My chess frustrations ...

Sort:
Avatar of MennoE

I have been playing chess now and then since I was a kid, but I have only really tried to get better since this year. And although learning is a lot of fun, it also comes with a lot of frustrations. I am writing these because I am curious if you guys have the same frustrations, and also if you have any answers to it.

1. A lot of times I play a move in a game, and just after playing it, I see what the better move was. This also happens when I have really taken the time for the move.

2. I learned openings, but I forget them. This also happens when I learn the theory. In my case the only way I seem to remember the openings is to play them a lot of times.

3. When I have played a game I am mostly to lazy (tired) to study the game myself, so I use computer analysis. When I do study it myself I don't find nearly all the good moves as when I use computer analysis (I think I have found a good move, but then the computer analysis shows me wrong).

4. When I take the lessons on chess.com, a lot of time there is a lot of chess annotation for move sequences. I find it very difficult to picture the annotation and because of this I skip them, or I do study them, but a lesson then takes a lot of time (and there are sooooooo many lessons).

5. When I take lessons I am amazed by the amount of calculation that is sometimes needed. I can look 2, 3 or maybe 4 moves ahead (with mistakes now and then), but in the endgames you sometimes have to look 7 moves ahead. 7 moves ahead with all the possible variations seems impossible to me.

6. Reading chess annotation is hard. This is especially hard when you have the black position. First I have to think which box is meant with annotation, then I have to picture the chess piece. And from there you have to picture all kind of moves. This is difficult.

7. There are so many openings, so many tactics and so many variations, so many articles, so many movies, it seems like the universe of chess is too big to comprehend.

8. Last of all: I am a father of a 1 year old child and chess is a hobby next to my job and my other million obligations. Most of the time I am too tired to think well and play or learn well. I try to use spare time to study chess, but sometimes I wonder why I use my time for this, since my learning curve is just not so steep.

In the end I still love the game and love thinking of good moves. Of course I will keep playing the game, but I am curious if you guys run into the same stuff.

Avatar of stiggling

All of that is normal.

I remember one time, many years ago, I was maybe 1500 OTB, and I had a daily game.

I set up the position on a real board on my desk to study the position. I probably calculated for 10 minutes, finally chose my move, and then turned to my computer and I made the move... and suddenly I see I missed my opponent has a simple back rank mate in 2 moves!

That's an extreme example of chess blindness, but something like that happens to everyone.

Most people will have many stories for every one of the 8 things you mention.

---

As for chess seeming too big, I think websites like chess.com have information overload for new players. All you really need is 1 or 2 good books. I recommend 1 book on tactics, and 1 book on something else (endgames, strategy, or an annotated game collection).

You don't need to watch 1000 videos, or learn 1000 openings. The universe of chess is big, and it does take many years to improve, but there are also ideas that apply to all sorts of positions. There are only one dozen (or so) primary pawn structures in all of chess for example, and knowing these will give you the basic strategic road map in (basically) every opening you ever play. Reading a book of annotated games may seem at first like highly specific positions and idea, but many of those ideas will apply to all sorts of positions. As a simple example maybe Capablanca wins a game because of a strong knight on an outpost square. That's not just something you'll see in that game, or that opening, that's something you can start to think about looking for in all your games.

---

Anyway, good luck with your chess. If you play a little and learn a little every day, it slowly builds up. If you can improve 50-100 points a year I think that's a very respectable rate considering you have young family, so don't worry if you spend months and months seemingly not improving. Just have fun and keep playing.

Avatar of kindaspongey

https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-start-out-in-chess

https://www.chess.com/article/view/study-plan-directory
"... In order to maximize the benefits of [theory and practice], these two should be approached in a balanced manner. ... Play as many slow games (60 5 or preferably slower) as possible, ... The other side of improvement is theory. ... This can be reading books, taking lessons, watching videos, doing problems on software, etc. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2002)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627084053/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman19.pdf
"... If it’s instruction, you look for an author that addresses players at your level (buying something that’s too advanced won’t help you at all). This means that a classic book that is revered by many people might not be useful for you. ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (2015)
https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-best-chess-books-ever
Here are some reading possibilities that I often mention:
Simple Attacking Plans by Fred Wilson (2012)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708090402/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review874.pdf
http://dev.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Simple-Attacking-Plans-77p3731.htm
Logical Chess: Move by Move by Irving Chernev (1957)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708104437/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/logichess.pdf
The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played by Irving Chernev (1965)
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/most-instructive-games-of-chess-ever-played/
Winning Chess by Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld (1948)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708093415/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review919.pdf
Back to Basics: Tactics by Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708233537/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review585.pdf
https://www.chess.com/article/view/book-review-back-to-basics-tactics
Discovering Chess Openings by GM John Emms (2006)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627114655/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen91.pdf
Openings for Amateurs by Pete Tamburro (2014)
http://kenilworthian.blogspot.com/2014/05/review-of-pete-tamburros-openings-for.html
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/openings-for-amateurs/
https://www.mongoosepress.com/catalog/excerpts/openings_amateurs.pdf
Chess Endgames for Kids by Karsten Müller (2015)
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/chess-endgames-for-kids/
http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/Chess_Endgames_for_Kids.pdf
A Guide to Chess Improvement by Dan Heisman (2010)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708105628/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review781.pdf
Studying Chess Made Easy by Andrew Soltis (2009)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708090448/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review750.pdf
Seirawan stuff:
http://seagaard.dk/review/eng/bo_beginner/ev_winning_chess.asp?KATID=BO&ID=BO-Beginner
http://www.nystar.com/tamarkin/review1.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627132508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen173.pdf
https://www.chess.com/article/view/book-review-winning-chess-endings
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708092617/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review560.pdf

Avatar of kindaspongey

Once one has chosen openings to learn, I think that there is wide agreement that the way to start is by playing over sample games. Some of us think that it can be useful to use books like First Steps: 1 e4 e5 and First Steps: Queen's Gambit

https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/7790.pdf
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/7652.pdf

as sources of games with explanations intended for those just starting to learn about an opening. Be sure to try to use the openings in games in between sessions of learning. Most of the time, one faces a position with no knowledge of a specific move indicated in a book. One has to accept that as part of chess, and think of opening knowledge as a sometimes helpful aid. After a game, it makes sense to try to look up the moves in a book and see if it has some indication of how one might have played better in the opening. Many opening books are part explanation and part reference material. The reference material is included in the text with the idea that one mostly skips it on a first reading, and looks at an individual item when it applies to a game that one has just played. Resist the temptation to try to turn a book into a mass memorization project. There are many important subjects that one should not neglect because of too much time on opening study.

Avatar of kindaspongey

"... Overall, I would advise most players to stick to a fairly limited range of openings, and not to worry about learning too much by heart. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)

"... I feel that the main reasons to buy an opening book are to give a good overview of the opening, and to explain general plans and ideas. ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)

"... If the book contains illustrative games, it is worth playing these over first ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)

"... the average player only needs to know a limited amount about the openings he plays. Providing he understands the main aims of the opening, a few typical plans and a handful of basic variations, that is enough. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)

"... Everyman Chess has started a new series aimed at those who want to understand the basics of an opening, i.e., the not-yet-so-strong players. ... I imagine [there] will be a long series based on the premise of bringing the basic ideas of an opening to the reader through plenty of introductory text, game annotations, hints, plans and much more. ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2002)

https://web.archive.org/web/20140627055734/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen38.pdf

"The way I suggest you study this book is to play through the main games once, relatively quickly, and then start playing the variation in actual games. Playing an opening in real games is of vital importance - without this kind of live practice it is impossible to get a 'feel' for the kind of game it leads to. There is time enough later for involvement with the details, after playing your games it is good to look up the line." - GM Nigel Davies (2005)

"... Review each of your games, identifying opening (and other) mistakes with the goal of not repeatedly making the same mistake. ... It is especially critical not to continually fall into opening traps – or even lines that result in difficult positions ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2007)

https://web.archive.org/web/20140627062646/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman81.pdf

Avatar of SeniorPatzer

MennoE, to answer your question, yes I run into the same stuff.  You're not alone.  

Avatar of IMKeto

1. A lot of times I play a move in a game, and just after playing it, I see what the better move was. This also happens when I have really taken the time for the move.

And it will continue to happen.  The only thing you're aiming for with improvement is to make your mistake smaller, but they will never go way.

2. I learned openings, but I forget them. This also happens when I learn the theory. In my case the only way I seem to remember the openings is to play them a lot of times.

How did you "learn" openings?  Were you memorizing moves, or were you understanding the pawn structure, and piece placement?

3. When I have played a game I am mostly to lazy (tired) to study the game myself, so I use computer analysis. When I do study it myself I don't find nearly all the good moves as when I use computer analysis (I think I have found a good move, but then the computer analysis shows me wrong).

Doing your own analysis is one of the best ways to improve.  I do my own analysis first, and only then do i use an engine.  And by engine use i am only looking for tactics that i missed.  If you don't understand what +.4 means, then you probably shouldn't even be using an engine.

4. When I take the lessons on chess.com, a lot of time there is a lot of chess annotation for move sequences. I find it very difficult to picture the annotation and because of this I skip them, or I do study them, but a lesson then takes a lot of time (and there are sooooooo many lessons).

Use a real board, and pieces when studying.  Move the piece around.  You want to simulate OTB play as much as possible.

5. When I take lessons I am amazed by the amount of calculation that is sometimes needed. I can look 2, 3 or maybe 4 moves ahead (with mistakes now and then), but in the endgames you sometimes have to look 7 moves ahead. 7 moves ahead with all the possible variations seems impossible to me.

The endgame is the hardest part of chess.  Openings are easy.  Middlegames are difficult.  There is a saying: "A mistake in the opening,  you can recover from.  A mistake in the middlegame can hurt you.  A mistake in the endgame will kill you."

6. Reading chess annotation is hard. This is especially hard when you have the black position. First I have to think which box is meant with annotation, then I have to picture the chess piece. And from there you have to picture all kind of moves. This is difficult.

Again...Use a real board and pieces.

7. There are so many openings, so many tactics and so many variations, so many articles, so many movies, it seems like the universe of chess is too big to comprehend.

Start with tactics.  Keep it simple.  Work on the basics.  Dont overwhelm yourself with thinking you need to study like GM's.

8. Last of all: I am a father of a 1 year old child and chess is a hobby next to my job and my other million obligations. Most of the time I am too tired to think well and play or learn well. I try to use spare time to study chess, but sometimes I wonder why I use my time for this, since my learning curve is just not so steep.

Study what makes the game fun.  If chess isnt a serious time investment for you.  Keep it fun.  Its that simple.

Avatar of MennoE
SeniorPatzer schreef:

MennoE, to answer your question, yes I run into the same stuff.  You're not alone.  

Thank you happy.png

Avatar of MennoE
stiggling schreef:

All of that is normal.

I remember one time, many years ago, I was maybe 1500 OTB, and I had a daily game.

I set up the position on a real board on my desk to study the position. I probably calculated for 10 minutes, finally chose my move, and then turned to my computer and I made the move... and suddenly I see I missed my opponent has a simple back rank mate in 2 moves!

That's an extreme example of chess blindness, but something like that happens to everyone.

Most people will have many stories for every one of the 8 things you mention.

---

As for chess seeming too big, I think websites like chess.com have information overload for new players. All you really need is 1 or 2 good books. I recommend 1 book on tactics, and 1 book on something else (endgames, strategy, or an annotated game collection).

You don't need to watch 1000 videos, or learn 1000 openings. The universe of chess is big, and it does take many years to improve, but there are also ideas that apply to all sorts of positions. There are only one dozen (or so) primary pawn structures in all of chess for example, and knowing these will give you the basic strategic road map in (basically) every opening you ever play. Reading a book of annotated games may seem at first like highly specific positions and idea, but many of those ideas will apply to all sorts of positions. As a simple example maybe Capablanca wins a game because of a strong knight on an outpost square. That's not just something you'll see in that game, or that opening, that's something you can start to think about looking for in all your games.

---

Anyway, good luck with your chess. If you play a little and learn a little every day, it slowly builds up. If you can improve 50-100 points a year I think that's a very respectable rate considering you have young family, so don't worry if you spend months and months seemingly not improving. Just have fun and keep playing.

Hey Stiggling, thank you for your reply. It was very helpful!

Avatar of MennoE
IMBacon schreef:

1. A lot of times I play a move in a game, and just after playing it, I see what the better move was. This also happens when I have really taken the time for the move.

And it will continue to happen.  The only thing you're aiming for with improvement is to make your mistake smaller, but they will never go way.

2. I learned openings, but I forget them. This also happens when I learn the theory. In my case the only way I seem to remember the openings is to play them a lot of times.

How did you "learn" openings?  Were you memorizing moves, or were you understanding the pawn structure, and piece placement?

3. When I have played a game I am mostly to lazy (tired) to study the game myself, so I use computer analysis. When I do study it myself I don't find nearly all the good moves as when I use computer analysis (I think I have found a good move, but then the computer analysis shows me wrong).

Doing your own analysis is one of the best ways to improve.  I do my own analysis first, and only then do i use an engine.  And by engine use i am only looking for tactics that i missed.  If you don't understand what +.4 means, then you probably shouldn't even be using an engine.

4. When I take the lessons on chess.com, a lot of time there is a lot of chess annotation for move sequences. I find it very difficult to picture the annotation and because of this I skip them, or I do study them, but a lesson then takes a lot of time (and there are sooooooo many lessons).

Use a real board, and pieces when studying.  Move the piece around.  You want to simulate OTB play as much as possible.

5. When I take lessons I am amazed by the amount of calculation that is sometimes needed. I can look 2, 3 or maybe 4 moves ahead (with mistakes now and then), but in the endgames you sometimes have to look 7 moves ahead. 7 moves ahead with all the possible variations seems impossible to me.

The endgame is the hardest part of chess.  Openings are easy.  Middlegames are difficult.  There is a saying: "A mistake in the opening,  you can recover from.  A mistake in the middlegame can hurt you.  A mistake in the endgame will kill you."

6. Reading chess annotation is hard. This is especially hard when you have the black position. First I have to think which box is meant with annotation, then I have to picture the chess piece. And from there you have to picture all kind of moves. This is difficult.

Again...Use a real board and pieces.

7. There are so many openings, so many tactics and so many variations, so many articles, so many movies, it seems like the universe of chess is too big to comprehend.

Start with tactics.  Keep it simple.  Work on the basics.  Dont overwhelm yourself with thinking you need to study like GM's.

8. Last of all: I am a father of a 1 year old child and chess is a hobby next to my job and my other million obligations. Most of the time I am too tired to think well and play or learn well. I try to use spare time to study chess, but sometimes I wonder why I use my time for this, since my learning curve is just not so steep.

Study what makes the game fun.  If chess isnt a serious time investment for you.  Keep it fun.  Its that simple.

And thank you IMBacon. I always have the obsession to want to master everything I am doing, and chess is just something that's not easy to master at all. Your post made that even more clear. Thank you.

Avatar of JayeshSinhaChess

I too have tried to learn chess and improve, but what I have realised is that online chess isn't for learning. The only way to truly learn is to get a coach. Think of it this way, you learn an opening, well how often will you play it in online chess. However with a coach, he could drill you playing that opening over and over again for a week.

You can't rally do that playing online chess where you face a different opening every game.

Also with a coach you immediately ask questions and get answers to things you don't immediately understand.

Online chess could only take you so far. If you really really want to improve, then get a coach.

 

Also point no. 1 is a classic case of playing blitz. In blitz you are literally thinking as you move. I have that problem almost every game of blitz I play.

Avatar of SEmbrey

Some good advice here, thanks to all the posters.

Avatar of IMKeto
MennoE wrote:
IMBacon schreef:

1. A lot of times I play a move in a game, and just after playing it, I see what the better move was. This also happens when I have really taken the time for the move.

And it will continue to happen.  The only thing you're aiming for with improvement is to make your mistake smaller, but they will never go way.

2. I learned openings, but I forget them. This also happens when I learn the theory. In my case the only way I seem to remember the openings is to play them a lot of times.

How did you "learn" openings?  Were you memorizing moves, or were you understanding the pawn structure, and piece placement?

3. When I have played a game I am mostly to lazy (tired) to study the game myself, so I use computer analysis. When I do study it myself I don't find nearly all the good moves as when I use computer analysis (I think I have found a good move, but then the computer analysis shows me wrong).

Doing your own analysis is one of the best ways to improve.  I do my own analysis first, and only then do i use an engine.  And by engine use i am only looking for tactics that i missed.  If you don't understand what +.4 means, then you probably shouldn't even be using an engine.

4. When I take the lessons on chess.com, a lot of time there is a lot of chess annotation for move sequences. I find it very difficult to picture the annotation and because of this I skip them, or I do study them, but a lesson then takes a lot of time (and there are sooooooo many lessons).

Use a real board, and pieces when studying.  Move the piece around.  You want to simulate OTB play as much as possible.

5. When I take lessons I am amazed by the amount of calculation that is sometimes needed. I can look 2, 3 or maybe 4 moves ahead (with mistakes now and then), but in the endgames you sometimes have to look 7 moves ahead. 7 moves ahead with all the possible variations seems impossible to me.

The endgame is the hardest part of chess.  Openings are easy.  Middlegames are difficult.  There is a saying: "A mistake in the opening,  you can recover from.  A mistake in the middlegame can hurt you.  A mistake in the endgame will kill you."

6. Reading chess annotation is hard. This is especially hard when you have the black position. First I have to think which box is meant with annotation, then I have to picture the chess piece. And from there you have to picture all kind of moves. This is difficult.

Again...Use a real board and pieces.

7. There are so many openings, so many tactics and so many variations, so many articles, so many movies, it seems like the universe of chess is too big to comprehend.

Start with tactics.  Keep it simple.  Work on the basics.  Dont overwhelm yourself with thinking you need to study like GM's.

8. Last of all: I am a father of a 1 year old child and chess is a hobby next to my job and my other million obligations. Most of the time I am too tired to think well and play or learn well. I try to use spare time to study chess, but sometimes I wonder why I use my time for this, since my learning curve is just not so steep.

Study what makes the game fun.  If chess isnt a serious time investment for you.  Keep it fun.  Its that simple.

And thank you IMBacon. I always have the obsession to want to master everything I am doing, and chess is just something that's not easy to master at all. Your post made that even more clear. Thank you.

Glad to help.  Whatever you decide, good luck to you!

Avatar of kaspariano

 

You have been studying for only a year, that's not enough time to get frustrated at your results yet.  I have been studying chess for decades. and I am still average at best