@jojojopo: please post. and let us analyze, using the three questions. and then post your analysis. I hope you kept track of your three questions during the game. That could be really interesting.
what the #$%^was he playing and how did he win?
Sort:
Jan 15, 2014
0
#683
question for aronchuck and qtko: when you write "and black is winning" or "and the position is equal"...when it isn't at all clear to me how you come up with that...how do you come up with such evaluations? Is it an immediate 'oh white is winning here because I've seen this exact postion before and I learned the hard way that white is winning here' or is there some very quick set of evaluators that you go through, tally them up, and come up with the conclusion. Or something else? thanks.
Here are two games from my last tournament. I won't say anything more about them now as several posters prefer not to know the details, but will give my notes over the weekend.
Jan 15, 2014
0
#685
thanks for not posting details of which side you were and result. and please don't post your notes until the end of the weekend. thanks. awesome.
Jan 16, 2014
0
#686
It answers my question. I thank you for your time and effort aronchuck. It becomes obvious that this is a huge subject that one could write books about, but your answer was generous and very very helpful. I so look forward to gaining increased chess knowledge and chess ability. I see that the three questions are a 'baby steps' method for evaluation also, althogh they don't take everything into account, they are crucial steps for considering the next move. thanks again.
Somebodysson wrote:
qtko: what you wrote about wanting me to understand the stonewall makes perfect sense. No one is attacking the stonewall as a learning tool. But aronchuck's point is that I mustn't get lulled into a one-dimensionality that a chessgame must involve an early attack on the king. I would like to start looking at some of Karpov's games, some of Pertrosian's games...if only to teach me that that is not the case!! And...starting with an all out attack a la stonewall is fun!! It just can't be the only way I play.
Absolutely correct, if you play the Stonewall it can teach you many things but it can only be 1 of many tools in your toolbox. It taught me the art of sacrifice & breaking open the opponents Kings position which leads me to a thought I've nurturing for a few days (In bed with virus) In one of your earlier games you had problems dealing with a sacrifice even though it turned out to be unsound. Sacrifices are somewhat unique OTB because you don't see them coming, if you did you would have prevented it. Dealing with them requires a cool head & for me anyway a slightly different approach from the 3 Questions. So my question is, should we take a quick look at dealing with sacrifices & map the different thought processes (if any). The fact that somone has already tried one against you means you are getting to a level where it will happen more often & I know from experience how easily a sacrifice can throw you off your game.
That open in g the creepy crawls sucks he is capital izing on your blunders that's all
The above position is from a 45/45 game, am white, and my clock is ticking it's last 25 seconds or so and failed to see THE MOVE. Guess I too will have to concentrate on tactics so that in future the mouse just knows what to do automatically! Thought I'd share this as something instructive.
@ aronchuck
Yeah, it can all be broken down to the 3 Questions but beginners haven't developed the board vision to see every sacrifice coming so when they get hit with one emotions often do come into play. I look at the sacrifice as a special tyle of tactic because there is usually far more at stake in either material gained or threat of immediate mate. So its a good way to reinforce your basic thinking by being able to successfully defend a sacrifice (or not if Fischer or Tal is on the other side of the board) For me its usually calculating power that gets me out of it, once I see the sacrifice its usually pretty obvious what he wants to achieve with it. So I'm wondering if it can be used to fine tune your thinking & improve board vision.
@ Tower_of_Joseph
How I would have loved to have that position!! But, time pressure can do many strange things & some ppl handle it better than others. I usually handled it ok which was just as well because I tended to get into it quite a bit, maybe I just got used to it, its hard to remember because its something you develope rather than learn outright.
Jan 17, 2014
0
#695
Tower_of_Joseph wrote:
The above position is from a 45/45 game, am white, and my clock is ticking it's last 25 seconds or so and failed to see THE MOVE. Guess I too will have to concentrate on tactics so that in future the mouse just knows what to do automatically! Thought I'd share this as something instructive.
too bad, you created that amazing position that one could only dream of finding in an elementary tactics puzzle like the ones I work on ;-> only to have insufficient time to catch it! Speaks I guess to a few things 1. you built a fantastic position 2. you didn't manage time well enough to leave yourself enough time to finish the job you had so expertly set up 3. more work on elementary tactics with lots of repetition will equip you to handle moves like that instantaneously. But super cool that you set up that position!
Jan 17, 2014
0
#696
Tower_of_Joseph wrote:
so how did the game continue? The game says that you (White) won. How did it end?
Jan 17, 2014
0
#698
@ToJ: what was the process by which you discovered your error at move #35. Was it engine analysis first, your own painstaking analysis, or did you quickly go over the game and when you got to your move 35. Nxg6 did you slap yourself on the forehead and yell "I can't believe it! I can't believe it!" Or some variant?
Its actually a serious question. I wonder how players of different levels arrive at their realizations, and you are at a level that is somewhat unique for this thread...so I'm interested. thanks
Actually what happened was that after move 11 got an international long distance call and couldnt dismiss it just like that, so when I got back to game, instead of 49 minutes now had 31. 
Jan 17, 2014
0
#700
I don't completely understand. you got the LD call at move 11, so you came back for your move 12 with 31 minutes left. When and how did you discover the missed mate by double check? That's what I'm asking. What was the process you went through to discover that missed tactic? and were all the moves after 35 played in 25 secs? That was a lot of quick moves!! (maybe I misunderstood when you wrote "its last 25 seconds or so and failed to see THE MOVE").
@aronchuk: your explanations and your advice is excellent as usual. Thank you very much, and I'd be happy to see one (or a few) of your games from this tournament if you deem it appropiate and feel like it. I wish you good luck!
@everyone: I finally have a short game I'd like to post here whenever you consider it appropiate. It was a correspondance game on this site (so don't look at my games if you don't want a spoiler!) in which I applied consistently the three questions we've been discussing, but I am sure I failed in the application of some of the deeper concepts we've been working on and seen in some of the games we analized.