chess and perfectionism

my thought here is: 1 blunder and it's all over.

what do u think about just trying to keep it solid and wait for the other person to screw up?

even on untimed games, i just can't stop the possibility of my blundering...

It is important to learn how not to blunder, practice with a computer

helps a lot....  Still, there is something to be said about a low risk

approach in chess.

I will make 40 good moves and if you are able to do the same, the game will end in a draw. - Vasily Smyslov

There's just one issue. Your opponent will do everything to make the "good move" tough to make.

The trick is to blunder without your opponent noticing.

 this i severly doubt.

It all depends on your definition of "blunder." When you re-analyze your game, try setting the engine to use a cut-off score defining blunder to 16. Sixteen is arbitrary. I think anything over 10 will work. Using this method, I've substantically reduced my blunder rate.

It's the chess improvement method we've all been looking for. It has immediate effect, didn't cost anything, required very little effort, and the effects will last forever.

If blunders are unavoidable, then looking for opponents mistakes may not be the correct path. One way I like to study is to run my games through Fritz 12 and get an evaluation profile for the game. Basically, what it does is to make a graph of how you are fairing in the game move by move. I'll look for a downswing in the assessment. Ok, maybe on move 10 I'm showing roughly even with the opponent, but on move 15, I am down a pawn. I'll scoot the game back to where it showed I was even and I will see what my thinking was about the position. Perhaps I chose the wrong plan, and didn't contest my opponents threats, maybe I moved the wrong piece and kept one of my pieces from getting into the battle in a timely matter. I'll check to see what variation the computer suggests, then I'll compare the two positions, the one I ended up with and the one the computer ended up with. By seeing what happens when alternate moves are made, I can try to weed out my bad moves. One terrific thing that will happen if you do this exercise is that you will be learning how to play better moves, and how to recognize and exploit bad moves. They key is to do as Fischer said, and if you lose, take your medicine!

Also, if you do happen to drop a piece, who's to say it wasn't a sacrifice with deep positional implications? Heck...not all sacrifices work out.

If the computer disagrees with you, remember...the computer couldn't possibly understand your plan. It probably didn't fully appreciate the positional implications.

Indeed, as sad as it is, instead of thinking so much about strategy, concentrating on not blundering, and taking advantage of your opponent's blunder, is actually a great idea. That's how almost every amateur game is won. By not blundering you may still allow a slight advantage for the opponent, but any amateur lacks the technique to convert that against someone who doesn't crack with an obvious blunder in an unpleasant position. And that's exactly what they're hoping for -- that you crack. If you refuse to do that -- in other words, make him show off grandmaster technique to make progress, he will have so much trouble beating you!