National Master: Ask Me Anything
Sort:
Abtectous
May 24, 2025
0
#21
Thoughts on Pineapple on pizza?
May 24, 2025
0
#22
Abtectous wrote:
Thoughts on Pineapple on pizza?
sure, why not. Are you offering? 
May 24, 2025
0
#23
I’m heading to my second classical tournament, I went to the same one around 4-5 months ago and although had a winning a position in every game, only got 2.5/5, I feel like I’ve improved a lot since then (and at keeping advantages) but I want to know any other advice I should have to try and get the full 5/5 in my tournament. I’m playing in the scholastic U1200 section
May 24, 2025
0
#24
Abtectous wrote:
I’m heading to my second classical tournament, I went to the same one around 4-5 months ago and although had a winning a position in every game, only got 2.5/5, I feel like I’ve improved a lot since then (and at keeping advantages) but I want to know any other advice I should have to try and get the full 5/5 in my tournament. I’m playing in the scholastic U1200 section
Good luck! We can discuss the games in a trial lesson: https://bookme.name/chessknight
That might help me have more context to answer you properly. Solving tons of tactics is pretty universally offered advice for club players. My brother Gus made it from 1200 to 1700 relatively quickly by just solving a lot, although he was putting some 2-3 hrs per day in, and also doing other chess. We combined this with Chessable/game analysis and Aagaard puzzles later for further development, and he did who knows how much independent analysis. Up to 2200 blitz!
These are online ratings, as his otb uscf is inactive. Quickly got to ~1400+ though.
For you, U1200 isn't that difficult of a section. Given your 1500+ rating in fast chess (1/0, maybe other peaks), you might be the clear favorite already, although who knows with kids these days.
Abtectous wrote:
I’m heading to my second classical tournament, I went to the same one around 4-5 months ago and although had a winning a position in every game, only got , I feel like I’ve improved a lot since then (and at keeping advantages) but I want to know any other advice I should have to try and get the full 5/5 in my tournament. I’m playing in the scholastic U1200 section
sounds like you are letting your opponents off the hook, feeling sorry for them. start by ruthlessly queening all your pawns to develop more desire to win.
May 24, 2025
0
#26
Thank you for your time, hope to get high enough rated to get paired against you 
May 24, 2025
0
#27
#24, thanks for the advice! Mostly what I’ve been doing to prepare is memorizing and studying opening lines (and analyzing the imbalances to understand the middle game plans) and doing tactics training, I think doing some endgame training would also be wise though. I feel like I’m pretty strong positionally at the moment (for me level at least) thanks to deep study of Silman’s Reassess Your Chess book.
May 24, 2025
0
#28
My friend NM Julian Proleiko has been making fun of Silman's book for how easy and redundant it seems to him, although I've heard good things for club players, maybe especially adults, and I've studied some of it.
May 24, 2025
0
#29
Also, after the tournament I’d love to discuss the games in a trial lesson! I’ve never had a coach before but think having somebody who can help point out imbalances and middlegame plans in certain opening positions and help give me guidance on what I should train would be very helpful! My question, what is your coaching style like?
May 24, 2025
0
#30
#28, I’ve heard other high rated players make fun of Silman’s book although there seems to be more that praise it then hate it, I heard someone say once that Silman “spoon feeds” to players.
May 24, 2025
0
#31
I definitely think it’s a fantastic book for anyone around 1300-2100 though assuming they don’t have an understanding of imbalances, to be honest there isn’t much material that summarizes imbalances like he does and he introduced the concept to me in the first place.
May 24, 2025
0
#32
Abtectous wrote:
Also, after the tournament I’d love to discuss the games in a trial lesson! I’ve never had a coach before but think having somebody who can help point out imbalances and middlegame plans in certain opening positions and help give me guidance on what I should train would be very helpful! My question, what is your coaching style like?
Sure! My friend Ian thinks I should drop the trial lesson and just charge, however I've decided to keep it up for now. https://bookme.name/chessknight/free-trial-lesson
When I was active at coaching some years ago, my enthusiasm would catch fire, I remember one time a parent of an indian kid student of mine wanted a break from lessons because she was concerned that Darshan wouldn't want to do anything except chess, and he had school. 
Showed up to Zaeem's house to teach (carried a stack of ~20 books, he was like 10)... great times!
Yeah, my rate is discounted because I want to be more active as a coach again, I took a break.
May 24, 2025
0
#33
JackDeRip wrote:
How do you learn from reading books on matches? I always feel like "Ok, what is to be learned from this match? Ok, this Anderssen Immortal match is cool, but the book doesn't explain why they moved the pieces like they did, except for the main moves"
They actually do explain the moves. If not to your satisfaction, I can!
May 24, 2025
0
#34
Fair enough. Some do, actually. Or maybe they assume you see that, and explain more advanced concepts.
May 24, 2025
0
#35
#35, sometimes it’s more informing to do that analysis yourself rather than filling the book with too many words. (In my opinion)
May 24, 2025
0
#36
#33, I’m glad to hear that! I’ve been trying to look for a coach who is as passionate about teaching chess as I am learning it! I have a lot more free time for chess as well since I’m homeschooled and am able to complete my school in around 3 hours since I can work at my own pace instead of following a class. My parents arnt too enthusiastic about getting me a coach but if I win my tournament I’d be able to pay for it with my own earnings! (I don’t know if it matters but I’ll just let you know my age now, 16)
May 24, 2025
0
#37
My brother Gus started taking chess more seriously at age 16. I remember sometimes I'd go on these "passionate rants" about chess concepts (for example, in this interview here)
Some of my reviews might seem overkill with how much I cared, for example:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R2TXXDD0YKIDMH
May 24, 2025
0
#38
#35, for example I was reading a book on the King’s Indian yesterday and the book said nothing else about the move Qc2 for white except (Qc2, Na6) I looked at it for a minute trying to understand why, then I realized it’s because black would be able to jump the knight to b4 and attack the queen, white should most definitely block this of course by a3, but I realized the move deeply weakened white’s position because of black’s bishop on g7 lazering down the a1-h8 diagonal that was clear of pawns except the near backward one on b2 which was only a weakness.
May 24, 2025
0
#39
#39, that’s great to hear! I started playing almost a year ago now and plan to be real serious about it for at least 6 more months before maybe focusing on other things. I truly believe that passion in chess is more important than most people think, it can help you improve quicker, teach better, and play better!
May 24, 2025
0
#40
Abtectous wrote:
#35, for example I was reading a book on the King’s Indian yesterday and the book said nothing else about the move Qc2 for white except (Qc2, Na6) I looked at it for a minute trying to understand why, then I realized it’s because black would be able to jump the knight to b4 and attack the queen, white should most definitely block this of course by a3, but I realized the move deeply weakened white’s position because of black’s bishop on g7 lazering down the a1-h8 diagonal that was clear of pawns except the near backward one on b2 which was only a weakness.
Generally, White's queen doesn't go to c2 in the KID as far as I know of. It might have been a book for Black, and skipping unusual opponent's ideas is pretty typical when writing, not explaining ideas of a move that doesn't have much bite seems ok to me. When doing editing for "The Ambitious Berlin" on Chessable recently, one of my beta testers wanted me to explain some substandard or non-threatening opponent's moves, although that didn't really seem needed to me at the time. I added a little bit of notes in the discussion with him though, some people might read the comments and learn from those. Some other moves got further annotations after feedback.