Playing positionally takes experience and practice. You have to understand positional ideas and undestand why they are so good and powerful before you will start to naturally think about these things in games. In your case while you probably lack experience, you may simply not be pacient enough. Study games and ideas and when playing one of your own games give yourself time each move to think about these things.
How do I change me view of chess to only play by Positional Play?
Sort:
I'm working through that book now, and am looking good in first two games I've played -only on chapter 4. I reviewed Example 43 daily for a week (which Silman constantly stresses) so I could understand the methodology. Speaking only for myself, I do exactly what he says to do: Pen and psper, OTB for each example B4 I see his review. Also analysis of your own games is needed. Stick with it and you'll go far. Supplemented this with John Nunn 's Chess Move by Move, which you can buy any day of the week on ebay for 10 dollars US.
Make sure to remember one thing while reading books like Reassess Your Chess: tactical skill is still the most important measure of skill in chess, and when you are playing a player 500 points above you, the primary difference between him and you is that he can calculate better and will not miss tactics. This means that tactics should come first in your studies, and then positional play.
That said, don't look for cheapo threats or anything. When there are no tactics in a position, look at the pawn structures and piece placements to determine your plan. It is something you will improve greatly with practice over many hundreds of games.
JustinCarcirated wrote:
I'm working through that book now, and am looking good in first two games I've played -only on chapter 4. I reviewed Example 43 daily for a week (which Silman constantly stresses) so I could understand the methodology. Speaking only for myself, I do exactly what he says to do: Pen and psper, OTB for each example B4 I see his review. Also analysis of your own games is needed. Stick with it and you'll go far. Supplemented this with John Nunn 's Chess Move by Move, which you can buy any day of the week on ebay for 10 dollars US.
is John Nunns book any good?
dpnorman wrote:
Make sure to remember one thing while reading books like Reassess Your Chess: tactical skill is still the most important measure of skill in chess, and when you are playing a player 500 points above you, the primary difference between him and you is that he can calculate better and will not miss tactics. This means that tactics should come first in your studies, and then positional play.
That said, don't look for cheapo threats or anything. When there are no tactics in a position, look at the pawn structures and piece placements to determine your plan. It is something you will improve greatly with practice over many hundreds of games.
Thank you for this insight. I will heavily consider this.
If you want to play positionally rather than mostly relying on constant attack you should play positional opens. For example, e4 openings tend to open the position more and allow for more tactics. Instead, use d4 openings which tend to close the position and allow for more developmental/positional play. You really have to wait for tactics to pop around in many d4 openings. I suggest playing the Queens Gambit for white. It is positional, but it offers heavy attacks if you can be patient into the middle game.
I bought the book, How to reasses your chess...and it is all about imbalances and positional play...however i can not get myself to think like that during a chess game. I seem to only play trough tactics and attacking. How do i change this mindset that isnt doing me any good?