Help With Identifying My Weaknesses?

I played a tournament recently, and got a rather disheartening result of 1.5/6. I've since been trying to figure out where I'm going wrong. I'll include the game that I won, and also my most crushing defeat. Analysis would be appreciated.

Any advice is appreciated.

 

1. Study tactics, tactics, tactics. Overlooking moves like Qd5+ followed by QxB is a prime example of why you need to.

2. Practice assessing positions. Go through your own games or download some master games or download a few of TWIC databases and go through the games. Write down your analysis of the positions as the game progress. After analyzing each game, load your engine of choice and see how your analysis compares to the engine's calculations. Even if you're lousy at first, keep doing this. Being able to properly assess positions will help you tremendously.

3. Always have a plan. In both of those games, I never got a sense of a concrete plan. Even if you're plan is incorrect, still have one. This is something else that will get better with practice and will also improve exponentially as you get better at assessing positions properly.

4. I may be wrong, but from many of the moves played it seems like you weren't using a lot of time per move. The clock is important but chess isn't a race at tournament controls. Always be aware of your time usage, but also be sure to take enough time to look at possible tactics, strategic ideas, etc.

Just some general ideas that will help your game a lot if you put them into practice. Hope it helps. Cheers.

5) Nxe5... he thinks he can win a pawn here.  Which he does, but what can you do instead...   his knight is up for grabs, but that lets him pawn fork you.  Hmm.  What happens if you play Bxf+?  KxB, NXN! Now you have equal material and white cannot castle and is out of position.   White's next move is critical, he pretty much has to move his king and waste time getting safe or your Q, 2 knights, and a bishop are going to pound on him...  Instead of doing something like this, you play into his trap and worse, instead of just losing a pawn, you drag it out several moves and make your overall position worse. 

7)Ba5... dragging out the inevitable.   Just take the pawn, check the king, save your knight, and try something new.

9)d5 is just as bad.  Retreat the knight, you can't defend with a pawn due to the EP capture.

Bh3 is actually a good PLAN but a bad MOVE.  Can you set it up for later?  c5 perhaps?  I dont know if it works, but you can't lose any faster anyway.. he might be baited into Qxa and give you a shot at Bh3!  Regardless... you are a piece down and he is well defended there at the end. 

On the flipside, if those ratings are correct, you faced a very strong opponent and a loss is expected.  300 points is a big gap to beat.

And the won game.

3) keeping that pawn as white is tough, and usually leads to trouble.  Just warning you about this dangerous opening (a favorite of mine as black).

You did better than most but that isolated pawn is not too good.

11) A very nice combo.  Castling to turn a lost piece into a trade is also slick.   However you castled into a deathtrap and were lucky to get out of it.

16 Be5 to defend the pawn?

19) Bb4 for black seems better.  What would you do there?  And he should follow with Rae8+ and see if he can cause problems for you.

He drops his queen and loses after missing the above setup to try to keep the pressure on.  But to be honest, his attack was falling apart and even with the 2 moves I gave might still have been insufficient.   He should probably have traded queens and gracefully retreated.

All in all, you have some good combos and ability to see tactics and depth.  In game 1, where you won, you got into (and back out of) several problems with creativity and some good moves.   But ask yourself how you can avoid getting into a bind like that in the first place... nearly dropping the knight, allowing a R+Q castle assault, etc.   In game 2, it really was just that one pawn fork and trying to fight it too hard that pulled you way out of position early on, followed by trying too hard towards the end, pushing an attack when you had none, and being a piece down.. 

With your combos, creativity, and tactical ability, I think you can quickly improve with some practice.  Just have to watch equally what the other guy can do to YOU -- if I had to guess, you were very focused on your own plans and not enough on what could be done to your own weak spots.  Which is one of the hardest aspects of chess.

Where might I find tactics to study? I don't quite agree with c.c's Pay to Win aspect, and from the sound of it, you think more than 5 tactics a day are necessary.

I think I'm okay at postion-assessing... But I've found myself only assessing MY possibilities, which has killed more than one of my otherwise good games. I also find looking at other people's games rather dry, but I think that's just a mental-dicipline obstacle. 

I agree, plan-making is a problem of mine... Unfortunately, while I appreciate the theory, I haven't been able to come up with a reasonable template with which to come up with such a plan. 

Usage of time has always been one of my nemeses, although I am getting better... My brain loops itself and forgets that I've already analysed a certain position, so I tend to look at one move and go fairly deeply into that one move. 

Thank you, your suggestions have been helpful. 

First game knight on g4, second game bishop on a5, these are the kind of pieces to focus on during calculation e.g. "what if my opponent attacks it" or more generally "how can the opponent exploit it."

A piece anchored by a pawn is the best. If it's anchored by minor piece that's 2nd best. If it's unprotected is obviously most worrisome, and protected by queen is 2nd worst.

---

Also in both games, you played the queen pawn 1 move forward instead of two. In chess, we usually have moves we like... but they look dangerous so we don't play them. It's important to fight hard for the moves you like though. Calculate and try to find a way to make it work.

In the first game (I play this opening a lot as black in blitz) as white I would have 0-0 then played d4.

I assume your calculation or observation went something like "I can't play 9.d4 because after bishop takes knight it removes a defender."

But look at that position again. Without moving the pieces calculate 9.d4 Bxf3 10.Qxf3 Nxd4 ok, now white has a really good move 11, do you see it?

This sort of calculation will give you hope, then you can try to work out the details e.g. black doesn't have to capture d4 with the knight. Black doesn't even have to take the f3 knight right away, etc.

In the 2nd game your calculation has to go further, but it's the same kind of idea, you could have played d5.

Also in the 2nd game you criticize your move 13...Qe8, but this doesn't lose a piece yet, do you see why?

---

Even if there weren't a tactic for white, in the 2nd game the move 14...Rb8 is the kind of move I'd try really hard to avoid... as in I'd calculate hard to find a way to sac the b7 pawn rather than be forced to play that move. Don't get the wrong idea, when the pawn is important, especially if it's an advanced pawn, having a rook babysit it is not so bad. Lets say the pawn is 2 squares from queening, the rook is a defender, but it will have 5 files behind the pawn to work with. In the game we have an active bishop tying a rook (already not ideal) but also the rook is totally passive (the pawn is on the original square).

---

As far as openings, as I said in the first game, I have a good amount of experience with the black side of that opening. What black really wants is for white to try to try to keep the extra pawn like you did. Usually black gets quick development and more than compensation.

But white can have a bigger than normal edge after

 

 

Your tactics are fine for your level IMHO.  Those combos you pulled were pretty stunning for a 1300. You can always do better (see the bishop hit in the lost game I listed) but that isn't your weakest area by a long shot.

The plan thing, and looking at your opponent's position/plan/threats are what I would agree to focus on.   Forming a plan ... kind of like how I said block his queen from defending before attacking his king in the lost game... takes practice, but if you see a move that kind of works but doesnt really, then you start to ask "can I MAKE It work?"  ... that is a plan, in its crudest form.   A good plan usually starts with less detail.. identify a weakness, then ask on each move "is it still there, am I closer to exploiting it.."  and so on.   Looking at the opponent's side critically is just hard.  The best way to work on these honestly for now is to keep playing and keep them in mind.  If you are thinking of them, you will try to do them, and that practice will bear fruit.

http://chesstempo.com/

http://www.chessvideos.tv/endgame-training/endgame-simulations.php

I hadn't even considered Bxf2+... That would have been much better. That's a reminder to me about looking at the whole board, I guess. :P

I know that I can't directly defend it, but 9...d5 10. exd6 Nxd6 leaves my king slightly less open.

Yup, Bh3 was simply a good move done at a terrible time. c5 would have been an infinitely better alternative, but I still would most likely fall after Kh1.

Here in AUS, ratings are hilariously over done, but he is still definitely a strong opponent. (He's a member of the local chess club and is the second oldest member.)

 I am now less stumped about how I lost, thank you very much. :)

I like c4, as it tells my opponent that I am trying to fight for the d pawn, then it flummoxes them when I continue normally. And yes, I spent a lot of the game cringing at my pawn structure...

I was rather proud of the bishop sac to gain a pawn, but I WASN'T proud of having my knight floating around on g5. As I said in my annotation, using the knight to block the check was probably better. 

Be5 is very temporary because of Bd6 from the looks of it.

I constanly try after games to figure out how I could have done better, which encompasses looking at how I developed the weaknesses that I did.

Thanks again, you've been extremely helpful. 
 

The answer to your first quiz would be Qxf7#. :) 

I generally don't like allowing my opponent to give me stress, for example Black can try and capitalise on my wayward d pawn if I advance it too early, which makes me concentrate on what my oppnent wants me to concentrate on, instead of vice versa.

Which move were you reffering to with O-O then d4?

Well, yes, I can take on e2... But I wasn't thinking about that while I was playing the game, which I should have been doing... 20/20 hindsight, eh?

I guess Rb8 wasn't really all that good... :D I don't usually think about thingslike that, but it makes sense.

Doesn't white lose a tempo there? Black is ahead in development... But the pawn structure IS nicer.

Thanks for the contribution, you got me thinking about things that I hadn't before... :) 

I think I'm actually better otb because I associate myself with the game more than online.

I think I use the crude planning structure  that you mention... I'm trying to develop what you refer to as good planning structure, but I'm not there yet.

WilliamShookspear wrote:

jhubchess wrote:

1. Study tactics, tactics, tactics. Overlooking moves like Qd5+ followed by QxB is a prime example of why you need to. 2. Practice assessing positions. Go through your own games or download some master games or download a few of TWIC databases and go through the games. Write down your analysis of the positions as the game progress. After analyzing each game, load your engine of choice and see how your analysis compares to the engine's calculations. Even if you're lousy at first, keep doing this. Being able to properly assess positions will help you tremendously.3. Always have a plan. In both of those games, I never got a sense of a concrete plan. Even if you're plan is incorrect, still have one. This is something else that will get better with practice and will also improve exponentially as you get better at assessing positions properly.4. I may be wrong, but from many of the moves played it seems like you weren't using a lot of time per move. The clock is important but chess isn't a race at tournament controls. Always be aware of your time usage, but also be sure to take enough time to look at possible tactics, strategic ideas, etc. Just some general ideas that will help your game a lot if you put them into practice. Hope it helps. Cheers.

Where might I find tactics to study? I don't quite agree with c.c's Pay to Win aspect, and from the sound of it, you think more than 5 tactics a day are necessary.I think I'm okay at postion-assessing... But I've found myself only assessing MY possibilities, which has killed more than one of my otherwise good games. I also find looking at other people's games rather dry, but I think that's just a mental-dicipline obstacle. 

I agree, plan-making is a problem of mine... Unfortunately, while I appreciate the theory, I haven't been able to come up with a reasonable template with which to come up with such a plan. Usage of time has always been one of my nemeses, although I am getting better... My brain loops itself and forgets that I've already analysed a certain position, so I tend to look at one move and go fairly deeply into that one move. Thank you, your suggestions have been helpful. 

No problem. Google chess tactics. There's several sites dedicated exclusively to tactics that are completely free. As far as reviewing games go, it CAN be a bit boring but... If you seriously want to get better it is a necessity. Check out Silman's books. They would be a huge help to you.

I dunno why it won't let me make quotes in my comments :/

I've read a few of his books... They have been quite informative. I'll go back over them soon. :)

Aha, thank you. :)

 

0-0 then d4 might well work there, you're right... In fact, it was probably better.

Umm... Ok?