Greetings Goulin, Glad to see you are persistant and unwaivering in your search for critisism,
. Without playing out your game, it seems I am already familiar with your approach I ask; why play out positions that when explained are preempted with such statements as "blindly crashed my way through without deep calculation". If you don't want to take the time to analyse your games why should someone else? Not to be overcritical but you will learn the most about your games from analysing on your own until your rating is much, much higher. the Middle of your post contains your answer! I often found the same to be true, where an unintentional endgame, or middle game position was favourable and would wonder how I could get there again. Here is were self analysis will help. Likely it will lead to you even better tactics and positional dynamics when you delve deeper. Playing without blundering material and the remotest of fundamental rigour and your rating will likely hover at 1200. Just try and do that, whatever it takes to get and keep your rating at where chess.com starts you. That should force you 2 control you impulse to plunder !!
Great post as always, Sang. :P I realize that I play kind of tunnel-minded in games: I always try to accomplish an attack or defense in just one little move. It ends up with me making moves that only benefit me right here right now, but I never think if the move will benefit me in the long run. I must lift the fog.
Also, rating distracts me, which is why I don't play rated games. :P
Its ok my brotha from anotha motha! did I just say that, lol. I totally understand your singleminded focus. Which brings me to an idea, focal points. I once read a book, "the art of attack in chess" great book on Hypermodern theory. Not even sure what "hypermodern" is anymore but what i got out of the book were two main points. Developing your rooks and thus where to put them in the event of an open file and two, how to bring down a castled king. I now feel the logic of the book flawed but for many years simply attempting to put my rooks in the right place forced me to reasses my games post loss or mistake. Know the stengths and weakness of a castled king, well need I say more. As far as your inclination to abate an attack or wage a war in one little move, those attemps can often be neutralized in the same one little move. Multiple Tansitional Positional Dynamics. These will be achieved through positional tactics, ...just a few more moves before I make that crazy sacrifice.. try and have several goals in mind with your pieces working together, not just the one. In some very special games all of your goals will be progressing and in others not so much. But at least you are not hopelessly tied to one aspect. As always good luck, and after a few a cocktails I hope some this makes sense! see you around..
Heh, so the computer finished analyzing my game, and the game swayed as much as FOUR POINTS BOTH WAYS. It's amazing how the computer suggests boring (for my playstyle :P) but solid moves that ultimately would give me a much better fighting chance.
Btw, I thought Hypermodern theory was flank attacks...
as in not classic center play yes. If you haven't already you should do at least 5 hours book study on how to attack a king side castle. Almost all chess books are either to basic or just not relavent for my skill level. What i liked about the art of attack in chess was its emphasis on pieces and tactics. Most books go over the same stuff, advocate Queens gambit for new players, castle early blah blah yada yada. Truthfully faulty logic abounds in the book but as a total noob to cracking a book to better my chess, this was years ago, it made me feel like chess was new and all the previous GM's of the world surely have missed something and that i will surely discover it! Like chess was new and fresh!! Their is this really cool game out, its called chess. Every play it?
