how to counter ¨dumb chess¨?

Sort:
JubilationTCornpone
AngryPuffer wrote:

this topic is about how to play agianst these bad moves. i obviously did not understand and so i asked. what i got out is that i just need to play principled chess and hope that i didint miss anything with the move they made

i won't argue with you anymore, but what you just said "play principled chess and hope not to miss anything"--that is all there is to it.

AngryPuffer
IronSteam1 wrote:
AngryPuffer wrote:

what im trying to get at here is when people play obviously bad/weakening moves that arent losing but just bad

Then you respond by doing the exact opposite:

Play obviously good/strengthening moves that aren't winning, but are just good.

Example, a bullet game I played:

My opponent went for a strange "all pawns to the 6th rank" approach. Obviously bad, but there isn't an obvious knockout punch to be seen, right away.

So I just played "good" moves: developing my pieces to strong squares, occupying the center with my pawns.

Then, when I was all developed, I pushed for a pawn break.

Black's position crumbled quickly, and my pieces were well-placed to mop up any available tactics.

"Tactics flow from a superior position", as Fischer claimed.

Just strive to play "good" moves in response to your opponent's "bad" ones. This, alone, won't automatically give you the win - but it should (hopefully) place you in a good position to take advantage of any positional weaknesses that might arise, later in the game.

yeah but pushing all pawns to the 6th is an obvious mistake and white has a clear way to win

then compare it to something like this

there is no obvious win here allthough the computer says its much better.

Chess_Player_lol
AngryPuffer wrote:
IronSteam1 wrote:
AngryPuffer wrote:

what im trying to get at here is when people play obviously bad/weakening moves that arent losing but just bad

Then you respond by doing the exact opposite:

Play obviously good/strengthening moves that aren't winning, but are just good.

Example, a bullet game I played:

My opponent went for a strange "all pawns to the 6th rank" approach. Obviously bad, but there isn't an obvious knockout punch to be seen, right away.

So I just played "good" moves: developing my pieces to strong squares, occupying the center with my pawns.

Then, when I was all developed, I pushed for a pawn break.

Black's position crumbled quickly, and my pieces were well-placed to mop up any available tactics.

"Tactics flow from a superior position", as Fischer claimed.

Just strive to play "good" moves in response to your opponent's "bad" ones. This, alone, won't automatically give you the win - but it should (hopefully) place you in a good position to take advantage of any positional weaknesses that might arise, later in the game.

yeah but pushing all pawns to the 6th is an obvious mistake and white has a clear way to win

then compare it to something like this

there is no obvious win here allthough the computer says its much better.

the kingside is very weakened making it pretty much impossible to castle kingside due to h5 or possibly f5 pawn breaks. meaning black's king will castle queenside or stay in the center. not to mention your dominant central control. the easiest plan of action is to develop normally and be active, ready for wherever black chooses to put the king.

But to give answer to the original topic, chess is not a game where you can always give clear cut answer. You need to learn the patterns by playing games and studying books about what to do when the opponent plays "weird" moves.

nighteyes1234
AngryPuffer wrote:

there is no obvious win here allthough the computer says its much better.

yes, if you understand strategy.

But no one cares...and you get disrespected.

Its common that a beginner has a hard time with strategy. A hard time with everything really.

AngryPuffer

i think recognizing a similar position from another game and knowing how that game played out is key. but like nobody at the higher levels plays the Blackburn-shrilling gambit or g5 or any other obviously bad openings.

i can typically punish these errors in slower chess. but in faster times its much harder

MaetsNori
AngryPuffer wrote:

yeah but pushing all pawns to the 6th is an obvious mistake and white has a clear way to win

then compare it to something like this

there is no obvious win here allthough the computer says its much better.

Same thing.

1) Develop your pieces to "natural" / good squares.

2) Occupy, control, or challenge the center.

3) Complete your development.

4) Look for pawn breaks to open avenues for attack.

In this case, since there is pawn on g5, I would develop White's knight to e2 (not to f3, which would just kicked by g5-g4).

Let's say Black plays in an unusual, hypermodern way (which seems to be what is giving you the most trouble):

We've got ourselves all developed. Now what?

Look for a pawn break.

d4-d5 would work, as it hits the e6 square (if Black moves the e6 pawn, then White's knight gains a tremendous outpost on f5!).

h2-h4 would work also, as it threatens to rip open Black's kingside.

Many ways to proceed here ...

Now, sure, it's not always easy to do this. Sometimes your opponent makes weird moves that seem "wrong", but you can't find a way to prove it.

But ... that's chess for you. It's not always easy. The best you can do is try to play well.

If there were an easy solution to every chess anomaly, we'd all be grandmasters ... tongue.png

Chess_Player_lol
AngryPuffer wrote:

i think recognizing a similar position from another game and knowing how that game played out is key. but like nobody at the higher levels plays the Blackburn-shrilling gambit or g5 or any other obviously bad openings.

i can typically punish these errors in slower chess. but in faster times its much harder

the reason why its very rare for high rated players to see dubious openings is because higher rated players already learned to punish them. you should read art of attack in chess by vladmir vukovic and road to positional advantage by herman grooten

bald55

Just be smart