Hey Kilgorebass, I clicked the link. I am laughing so hard right now. That is priceless.
How To WIN at Chess
Sort:
cheater_1 wrote:
Volumes have been written on this topic, but I am going to condense it down to the BARE essentials that must be adhered to 99% time if you want to win consistently. Remember people, I have been playing chess for over 30 years ( I should be rated much higher than I am with that many years, but that is another story). Listen to the Chess scholar now.
1) If you are white, ALWAYS open with D4. It is statistically the BEST first move there is. NEVER EVER EVER open with another move.
2) Black's first move is dependant on white's. If white opens with D4, then you MUST reply NF6--it is statistically your best move (These are the first moves in my current vote chess game vs. Light Force).
3) ALWAYS develop BOTH your knights before your bishops. This must ALWAYS happen....unless of course your opponent is very unorthodox and you have no other choice.
4) AVOID the flanks. Develop towards the center. Even if your opponent is mounting a flanking attack, IGNORE IT. Your central control will pay big dividends.
5) Once both knights have moved and you have castled, plan your attack for the center. IGNORE the flanks. Divide and conquer. Aim for the heart. Flanking attacks are VERY easy to defend (think of a cornered animal). Point all weaponry at the center.
6) If you are attacked, DO NOT DEFEND. Attack back. Statistics show that the best chess players over the years have been attackers. Not many defensive players have risen to the top. The best defense is a good offense.
7) Never ever ever ever resign. It is poor etiquette to resign. It shows laziness and lack of commitment. The same poor moves you played may also be played by your opponent and get you back in the game. Play for the stalemate or draw. Make your opponent EARN the win, dont hand it to them.
These are MY basic pointers for chess. Study them and apply them in your games and you will see a sharp increase in your win %.
I disagree with all of those. only opening with d4 makes you easy to predict and unless you have experience with the other moves, you won't be learning so much. The reason why people resign is because it's basically impossible to come back, so they already earned their win. Don't assume that counterattacking is always best, sometimes it's terrible if the opponent has a much better attack and theirs is obviously coming first. If all you do is develop your knights before your bishops, you will not get ideal development because it totally depends on the position. Also, sometimes flank attacks are more important than the center as long as you're not completely dominated in it. 1.. Nf6 is not the only good reply to d4! Even if these rules were right, they are not true in all positions, as you make them look. It's best to be flexible with the rules.
cheater_1 wrote:
... bla bla bla bla ...
1) If you are white, ALWAYS open with D4. It is statistically the BEST first move there is. NEVER EVER EVER open with another move.
No it's not. It's no better then e4. For a beginner, intermediate player, e4 is the better move, it leads to a tactical game, while d4 leads to positional battles.
2) Black's first move is dependant on white's. If white opens with D4, then you MUST reply NF6--it is statistically your best move (These are the first moves in my current vote chess game vs. Light Force).
Nf6 is the hypermodern continuation, which advocates attacking the centre with distant pieces rather than with pawns, in turn attacking the opponents centre. There is no proof the hypermodern reply is better then a standard 1... d5.
3) ALWAYS develop BOTH your knights before your bishops. This must ALWAYS happen....unless of course your opponent is very unorthodox and you have no other choice.
In chess there is never ALWAYS. Look at the bishop opening: e4, e5, Bc4. Certainly a sound opening. You are generalising here.
4) AVOID the flanks. Develop towards the center. Even if your opponent is mounting a flanking attack, IGNORE IT. Your central control will pay big dividends.
I agree for the most part. Attacking and controlling the centre is certainly important. But if you have no plan than all that control is pointless. Also sometimes a rook swing, may be an interesting and unexpected attack.
5) Once both knights have moved and you have castled, plan your attack for the center. IGNORE the flanks. Divide and conquer. Aim for the heart. Flanking attacks are VERY easy to defend (think of a cornered animal). Point all weaponry at the center.
Don't agree with this. Sometimes - many times - there is no clear kingside attack, what would you then ? Many games are won and lost on the flanks.
6) If you are attacked, DO NOT DEFEND. Attack back. Statistics show that the best chess players over the years have been attackers. Not many defensive players have risen to the top. The best defense is a good offense.
Rubbish. Karpov ? You have to know how to defend.
7) Never ever ever ever resign. It is poor etiquette to resign. It shows laziness and lack of commitment. The same poor moves you played may also be played by your opponent and get you back in the game. Play for the stalemate or draw. Make your opponent EARN the win, dont hand it to them.
What? Not resigning is poor etiquette. Some positions are clearly lost. I play chess to have fun, not to waste my time with a hopeless position. Just play another game and earn your win then.
These are MY basic pointers for chess. Study them and apply them in your games and you will see a sharp increase in your win %.
VERY elementary, and mostly misguided.
My two cents
Hey Kilgorebass, go do the other thing on careerbuilder.com that turns you into an old man. For those of you thinking I'm nuts, well you're right.
Cheater 1 ,some good points but I don't agree with ,that you always have to develop both knights before the bishops .
can anybody tell me whre is d centre??? d4??????
Cheater_1 is obviously discussing the epitome of chess games and is probably assuming that the game is between 2 nearly flawless players. In such instances, a strange and unsound opening will most likely cause that player to lose. However, in "real" matches, i.e. matches between non GM-s, a variety of openings and strategies are very playable, especially if it unnerves your opponent. Im 100% that In any game I play against a 1400 or 1500 rated opponent, my usage of d4 to e4 will give me zero advantage since our inaccuracies through the game will easier outweigh the preciseness of "ultimate" chess opening theory.
I tend to side with Olimar. Unless your using two nearly flawless players (or your own chess computer), you're going to have a bit more variation with more possible positive outcomes.
Olimar wrote:
Cheater_1 is obviously discussing the epitome of chess games and is probably assuming that the game is between 2 nearly flawless players.
I dunno, A nearly flawless player would very rarely follow cheater's rules.
you do not have to agree with his "rules" but I think that, in his opinion, they only apply to the best of the best of the best.
Hahaha! A joke forum from cheater_1! I enjoyed it, thanks for sharing.
This column should be titled, "How to get points on chess.com by writing meaningless posts online".
cheater_1 wrote:
Volumes have been written on this topic, but I am going to condense it down to the BARE essentials that must be adhered to 99% time if you want to win consistently. Remember people, I have been playing chess for over 30 years ( I should be rated much higher than I am with that many years, but that is another story). Listen to the Chess scholar now.
1) If you are white, ALWAYS open with D4. It is statistically the BEST first move there is. NEVER EVER EVER open with another move.
2) Black's first move is dependant on white's. If white opens with D4, then you MUST reply NF6--it is statistically your best move (These are the first moves in my current vote chess game vs. Light Force).
3) ALWAYS develop BOTH your knights before your bishops. This must ALWAYS happen....unless of course your opponent is very unorthodox and you have no other choice.
4) AVOID the flanks. Develop towards the center. Even if your opponent is mounting a flanking attack, IGNORE IT. Your central control will pay big dividends.
5) Once both knights have moved and you have castled, plan your attack for the center. IGNORE the flanks. Divide and conquer. Aim for the heart. Flanking attacks are VERY easy to defend (think of a cornered animal). Point all weaponry at the center.
6) If you are attacked, DO NOT DEFEND. Attack back. Statistics show that the best chess players over the years have been attackers. Not many defensive players have risen to the top. The best defense is a good offense.
7) Never ever ever ever resign. It is poor etiquette to resign. It shows laziness and lack of commitment. The same poor moves you played may also be played by your opponent and get you back in the game. Play for the stalemate or draw. Make your opponent EARN the win, dont hand it to them.
These are MY basic pointers for chess. Study them and apply them in your games and you will see a sharp increase in your win %.
1. It may be. e4, c4, g3, f4 and probably more are also sound, and well researched. Just because you may like d4 doesn't mean it's the best. The fact that you use d4 won't make you better at chess, you just like using it.
2. MUST? d5, f5, e6, amont others. Read what I said for 1.
3. I can find a variety of games where the winner has developed bishops or their queen, before their two knights. It's not a necessity, it's just a good rule of thumb.
4. Pawnstorms on the king's posistion occur on the flanks. If you ignore those, you're screwed. Stop talking out of your backside, lol.
5. Flanking attacks are just as useful as the center, if the position is right and it is timed right. Stop thinking mechanical.
6. No, you attack back if you can. If you have to defend, you defend. The position is different for every chess game. You can't apply a single rule of thumb to EVERYTHING.
7. Resign when you know you're going to lose. It's bad etiquette to make your opponents 2 queens run your king around the board and waste time.
Wow, I just shown you to be wrong on all of them! 8D
Your tips are mainly concerning the opening. and a bit of the middlegame (not all middlegames have offencive nature), so it's not accurate about how to win all chess games. and i believe fischer said "best by test" about e4 for about the same reason you said it about d4 :)...
another thing: not moving side pawns is just wrong, not controlling the center and not moving central pawns is bad, but moving side pawns is not bad at all and flank attacks are not as easy to stop as you describe them if you commit yourself wisely (d4 openings have great flank attacks in the kings indian for example)...
i do agree that counterattack is better than defence, but defending skills are also important, if you must defend.
developing both knights before a bishop is not quite a sound rule in most openings, as it will lead to four knight games. but it is correct in most d4 openings (as white mostly, black usualy developes a knight and bishop in 1...-Nf6).
i must say that in general your rules don't fit into "how to win chess", but more likely fit into: "learn to play cheater1 style quickly, rules for begginers in d4" but that would be too long and no one would care to look at it :(.
you say that you base your writing on facts, but these are not facts, they are how you see chess should be played. i think else, and i don't think either of us has quite a good point in any of our posts, but i get the feeling as if your understanding of chess is limited because you limit yourself to rules that don't apply outside of the statistics, if i would discover a forced win in the gedults opening and keep it to myself i could win all of my games and keep d4 opening at the top for a great deal of time (untill other people start playing it too).
in summary: the only poiont i think you had in this post is that folowing the statisticaly good lines would prove to be good for winning, but all the other principals are wrong or inaccurate. so the only way to win chess 99% of the time is the rule i thought you would write: "hide Rybka 3 in your ear"
rich wrote:
This is extremely wrong, I agree 1.d4 is the best move for white even though 1.e4 can be good against {some people} but the idea of Nf6 being a good move against 1.d4 is totally wrong it's one of the worst moves black can respond with to a 1.d4 open. Against 1.d4, e6 is the best move, or d5 sometimes. Even though g3 can work well if you know how to use it. But it's stupid no one can win every time. Also Playing Nf6 against 1.d4 only cramps blacks position, also because after 1.d4 Nf6 white is either gonna play Bg5 or Nc3. And bg5 always gets a good start.
Once again, complete and utter nonsense! 1 d4 Nf6 has been the choice of many World Champions. Rich spouts off about anything, he just can't help himself. I strongly advise you to blank from your memory, anything he has to say on the subject of chess, it is invariably absolute twaddle.
rich wrote:
You need to buy a chess manuel.
Is that a Spanish book?
It's easy to win -- just play against me!
I have to say that I agree with Cheater_1, at least most of it. The only problem I have is when we try to quantify human game play with finite statistical mathematics. While the equations hold together in the beginning of the game, they tend to trend towards nano instances of instability which, if given the right circumstances, can create chaotic outcomes not accounted for by the statistician. You can quantify openings but get mathematically lost in the middle game.