Forums

# How do you convert this +3.5 position? I ended up in a losing position.

krazeechess wrote:

uhhh i just played a game and even after staring at the position for 5 minutes i can't figure out why this is a blunder

And on top of that, all the computer's top recommendations were moving the rook on the b file. Don't I get a pawn with this move?

Use self analysis to play moves while looking at what the engine wants... explore lines on your own and you wont have to ask us to do this thing for you.

-

-

Light square blockade plus active king.

blueemu wrote:
PerpetuallyPinned wrote:

hmm

The chances of me remembering all that are probably worse than a one armed bandit at the casino telling you how many of each fruit he just saw. And my eyes would feel about same

It was the basic principle (don't stop calculating half-way down a tactical line; evaluate at the END of the line, not in the middle) that I was trying to illustrate. The actual combination was just an example.

I got it

But still 100% sure after 10 or fewer moves, I'd lose track of the board. That's insane

llama47 wrote:
krazeechess wrote:

uhhh i just played a game and even after staring at the position for 5 minutes i can't figure out why this is a blunder

And on top of that, all the computer's top recommendations were moving the rook on the b file. Don't I get a pawn with this move?

Use self analysis to play moves while looking at what the engine wants... explore lines on your own and you wont have to ask us to do this thing for you.

-

-

Light square blockade plus active king.

Oh ok I think I underestimated the light square blockade when I was calculating. I did use self analysis.

Since the topic came up, I was digging around some books on the subject.

Now this book about decision making didn't work for me like I hoped. It did give me some structure to work with though.

And looksie what I found...

look familiar?

PerpetuallyPinned wrote:

Since the topic came up, I was digging around some books on the subject.

Now this book about decision making didn't work for me like I hoped. It did give me some structure to work with though.

And looksie what I found...

look familiar?

I think the position is common in the semi-slav.

I have an old database on an old phone. No real good way to search for similar positions. That's how I came up with the game I did share.

Must be more common than I thought.

PerpetuallyPinned wrote:

I have an old database on an old phone. No real good way to search for similar positions. That's how I came up with the game I did share.

Must be more common than I thought.

Do you play Daily? In Daily chess, you're allowed to move the pieces around (on the analysis board) while you calculate. It makes "visualizing" the variation far easier.

In this game, for example, the final position in which White resigned after my 32nd move was already examined on my analysis board at move 10... a whole 22 moves earlier!

A Heroic Defense in the Sicilian Najdorf - Kids, don't try this at home! - Chess Forums - Chess.com

PerpetuallyPinned wrote:

Since the topic came up, I was digging around some books on the subject.

Now this book about decision making didn't work for me like I hoped. It did give me some structure to work with though.

And looksie what I found...

look familiar?

Can't stand people who coin phrases to sell books where the phrases don't add anything.

Optimissed wrote:
PerpetuallyPinned wrote:

Since the topic came up, I was digging around some books on the subject.

Now this book about decision making didn't work for me like I hoped. It did give me some structure to work with though.

And looksie what I found...

look familiar?

Can't stand people who coin phrases to sell books where the phrases don't add anything.

Yeah, I don't think much of the "global quality" metric.

"Collective mobility" is a useful concept though, IMO. One of the main drawbacks of a doubled Pawn is that it degrades the collective mobility of the entire Pawn formation on that flank.

The chess board isn't a globe so it isn't even apt. Also, pieces tend to have more maneuverability in some parts of the board than others, due to pawn structure etc.

Aha, global quality = maneuverability. Global quality has 14 characters including the space and maneuverability has 15 so the latter is less effective. The trouble is that the latter inherently explains the factor that is counted as "global quality".

So the new phrase wins on letter count but fails on two more important counts. Its main asset is for people who can't spell maneuverability. Let's hope it doesn't catch on.

<<"Collective mobility" is a useful concept though, IMO>>

Because it's inherently explanatory.

You are literally asking how to avoid blundering in a blitz game.

Well, this sort of question is dumb, and requires an equally dumb answer like "try playing faster, and better".

Or, as a very famous Soviet chess master and coach has claimed, "he, who analyses blitz, is stupid".

Blitz is OK, as long as you play it for fun, and do not take it seriously.

"I've tilted seven points in blitz over the past week .... I think I shall end it all or become a monk on a Greek island".

pfren wrote:

You are literally asking how to avoid blundering in a blitz game.

Well, this sort of question is dumb, and requires an equally dumb answer like "try playing faster, and better".

Or, as a very famous Soviet chess master and coach has claimed, "he, who analyses blitz, is stupid".

Blitz is OK, as long as you play it for fun, and do not take it seriously.

bruh this was a G30 game

pfren wrote:

You are literally asking how to avoid blundering in a blitz game.

Well, this sort of question is dumb, and requires an equally dumb answer like "try playing faster, and better".

Or, as a very famous Soviet chess master and coach has claimed, "he, who analyses blitz, is stupid".

Blitz is OK, as long as you play it for fun, and do not take it seriously.

I love pfren!

In a world of offense and "youre mean"  A dose of honesty and reality.

snort!

<<Or, as a very famous Soviet chess master and coach has claimed, "he, who analyses blitz, is stupid".>>

That's incorrect, however. Some of our very best players have used blitz to explore new ideas.

A lower level player can benefit from analyzing Super GM or very high rated player blitz games, but not all of them.

Analyzing lower rated player blitz games can be a waste of time, especially for higher rated players.

Just my low level opinion

That was certainly a wild game. Some of the moves seemed quite good. Was white a bit lucky?