i dont think a plus 2100 can play a perfect game.
how to acquire a good chess "technique" ?
Sort:
TetsuoShima wrote:
i dont think a plus 2100 can play a perfect game.
No one has, or will, play a perfect game
When you see a good move, look for a better one.
by Emanuel Lasker
That advice comes in especially handy in correspondence games.
yeah of course not perfect, but 2100+ is still considered superior...ermm for me at least...
and to be as accurate as that 2100+ is not THAT easy i know...and i think only those 2000+ can really exploit the mistakes they do... ( which is far from obvious )
Play over a lot of annotated games. That will help you develop a feel for technique. And of course you must play a lot of games yourself to see if you are learning better technique as a result.
How to aquire good technique, you ask? Only through practice and experience, shall one get good "technique". Ask the other 2000+ rated players here in the site, and I truly doubt if they would answer otherwise.
As you play more, your understanding of chess improves. That is, if you do actually practice. There are lots of secrets strong players know that amateur players don't. But over time, the amateur player shall soon discover these "secrets".
Well, these secrets are actually in your very finger tips right now. Hint: the INTERNET
What I'm saying is, ask. Yes, quite simple, I must say.
thks...yea i dont think got any faster way also... 
'The rest is technique' means that the endgame only needs limited knowledge to win, despite an apparent complexity.
Extreme example : the position ends up in K + R vs K. 'The rest is technique' because although the side with a lone king has many moves -apparent complexity - the side with the rook barely needs any calculation to win this, if he knows the process to mate.
The same goes to a lesser extent when there is just a pawn to push, when the pieces are restricted so that breakthrough is easy, etc.
After reading what Ted (and the others wrote), acquiring a feasible chess technique seems to be always connected with hard, physical labor. Kinda depressing, since there's no way I could ever be disciplined enough to actually grab myself a book and learn some lines out of it by heart.
Like, what am I, a nerd? 
All the more admiration for the top GMs, who dedicated their entire lifes to Chess! I would be content with an Online Rating of 1600.
Ted1331 wrote:
As the saying goes “There are so many ways of killing a cat”, the above way worked for me because I had the appetite to work hard and develop a style. I however feel that the easiest way of improving in technique is either to play frequently with players who are just better than you whom you can defeat once in a while but on average win more games than u. Aim to be better than them and when you are confident of defeating them keep on raising the graph by handpicking stronger players again. We learn a lot of theory, strategies and tactics in toto by playing with better players than us.
By the way TheBigDecline thats a nice picture of RGM? On the 18th of April we shall be celebrating the 33rd year of independence from GB! Mugabe remains our only needer ever since that date a feat which I hope shall never be repeated ….
Ha ha, lol, no!! 
That guy in my avatar is a black Catholic bishop who has a big frown in his face. Frowning Bishop-Chess-My Username ... you see the connection. By the way, the 18th of April is my birthday! And I had no idea Zimbabwe was even British! 
When I began playing Chess again as an adult approximately 6 months ago, I wasn't better than 800, tops. Now it's 400 points higher, a feat of which I'm pretty proud of, tbh. But I can see my frontiers too, where you can only get as good as it's possible without any intensive training and coaching besides just burning a couple of hours a day on Chess.com and playing some games. Idk, maybe my I'll never even reach 1600, I'm still seeking my limits right now. But one thing's for sure, which is that I'll never treat Chess with enough seriousness to even consider studying it. It's just a mindless hobby, which is a lot of fun for me. Before that, I was hooked on Online Poker for a year but I learned to hate the game and abandoned it.
I learned Chess as a kid, but only lately I play with an actual planning behind the moves. But yeah, after all, it's just a nice game.
Your Technique, it is not very good!!
Greenmtnboy wrote:
Once you play thousands of good games and learn from the bad ones and keep up your practice, like playing the piano, if you don't use it you lose it, it becomes second nature. I think Benko said something like that, but with age he lost it, good chess instinct. It also has something to do with playing positions you are comfortable in.
Benko always had an excuse like when he lost to bobby. Yeah right it were the women it sounds good and on the same time discredits the achievment of your opponent.
Anyway korchnoi said chess is like swimming, once you learned how to play proper chess you will never lose the skill.
Ted1331 wrote:
To be good in “chess technique” the most important thing is to understand the strategy behind lines and know when to use tactics to gain advantages. It is not just an adage when they say chess is 1% strategy and 99% tactics. If I can explain from my own experience. I used to be an average player who just loved pushing the pieces and making sacrifices here and there without knowing the direction of my game and just pray to God that my opponent would not see my Deadly moves. Over the years I became a true average player who was happy with winning on luck, time or whatever increased my average fluctuating rating of 1700. I got to a stage were I got tired of playing games without plans so I gave myself a few hours a week to study “middle game strategies” and acquire technique to outplay my opponents rather wait for luck.
My first course of action was to improve my tactics. I joined free online sites on the internet (there are plenty of them eg http://chesstempo.com/chess-tactics.html ) and it became a hobby to at least do 10 problems a day. In my online chess games I began understanding how to exchange pieces and how to sneak out mates from impossible position. My tactical solving skills are as good as any GM in the world and I possess a rating of 2700 plus on most sites.
My next step was to understand the strategy behind games. I chose the Sicillian and the King’s Indian as the main lines to do my studies so I started by thoroughly understanding the openings and cramming many side variations. I them started using books which explained “middle game positions” and the ideas behind certain moves. First I concentrated on pawn structures. How to formulate a plan by understanding the way the pawns are set up and then from then onwards I went to piece manoeuvrings. I then started studying annotated games going through each move and seing how tactics were employed on given positions. … After a certain period of time I started winning my games on technique and I began playing seriously my online games.
I know this may be a long story but I managed to achieve a rating of 2000plus on my blitz from being an average 1700 and with my online chess game am bound to rise to beyond 2500. My set goal now is to raise my blitz (@chess.com) to 2200 (5 and 10 minute games) standard to 2200 and my online to 2600. I have become much stronger in chess and hardly lose my club games against lower rated International Masters and once in a while have beaten Grand Masters. This is probably the way I learnt technique and my chess has become more exciting as I outplay my opponents because of “GOOD PLANNING”
Ted,this is a great post,thanks for sharing with us your personal story of progress!:)
recently i went to a chess tournament and saw a 2100+ player playing friendly match against a 1400-1600 player,making moves [ in the middlegame (open game) and endgame] which somehow make his position better, and you can't find any mistake from these moves, and at last win the game. ( just like a computer)
is this called chess technique??
and often when im reading strategy book, i see " the rest is technique " , and the player with the slightly winning position makes some really hard to understand moves and somehow convert the game into a win.
I dont think this is only strategy and tactics, can someone suggest me how to progress in this? ( i asked that 2100+ player, he said he learnt it through experience )