Play, fortnite, battle royale.🤣😃.I saw chessbrah playing. If u cant beat GM on chessboard, beat them there and have fun.
My latest disaster. What did I do wrong? (I'm stupid!!!)
Sort:
May 10, 2018
0
#3
At beginner level you shouldn't let defeats get to you because they will happen. You both played very poorly so effectively it was 50/50 as o who would get the win! After each game you play you should analyse it to see where you went wrong and what you could have done differently in each situation. Don't get yourself down about it and use each game as a learning tool!
Gruber86 wrote:
At beginner level you shouldn't let defeats get to you because they will happen. You both played very poorly so effectively it was 50/50 as o who would get the win! After each game you play you should analyse it to see where you went wrong and what you could have done differently in each situation. Don't get yourself down about it and use each game as a learning tool!
Can you please look at the game and tell me what I did wrong?
May 10, 2018
0
#5
Opening Principles:
1. Control the center squares – d4-e4-d5-e5
2. Develop your minor pieces toward the center – piece activity is the key
3. Castle
4. Connect your rooks
Tactics...tactics...tactics...
Pre Move Checklist:
1. Make sure all your pieces are safe.
2. Look for forcing move: Checks, captures, threats. You want to look at ALL forcing moves (even the bad ones) this will force you look at, and see the entire board.
3. If there are no forcing moves, you then want to remove any of your opponent’s pieces from your side of the board.
4. If your opponent doesn’t have any of his pieces on your side of the board, then you want to improve the position of your least active piece.
5. After each move by your opponent, ask yourself: "What is my opponent trying to do?"
One should not indulge in self deprecation. Its bad for you.
you are faffing about on the queen side pushing pawns, neglecting development and failing to castle. Once a position opens up the person with greater development is bound to have an advantage. A piece of unsolicited advise, only push pawns if it helps you develop your pieces. You got into all kinds of trouble because of lack of development and failing to castle. It was completely unnecessary.
You are not stupid, and I doubt if there is any correlation between chess and intelligence. There are plenty of highly rated morons. Nigel Short instantly comes to mind.
robbie_1969 wrote:
you are faffing about on the queen side pushing pawns, neglecting development and failing to castle. ... 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. c3 Nf6 preparing to castle, a developing move is usually always better than a pawn move (4... a6 is unnecessary, ...
Also: "4...Nf6! ... The knight attacks the pawn on e4, which can no longer be protected by Nc3." - First Steps 1 e4 e5 by GM John Emms
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/7790.pdf
"... Review each of your games, identifying opening (and other) mistakes with the goal of not repeatedly making the same mistake. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627062646/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman81.pdf
John Emms best book is 'Attacking with 1.e4', awesome book.
robbie_1969 wrote:
John Emms ... 'Attacking with 1.e4' ...
"... How do you get a king's pawn repertoire into 160 pages? Clearly the variations chosen have to be relatively easy to present and not in the theoretical mainstream. ... The lines are solid and even a little passive on average. ... They are not irregular or speculative by any means. ... Emms cares about providing fair and detailed analysis, more so than the typical author, so you'll get a straight story, albeit without much instructional verbiage. ..." - IM John Watson (2002)
If I remember correctly, the book does not have much in the way of sample games.
it has lots of sample games and evaluation of the lines.
robbie_1969 wrote:
it has lots of sample games and evaluation of the lines.
"... the approach with complete main games around which the body of theory is built, an approach that Everyman usually uses in this series of opening books, has been completely abandoned in [Attacking with 1 e4 by GM John Emms] ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2001)
May 10, 2018
0
#13
Cheer up mate! You haven't even played 100 games yet, there's no point in thinking that you are stupid. When I first started playing I actually felt the same way as you do. I kept thinking how is everyone so good even at lower ratings? Well I went through some of my old games and my opponents were not good at all. I simply didn't look at the board to see all the opportunities, hanging pieces and threats and adjust accordingly. It took me way over 100 games to get even somewhat accustomed with chess not to drop pieces every few moves. The more you learn about chess the more you understand how little you actually know. People who don't play chess as a hobby tend to think that being smart equals to being good at chess. I tell you that it doesn't. People who play good moves are those who have practiced the game a lot. So in the beginning you are bound to lose a lot of games. That is the only way to get accustomed with the game and start the learning process.
Don't worry about results that much but make sure to go through your games afterwards to see where things started going south, and try to think what lead to the situation and was there some other option you could've chosen. You can also do this when you win, but analysing lost games usually helps more than analysing the ones you won.
Good luck and keep at it! You will get better. Eventually. That's what chess is all about - a mountain of knowledge waiting there to be acquired and all you get are tiny fragments here and there. But it all adds up. :-)
kindaspongey wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
it has lots of sample games and evaluation of the lines.
"... the approach with complete main games around which the body of theory is built, an approach that Everyman usually uses in this series of opening books, has been completely abandoned in [Attacking with 1 e4 by GM John Emms] ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2001)
If I remember correctly, the book does not have much in the way of sample games. - spongebob
The fact that Emms does not go from 1.e4 to Mate in every game does not mean that there are not numerous lines and samples from games illustrating the main ideas. Its an opening book after all and Emms is content to demonstrate and leave it where white is better or has equality. Why that should be a problem I cannot say. The idea that there is not much in the way of sample games is quite ludicrous, then again I have only read the book. Hansen is also talking pants, Emms does build the book around main lines and illustrative games. The fact that the games do not conclude with mate or resignation is neither here nor there. Infact Emms lists all the main line variations at the end of the book and all the side lines upon which theory is built. Maybe Hansen never got that far, who can say?
robbie_1969 wrote: "John Emms best book is 'Attacking with 1.e4', awesome book."
kindaspongey wrote: "If I remember correctly, the book does not have much in the way of sample games."
robbie_1969 wrote:
kindaspongey wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
it has lots of sample games and evaluation of the lines.
"... the approach with complete main games around which the body of theory is built, an approach that Everyman usually uses in this series of opening books, has been completely abandoned in [Attacking with 1 e4 by GM John Emms] ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2001)
... The fact that Emms does not go from 1.e4 to Mate in every game does not mean that there are not numerous lines and samples from games illustrating the main ideas. Its an opening book after all and Emms is content to demonstrate and leave it where white is better or has equality. Why that should be a problem I cannot say. ... Emms does build the book around main lines and illustrative games. The fact that the games do not conclude with mate or resignation is neither here nor there. Infact Emms lists all the main line variations at the end of the book and all the side lines upon which theory is built. ...
"... For inexperienced players, I think the model that bases opening discussions on more or less complete games that are fully annotated, though with a main focus on the opening and early middlegame, is the ideal. ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2010)
"... 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
It seems to me that the latest comments of Robbie_1969 indicate that Attacking with 1 e4 is not the type of book that bases opening discussions on more or less complete games that are fully annotated. On the other hand, the modern Everyman First Steps books do seem to be of this type.
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/7790.pdf
First Steps 1 e4 e5 makes it somewhat easier for an inexperienced player to follow this sort of advice:
"... If the book contains illustrative games, it is worth playing these over first ..." - GM John Nunn (2006)
"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)
Inexperienced players might also like the amount of "instructional verbiage" in First Steps 1 e4 e5.
"... How do you get a king's pawn repertoire into 160 pages? ... [In Attacking with 1 e4,] Emms cares about providing fair and detailed analysis, more so than the typical author, so you'll get a straight story, albeit without much instructional verbiage. ..." - IM John Watson (2002)
http://theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/one-book-repertoires-online-bargain
One last point to make about Attacking with 1 e4 is that it was not written with the intent to give a lot of attention to explaining ideas for Black in a 1 e4 e5 game.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627003909/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen29.pdf
The 2001 Emms book seems to me to be somewhat similar in purpose to the recent Moret book, My First Chess Opening Repertoire for White.
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/9033.pdf
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/vincent-moret/
One last point to make about Attacking with 1 e4 is that it was not written with the intent to give a lot of attention to explaining ideas for Black in a 1 e4 e5 game - Spongebobs quote
The book advocates the Bishops opening against 1.e4 e5 and gives the mainline and sub variations with games and annotations. It does so to avoid theory. NO Ruy Lopez, NO Scotch, NO Petroff, NONE of the 2.Nf3 lines are covered because its not needed. How this could have evaded the author of that cherry picked sentiment is quite beyond me. It doesn’t cover all ideas for black in the Sicilian either, or the French defence. Its intent is to AVOID theory.
You would know this Spongebob if you have read it.
May 10, 2018
0
#17
robbie_1969 wrote:
One last point to make about Attacking with 1 e4 is that it was not written with the intent to give a lot of attention to explaining ideas for Black in a 1 e4 e5 game - Spongebobs quote
The book advocates the Bishops opening against 1.e4 e5 and gives the mainline and sub variations with games and annotations. It does so to avoid theory. NO Ruy Lopez, NO Scotch, NO Petroff, NONE of the 2.Nf3 lines are covered because its not needed. How this could have evaded the author of that cherry picked sentiment is quite beyond me. It doesn’t cover all ideas for black in the Sicilian either, or the French defence. Its intent is to AVOID theory.
You would know this Spongebob if you have read it.
I have a rule about chess books. I avoid any book that has any of the following in the title:
"Beat the..."
"Attack with..."
"Crush the..."
"Dominate with the..."
"Secrets of..."
Along with..."Agressive"..."Tactical"..."Hyper"..."How to..."
robbie_1969 wrote:
... [Attacking with 1 e4] advocates the Bishops opening against 1.e4 e5 and gives the mainline and sub variations with games and annotations. ...
"... Its an opening book after all and Emms is content to demonstrate and leave it where white is better or has equality. ... The fact that the games do not conclude with mate or resignation is neither here nor there. ..." - robbie_1969
"... the approach with complete main games around which the body of theory is built, an approach that Everyman usually uses in this series of opening books, has been completely abandoned in [Attacking with 1 e4 by GM John Emms] ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2001)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627003909/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen29.pdf
kindaspongey wrote: "... One last point to make about Attacking with 1 e4 is that it was not written with the intent to give a lot of attention to explaining ideas for Black in a 1 e4 e5 game.
robbie_1969 wrote:
... It does so to avoid theory. NO Ruy Lopez, NO Scotch, NO Petroff, NONE of the 2.Nf3 lines are covered because its not needed. How this could have evaded the author of that cherry picked sentiment is quite beyond me. It doesn’t cover all ideas for black in the Sicilian either, or the French defence. ...
I see no reason to believe that something specific evaded FM Carsten Hansen. I provided the link so that people could look up all his comments on the book.
robbie_1969 wrote:
... Its intent is to AVOID theory.
You would know this Spongebob if you have read it.
I have previously mentioned this comment:
"... How do you get a king's pawn repertoire into 160 pages? Clearly the variations chosen have to be relatively easy to present and not in the theoretical mainstream. ..." - IM John Watson (2002) 02)
http://theweekinchess.com/john-watson-reviews/one-book-repertoires-online-bargain
That is consistent with what I remember from browsing through the book.
Here is my latest disaster. Can you guys please tell me what I did wrong other than being stupid and a terrible player? I spent most of the game playing defense and actually played a long loss. I was hoping the clock would run out and it almost did, but alas it did not. This was a player with a lower rating who once again seemed to have every move memorized and counters for everything I did. Does everyone really have 10,000 moves/tactics memorized? Is that what I had to do? The opening was terrible.
I am now 14 games below .500 and my rating continues to plummet. I am sure it will be zero soon. I hate this stupid game. Anyways, your help is greatly appreciated. click link below. I don't know how to embed the games into the forum. Probably because I am stupid.
https://www.chess.com/live/game/2800439629