OTB. It really seems that studying too much harms your game until you really internalise what you have learned, so it needs to be taken in small dosages. Now, about OTB... this is something I'd like to try soon (once the pandemic is over) I recently bought a board to follow up on the books and it feels so awkward compared to the online experience...

@Uhohspaghettio1 Actually I have found out while reading some books that the theory in chess advances at a really fast pace! In some books I find advices that while they are really good, they seem to counter the way that good players are playing right now. Training is being hard and I'm finding games become easier and easier as I progress, but I also get stuck in some ideas that makes me throw away games that I should have won just because I'm trying to "adjust" to new knowledge.

While it's true that I'm starting to feel more confident now, I'm wondering... what once I reach 1000s? What about the 1200s? And if I managed to reach the 1200s, would I be satisfied, or would I want more? At what point progression becomes really difficult?

When I coached a very successful high school chess team, I wanted new players to learn, in order:

1. the principles of the openings (control center, develop pieces more than pawns, threaten when possible, castle early, don't get the queen out too soon, etc.)

2. tactics, tactics, tactics.  You should slowly be able to demonstrate by name every on of the dozens of tactics on the following sites. If you can't, those are tools you are throwing away!

https://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-tactics--definitions-and-examples

https://chesstempo.com/tactical-motifs.html

3. Basic endgame principles, especially the Principle of the Opposition and the Pawn Square Rule.

If I was coaching now, a requirement for players who learned those initial things, would be to STUDY Planning and Tactics.

Chessmaster Fred Wilson’s 4 principles from his excellent book Simple Attacking Plans where the 4 principles are demonstrated by 36 annotated games:

I have come to believe there are only four essential, even primitive, concepts which you must learn and understand in order to play successful, attacking chess - Fred Wilson

1. In the opening, whenever justified, relentlessly attack the weak squares f7 or f2.
2. Most successful kingside attacks are directed against the squares h7 or h2, and they are often preceded by eliminating or driving off its defender. Corollary: most successful attacks require a long queen move.
3. If your opponent’s king is trapped in the center, make every reasonable effort to open and dominate the e-file, and sometimes the d-file also.
4. If possible, point all your pieces at your opponent’s king.

Martin Weteschnik, Chess Tactics from Scratch, is the best tactics book I've ever read: not only examples, but principles behind how to create pins, discovered attacks, etc. Plenty of diagrams so you can follow in book alone without a board.

It might be of interest to look at the table of contents of A COMPLETE CHESS COURSE by Antonio Gude: "... 1 The Basic Rules of Chess 7 ... 2 Your First Chess Games 23 … 3 Openings and Basic Principles 33 ... 4 Putting Your Pieces to Work 52 ... 5 Strategy and Tactics 76 ... 6 Endgame Play and Further Openings 106 … 7 Combinations and Tactical Themes 128 ... 8 Attacking Play 163 ... 9 Your First Opening Repertoire 194 …"
http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/A_Complete_Chess_Course.pdf