The point of De La Maza's book book is utterly lost on Silman, Nunn and their legion of flunkies.
Finding my chess style
Sort:
Jan 15, 2018
0
#103
kindaspongey wrote:
torrubirubi wrote:
... A book should advice students which apps are good, ...
Is there reason to believe that the de la Maza book has up-to-date information about that? How long ago was it written?
I have to say that I don't know his book, only some videos. I was just replying based on what was written before.
Think of Minority Report, Chicago, Lilo and Stitch, Men in Black II, Ice Age, ...
robbie_1969 wrote:
The point of De La Maza's book book is utterly lost on Silman, Nunn and their legion of flunkies.
Do they also have legions of minions?
I dont think playing only blitz games is a good idea, you could try slower games and see what kind of positions you like more, actually when we start playing chess we like to attack, bring the queen out and do something but that doesn't mean that we are aggressive players, and if you want you can hire a coach if you dont have the time to go to a chess club all day an online coach its a good option, I am offering a free lesson if you want, just message me
If I remember correctly, it was stated somewhere that, for the Kasparov thing, the intended core audience was 1300-1700.
https://www.chess.com/news/view/kasparov-exclusive-his-masterclass-st-louis-alphazero
I would continue to imagine that Kasparov did not have it in mind that everyone should undertake a major style-determining project right away. Probably sufficient for now to make note of strengths and tastes while learning more about ways to try to win the game. Possibly of interest:
The Development of Chess Style by Dr. Max Euwe
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708095110/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/chestyle.txt
kindaspongey wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
The point of De La Maza's book book is utterly lost on Silman, Nunn and their legion of flunkies.
Do they also have legions of minions?
yes you Silman flunkie, they do. 
Aug 21, 2018
0
#109
I took the chess personality test and I got mastermind two times and surgeon one time .So must consider Buying Alekhine's annotated game collection at amazon.
I was searching the net for anyone made a book for finding chess style but I came across this website: mychess.style, seems free and it is showing up you some positions and find your chess style. I got Mikhael Tal ! hoora!
"... A typical way of choosing an opening repertoire is to copy the openings used by a player one admires. ... However, what is good at world-championship level is not always the best choice at lower levels of play, and it is often a good idea to choose a 'model' who is nearer your own playing strength. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)
"Building a repertoire ... we will take the idealized situation of someone starting from square one ... The first step is to think about your personal style. Do you prefer open, tactical positions or closed, strategic positions? Does an attack on your king make you nervous, or are you happy so long as you have a counter-attack? Do you prefer main lines, or something slightly offbeat? Next, look at the various openings available, and see which ones fit in with your personal style. ..." - GM John Nunn (1998)
I came across an interesting website, seems not fully developed yet but I was enjoying to check my style there, I was Tal. check yours. www.Mychess.style
It brings you some diagram or you can choose what to test, opening, specific endgame (for example pawn, rook etc.), then after you test, you go to dashboard and see the result.
There is a Demo Dashboard for a demo user, looking at that encouraged me to register and give a try,www.mychess.style/demo/
I found one big issue there and it is about the rating, seems all puzzles have default of 1400 rating which to me is very low, it is hard to get rating over 1700 there. 
"Building a repertoire ... The first step is to think about your personal style. Do you prefer open, tactical positions or closed, strategic positions? Does an attack on your king make you nervous, or are you happy so long as you have a counter-attack? Do you prefer main lines, or something slightly offbeat? ..." - GM John Nunn (1998)
I have more than one style, but I have one dominant style. I like semi open games, where there's always a latent energy for the position to go wide open, but later in the game.
But, I'm well adapt at completely closed off games where there is trench warfare, where both players have to make small moves with pieces just to change the position so slightly. There is an art finding combinations where there are very few unoccupied spaces where the biggest fight is going on.
Feb 28, 2020
0
#115
i dont think you should care about a style as long as you are less than 1800
There are a fair number of places where one sees advice of this sort:
"... you must choose what openings you will be using. This choice depends on your taste and also on the character and style of your game. If you like to attack and you are not afraid of sacrificing and taking risks choose sharp gambit openings. If you prefer a quiet game, then there are relatively calm openings for you. ..." - Journey to the Chess Kingdom by Yuri Averbakh and Mikhail Beilin
(See, also, the Nunn quote posted about 16 hours ago.)
If one is aware of having such preferences, I do not see anything wrong with thinking about them when choosing openings. On the other hand, if one is not aware of such preferences, I don't see any compelling reason to go searching for them within oneself. I find it particularly hard to imagine that there is any reason to take it seriously if a machine claims to have detected a "Tal" style or whatever.
Feb 28, 2020
0
#117
No one has a style until you are rated much higher. You think you are attacking style now, because most lower rated players don't really understand positional chess, and at least when attacking (whether the right thing to do in the position) makes them feel active, like they are doing something.
Furthermore, if you really are an attacking player, focusing on the weakest part of your game can often times bring the most result. Most player are not propelled by their strongest Area, but are rather limited by their weakest link.
Morphys-Revenge wrote:
No one has a style until you are rated much higher. ...
Does it perhaps depend on how one interprets the meaning of the word? Again:
"... you must choose what openings you will be using. This choice depends on your taste and also on the character and style of your game. If you like to attack and you are not afraid of sacrificing and taking risks choose sharp gambit openings. If you prefer a quiet game, then there are relatively calm openings for you. ..." - Journey to the Chess Kingdom by Yuri Averbakh and Mikhail Beilin
"... 'Journey to the Chess Kingdom' ... is primarily intended for children ... The first chapter introduces the reader to the rules ..." - WGM Natalia Pogonina (2014)
https://www.chess.com/blog/Natalia_Pogonina/book-review-quotjourney-to-the-chess-kingdomquot
Feb 28, 2020
0
#119
Morphys-Revenge wrote:
No one has a style until you are rated much higher. You think you are attacking style now, because most lower rated players don't really understand positional chess, and at least when attacking (whether the right thing to do in the position) makes them feel active, like they are doing something.
Furthermore, if you really are an attacking player, focusing on the weakest part of your game can often times bring the most result. Most player are not propelled by their strongest Area, but are rather limited by their weakest link.
We all have a style. For the vast majority of us its called "Blundering" and "Mistake Prone"
Morphys-Revenge wrote:
... if you really are an attacking player, focusing on the weakest part of your game can often times bring the most result. Most player are not propelled by their strongest Area, but are rather limited by their weakest link.
This, too, is advice that one sees from time to time, but is it necessarily something that must be undertaken right away? Some players may not have any really strong area. Is it that unreasonable to choose to concentrate more on one area for a time?
"... When you first begin serious competition, play sharp openings so that you can strengthen your tactics. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2002)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627052239/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman16.pdf
If you show a drill, it is better to explain it well, or not? But tactics will take much more space. Of course an author can chose something like 20 tactics pro forma, but this is not enough, you need several hundred of exercises, better 2 or 3 thousand to begin to grasp the main ideas in combinations. A book should advice students which apps are good, and not replace them, specially if they are dealing with a broad spectrum of topics. These kind of drills are often ignored in chess books.
Thankyou.