HOW TO STUDY GRANDMASTER ANNOTATED GAMES

Sort:
Nizman

Guys i need help on how to study annotated games well.. Whenever i study these games i play the moves very fast not like the way i play in my own games and i think its luck of having a study method to use in the end, it becomes boring. I desperatly need expert help.. Any suggestions would b very helpful..

AndyClifton

Play through the games.  Read the notes.  Study the variations.

Repeat as necessary.

AndyClifton

well-put!

AndyClifton

except I was being facetious (heehee!)

And I just got through giving an answer to the OP's identical thread...only to discover that it had been deleted in the interim. Frown

losingmove

Those are the breaks

konhidras

Hey Nizman, im no expert but this is how i study master games. I play through the games slowly about 30 to 45 mins each. During the playthrough, i try to contradict the annotators analysis trying to find the best move to the losing side .Most of the time im lost and wrong, but it helps alot coz you get to see your faults too trying to find other solutions on the board.

TetsuoShima

well i think that ivanchuk said he guessed the moves as kid and then compared what is correct and what was played. but i might have it confused in my memory

TetsuoShima

but that being said, i tried it myself and guessing the moves like never works for me

K4rbon

Don't just read, UNDERSTAND why the GM made that move, play through the game on a real chessboard

TetsuoShima
K4rbon wrote:

Don't just read, UNDERSTAND why the GM made that move, play through the game on a real chessboard

well i just looked recently at the karpov seirawan game and even with explanation i still dont understand it. 

learningthemoves
TetsuoShima wrote:

well i think that ivanchuk said he guessed the moves as kid and then compared what is correct and what was played. but i might have it confused in my memory

You know, that makes sense because in essence, you'll have the "differences" between the guess and what was played do all the 'teaching' for you in some regard. 

Like,
"Oh okay, I see Kasparov sac'd the rook here on c2 to open up the king side for his queen and knight to attack. I just guessed he would have brought the other knight closer to the kingside to have an extra piece to coordinate for the attack, but I see this is more immediate, gains a tempo and is a much better move."

Then the next time I see the position over the board, I'll have the benefit of that study to pull from and use it in my own games if all goes the way it's supposed to, right?

Nizman

Guys thank u very much 4d comments

ticcherr

dis gm thing sounds gud but i always get bored when i ask why not an alternate move nd cant understand anythin...

 

im goin thru carlsens wins backwards nd only lookin at quick games of 30 moves nd less..