Some may find this a bit odd, perhaps even a bit disturbing. To keep my study chess set pieces from wandering around, I spent a full day modifying all 32 pieces with internal weights and sticky bottoms. My chess pieces do not wander wherever they like.
That's cruel. My pieces are free range.
Mine too, they normally end up next to my opponent's scorepad.
So is it agreed that the paid membership on chess.com is not a waste of money?
Are the chess video teachers at this site good? They are more than good, they are excellent. However, I am not ready for their teaching based on my limited knowledge of the game.
As a language teacher told me before, "Immerse yourself in the experience of the new language. You will learn faster that way"
There is always something new to learn in chess, so we won't be doing ourselves any favors if we dabble in theories that are too easy for us already. Obviously we should not bite more than we can actually chew, but that does not mean that should stop biting. 
I didn't know why 3.d4 was played until your really outstanding explanation on post 185. Before your explanation, all I would have been able to say was this: 3.d4 is book, so that is what I will play. Take me out of book and most of the time I am lost.
Have you written any articles/blogs on chess? I will read all of them! You have a gift for writing. What you said actually made sense to this first year chess player.
---
White has one pawn in the center + a centralized Knight + prospects of quicker development (1...c5 doesn't open lines to develop the bishops, while 1.e4 does) => he will enjoy some initiative and can try to build up an attack. Of course, black has good long-term prospects thanks to his extra center pawn (center pawns give extra board influence and space for your pieces). That is pro writing.
Just so you know, that was written by Hicetnunc, not Paul.
Oh Geez! My mistake. I was thinking about Paul's comments about my son's Cheescake at the time. Both Paul and Hicetnunc have crafted some excellent posts. 
A picture is worth a thousand words. Here is a visual of my understanding of opening principles. I will strive to achieve this set-up for White, and if my opponent, playing the White pieces, does not push a center pawn, I will use the same set-up for Black.
I do know this regarding opening principles:
1. To move each piece only once in the opening, with a few exceptions.
2. Move only one to three pawns in the opening, then knights and bishops, then move the queen to connect the rooks and castle.
3. Connect the rooks. I have a better understanding of the role of the rooks then I do of pawns. By getting the queen off of the back rank, my rooks can move to any square right away. So, if I see an open or semi-open file, I will place my rook on that square, where it will have more influence over the game.
I saw this set-up in a few books, so I strive for this placement of pawns and pieces, as it controls the maximum number of squares and creates space for my pieces to move about.
Surprisingly, there have been a few times as both White and Black where I had this exact set-up, only because my opponent chose to develop in a way where none of his pawns or pieces went past the third rank.
You are ignoring what your opponent's pieces are doing in the meantime ...
You are ignoring what your opponent's pieces are doing in the meantime ...
During the opening phase of the game, if my opponent's pawns and pieces are not past the third rank, then yes, I ignore my opponent's pieces with one exception - I won't push the d-pawn 2 squares if it is not safe to do so.
I see a lot of strange non-classical openings by my opponents, some could even be called hypermodern, where my opponent chooses to attack from the flanks.
As an example, I've seen these moves by Black while I go about my business of pushing the center pawns and developing my pieces to good squares. I don't know if there is a name for this set-up by Black, but I have seen it on several occasions. I call it the double fianchetto set-up.
Good... you've managed to play eight harmless developing moves without losing a piece... very good! This is what it's all about in chess. Develop and keep your pieces safe. Now what's next?
Good... you've managed to play eight harmless developing moves without losing a piece... very good! This is what it's all about in chess. Develop and keep your pieces safe. Now what's next?
Thinking. Still thinking. Still more thinking. 
O.K. I remember now. To have a plan, look for a weakness in my enemies camp and make it a target.
This is where it gets tricky for me. If I can't see a weakness...
Silman says...or is that Simon says...anyway...Silman says to create an imbalance first. I read that chapter several times and still can't remember how to create an imbalance in the position. Maybe someone could dumb this concept down for me a bit.
Next thing you are going to do here is adding the Rook from a1 to the party - remember you must have "developed" (touched) all your pieces first before even thinking of something more ambitious. At the moment this Rook feels left out, and it is sulking a bit. Put it on d1 which is a luxurious spot where it can stay for a while - see how the Rook is already targeting the black Queen on d8 through the "wall".
Then after that, because Black has been so lax in the center, you are going to play e4-e5 maybe followed by d4-d5 while keeping your own pieces (Bishops) out of the hands of those knights. Harrass your opponent's pieces, give your opponent things to worry about while your pieces are comfortably looking on from a safe distance.
This is just a possible plan, one that I used to play a lot when I was about 1300. No matter what the opponent did, I attacked the king.
The moves are by no means perfect, and some may be downright bad ( mostly with Black, because I never played this opening ). Still, this was made only to show a possible plan, not to develop opening theory.
Also, instead of trying to learn and apply complicated thinking methods ( see Silman ), you'd be a lot better off just playing and trying different plans and ideas.
Feel free to ask any questions. :)
This is just a possible plan, one that I used to play a lot when I was about 1300. No matter what the opponent did, I attacked the king.
The moves are by no means perfect, and some may be downright bad ( mostly with Black, because I never played this opening ). Still, this was made only to show a possible plan, not to develop opening theory.
Also, instead of trying to learn and apply complicated thinking methods ( see Silman ), you'd be a lot better off just playing and trying different plans and ideas.
Feel free to ask any questions. :)
Thank you! That was a great explanation of how to develop a plan of attack with the artificial opening I posted. I saved it to my tips folder.
Musikamole wrote post #198: "
1. Yes. I am serious.
I didn't know why 3.d4 was played until your really outstanding explanation on post 185. Before your explanation, all I would have been able to say was this: 3.d4 is book, so that is what I will play. Take me out of book and most of the time I am lost.
Have you written any articles/blogs on chess? I will read all of them! You have a gift for writing. What you said actually made sense to this first year chess player.
White has one pawn in the center + a centralized Knight + prospects of quicker development (1...c5 doesn't open lines to develop the bishops, while 1.e4 does) => he will enjoy some initiative and can try to build up an attack. Of course, black has good long-term prospects thanks to his extra center pawn (center pawns give extra board influence and space for your pieces). That is pro writing.
Credit here should go to hicetnunc post #185 he wrote this not me.
Sorry about that guys. Like I said before in this very long thread, both you and hicetnunc wrote some great posts and have given me much think about and learn from.
Still, remember, tactics, basic endgames, not too much thinkin' he he he.
Talking about chess.com videos those of icelandic FM Johannesson about the various chess patterns have a concrete utility for everybody IMHO
Still, remember, tactics, basic endgames, not too much thinkin' he he he.
Perfect for blitz!
If you want to win in traditional time controls, good luck with that.
Have things improved for you?
yah i agree people have said f*** u mundo or the s word or wtf that junk to me
Some may find this a bit odd, perhaps even a bit disturbing. To keep my study chess set pieces from wandering around, I spent a full day modifying all 32 pieces with internal weights and sticky bottoms. My chess pieces do not wander wherever they like.
That's cruel. My pieces are free range.