Learning to attack is a must, as a beginner you can't avoid open tactical games, and you shouldn't, most closed games are actually won by being opened up, and if you have no experience in open games, guess what happens?
And no offence, but none of us sub 2000 players has the strategical understanding enough to "gather small advantages and try to convert them into a win.", if we had that deep understanding, we wouldn't be sub 2000.
Has your playing style changed as you've become a better player?
Sort:
[COMMENT DELETED]
He means smaller advantages than a pawn, such as positional ones, if I am getting him right.
That being said, it's not beyond a sub-2000 to get some or even most of that process right some of the time. If it helps make the game fun then the player might as well dive in to whatever part of the game turns him on.
For serious students who are aiming for 2300 FIDE or NM, maybe a tighter course navigation would be in order.
Otherwise, just enjoy the game.
Tricklev wrote:
Learning to attack is a must, as a beginner you can't avoid open tactical games, and you shouldn't, most closed games are actually won by being opened up, and if you have no experience in open games, guess what happens?
And no offence, but none of us sub 2000 players has the strategical understanding enough to "gather small advantages and try to convert them into a win.", if we had that deep understanding, we wouldn't be sub 2000.
Point taken. But you didn't answer my question. 
When I started playing chess I didn't like closed positions and avoided them at all costs now while I still prefer open positions I don't mind playing closed games and as black against e4 I play the french which is semi closed.
My style has evolved over the years with my choice of openings but I think how I play now has some ressemblence to my old play.
For example I still aim for quick endgames once I gain an advantage I feel I can convert such as a pawn( the advantage requiered for me to win has decreased over time).
I will bail out of an attack if I see easy material gains after which the win is only a matter of technique.
I almost never make unclear sacrifices, when I sacrifice more then a pawn I need to see how I get my material back first or see a mating attack or if it's the opening I need to know the theory about the sacrifice.
I will grab most material offered to me even if it means having to play a very defensive/uncomfortable game.
This are habits that have stayed with me over time.
When I started playing chess I admiered the games of Tal, Nezhmedinov or Fischer but I think I ended up with a style that is somewhat similar to Korchnoi.
parsley76 wrote:
Tricklev wrote:
Learning to attack is a must, as a beginner you can't avoid open tactical games, and you shouldn't, most closed games are actually won by being opened up, and if you have no experience in open games, guess what happens?
And no offence, but none of us sub 2000 players has the strategical understanding enough to "gather small advantages and try to convert them into a win.", if we had that deep understanding, we wouldn't be sub 2000.
Point taken. But you didn't answer my question.
Well, maybe I should stop trying to preach and just answer the question the next time. 
Yes, my style has changed alots, all the time! It depends on what book or ideas I'm reading about currently, if I'm reading a book on kingattack, I try to aim my game in that direction as much as possible, if I'm practicing my tactical play, I usually open with a vienna sacrifice or even a bishops opening that can transpose into loads of tactical openings. If I'm reading on bishops vs knights imbalances, I try to go for a game where those exists. If I'm reading about pawnchains and attacking the base of the pawnchain etc, I try to aim my games thowards positions where those exist (french advance etc) and test (practice) the ideas for myself. And so forth, I want to try out the things I'm reading about, I wanna sit at the board and think "aha, this is what he meant!".
As for other than that, I really haven't got a style, I guess you can call my style the art of a thousand blunders.
As a novice I can't really answer this. I consider my style to be quite defensive. I'm not very fond of the opening phases. At the moment I prefer relatively closed games, where I try to gain a small strategic advantage in the middle game which will hopefully lead to a narrow victory in the end game.
I don't really think my general style of play will change much if I become a better player.