How to (really) get better at chess: What they aren't telling you

When playing non forcing moves knowing your opponent or possibly what you think he is up to is key.  Sometimes I don't want to make a certain move that is more correct so as not to "give away" a weakness on my side. OTB I have better time with non forcing moves you can't always get a good read online or live.  In these cases I just try and develop the board evenly as if it had three parts; two sides and a center.

"How to (really) get better at chess: What they aren't telling you"

Gimmie a break ok.....what you have stated is and has been common knowledge for a very very long time.....zzzzzzzzzzzzz

So why aren't you using this knowledge yet?

Now I read "Experts vs the Sicilian". It's a book for white's attacks against all open sicilians, written by several different authors. It's in a game format, that means they analyze some representative games from start to finish.

I didn't read many books so far but for now my favourite book is Ftacnik's "the Sicilian Defence". A complete repertoire against e4 based on the Najdorf. I really like the lines he chooses, although they are often quirky so maybe not everybody will be ok with them. Funnily enough, in spite of being a book for grandmasters it's the most clear and easiest to read I've come across so far.

Over the years I have purchased many chess books only to end up collecting dust in my growing chess library. Reason, there are so many other things/distractions it was difficult to sit down for a few hours without being disturbed.  None less ,I have gotten out of chess was most enjoyable, never planned to be a GM, though reallistically, I do not feel I ever had what it takes! 

     Anyways there are two particular books I bought way back when?  Chess Master vs. Chess Amateur, and The Road To Chess Mastery. Both by Euwe-Meiden. It pairs chess master against amateurs at various levels. I found the books a  hard to follow until now  a little bit easier with the use of a computer. They seem to fit in what is being said here, may want to check them out? I love to donate these two books to my young chess promising  friend in Nepal. HTH

@sapientdust: True, positional play is important... but my point was not that you should not learn positional play but rather that if you must study chess, then more emphasis on tactics and very little on positional play. Positional understanding can be gained by practice alone. Spending 10 hours reading a positional book is not going to reap the rewards as it spending 10 hours learning more tactical positions and becoming more tactically sharp.

@The_AlphaWolf: I think that endgames are part of tactical understanding. So yes, you're right :)

@plutonia: I used to think that studying openings was really important... but now I realize that actually simply picking up a new opening and playing it fresh is more helpful. Maybe you can study a few games of the opening in the database when you have trouble - but having a "feel" from reading an opening book and having practical experience from games is a huge difference.

@TacticalSymphony: right on ;) But do you play any over the board tournaments? That is a big part of the training and probably the most beneficial, if anything.

@Noreaster: It isn't so much that the things I am suggesting are new, but more that I am suggesting that you can do ONLY this and get better. I am saying that it is not necessary to keep purchasing strategy books or playing blitz - those are not going to lead to as significant of rating boosts.

I personally have read a lot of chess books - I am saying that from personal experience, drilling on tactics and playing in long games is SOOOOO good for you. If you like to read the strategy books, then do it, but don't neglect to play long games and continue getting stronger at tactics/calculation.

Have a couple of real simple rules. They will always be in play.

Do not rush too quickly with your moves. Number one players lose more games is because they rushed too quickly and noticed it just as they made the move. 2nd do not hope that your opponent does not see the way out. If you found it they will also. 3rd rule always make a move to gain something, pointless moves is a good way to lose a game.

Honestly.....are any guys reading what she wrote or just looking at her pic...lol.....Thought I was on another site....

Nf6 is a good response to e4. I have seen a Master in my group play it. That is when i first saw it. Go for it.

I hope you cut and pasted that.....instead of writing it all out...

Didn't know you were the chess blog monitor ....sticking up for ladies....good to know chivalry isn't dead.....

I'm certain for sure now she she will accept your chess game challenge....good luck bud!!!!

I see it is 4 am where you are located. Must be sleepy that last statement made no sense at all. -5 cool points add and -50 for what you are about to say.

Yes in my group there is a Master player and the guy is helpful in a way. Maybe your jealous. I think if she gets better and beats you all we will hear is silence from you here.

51827....is the amount of points you have accumalated ...and Im guessing its not from your strong play....and its actually 2:46 am in beautiful Los Angeles....

-50 for me

-100 more additional because your not making sense still. My points have noting to do with the topic of this forum. Gonna have to put you at the kiddy table and make you take a time out.

Now we go to variation of this. What are you smoking and you not telling us. I like to offer my opponents some of that because it look like it do a bang up job on them just by reading your comments. Don't need it just for fun.

Nf6 works because to many players know e5 or c5 is coming after 1 e4. They know the book moves. What happens when your opponent takes you out the book. Like a man falling out a plane without a parachute.

Ah i get it now. Tried to get a kiss and she rejected you....denied, shotdown, buried and washed up. She gave you the cold shoulder then told you maybe she like it better if you were her ....... friend!

[Tracking Off]

Nice advice. Thanks.

51829

I find that if an objectively best move creates a weakness that the player is either in bad shape (such as the Giuco Piono line after 1.e4,e5 2.Nf3,Nc6 3.Bc4,Bc5 4.c3,Nf6 5.d4,exd4 6.cxd4,Bb6? 7.d5,Na5 8.Bd3,c5 if an anti-positional move like 8...c5 is best you know something's wrong) or the weakness isn't really exploitable, such as the doubled f-pawns in certain Sicilian positions.  I'm currently looking at some Petrosian games and find many positions that lack forcing variations where both sides have plenty of viable options.  I find that it's best to note imbalances and to make a general plan, and then do minimal calculation to determine the best way forward with the plan. 

dont b so cheap--buy a car! o i forgot, u cant use ur car becuz they took ur license away due to drunk driving!

Emanuel Lasker correctly pointed out that every move creates weaknesses. 1.e4 weakens the squares f3 and d3. His point is that if you focus on what is weakened by your opponent's last move, you can begin to come up with plans to exploit those weaknesses. In almost every chess game (even those between extremely strong computers), exploitable weaknesses arise.

The task of the chess player is to encourage and exploit weaknesses. Computers aren't very good at encouraging their opponents to create weaknesses, but humans are. Study the great gambit games of Alekhine, Tal and Shirov. Study tactics tactics tactics.

The single most important thing to get better at chess is to get serious at studying chess. Don't just read books and click through games. Ask yourself questions about these games. Memorize them. Treat each great game as a mini course on chess. Spend at least 5 hours studying a single Grandmaster game!

The dirty little secret to getting better at chess is work.

Good post Smyslovfan. I'm certainly not afraid of work when it comes to chess (I hate work otherwise) but feel that I can't see the wood for the trees. With so many resources easily available, just where do you start? I'm limiting myself to a couple of books, tactics and analysis (master games in the books) but where to truly focus?

Do you really think spending up to five hours on one game is good time management? If so, where do you start with potentially millions of mastergames available? Christ,  I would slaughter a goat just to be able to stop blundering away pieces in fits of loss of concentration. Like in my last horrendous misadventure (short on time to me is still not an excuse).