Heisman calls playing a move without calculating at least 1 move to see what your opponent can do "hope chess." He says he calls it this because you have to hope that your opponent won't immediately win a piece, or even checkmate you.
We all check on some moves. But we must check on every move of every game. Heisman identifies this consistency (or rather, the lack of it) as one of the biggest problems for players under a certain rating.
Work more on your chess knowledge. Thats it. The fact that you are aware that both calculation and impulsivity is important sometimes, is enough. You need more knowledge. The fact that you do not always find the best move has to do with knowledge, not impulsivity. So do Endgame, Tactics, Openings, analyse all your games, etc. guess you know that already.
If you are not playing blitz, then of course shell knights words are absolutely true. Salov once set up a rule: three minutes per move. At least for Salov it worked. He was amongst top ten.
This problem has been plaguing me greatly. That and lack of defensive and positional skills.
You're talking about "forcing moves." Forcing moves are moves with few or no adequate responses, like a check or a capture of a major piece. Forcing moves are the key to combinations, and actually define what a combination is. Since a puzzle involves a combination, usually the trick is to consider the most forcing moves first, before looking at moves that allow more responses, like the moves you mentioned. You're right, though: in some puzzles, like positions pulled from Tal's games, there is more leeway for responses, so I also get lazy about calculating those possible responses, and often I just push the piece where I believe it will start the combination, without working it all out first, and often I guess wrong.
----------
(p. 8)
Now we are in a position to define exactly what we mean by
"forcing variation": A series of moves which alternate between
a threat and a response to that threat. The defending side cannot
break this chain of alternating threats and defenses without
losing material or allowing checkmate, until the forcing
variation has come to an end.
Of course it would be wrong to assume that all activity on the
chessboard consists of forcing variations. Without a doubt, most
of the time chessplayers dream up forcing variations and
sacrifices that never actually take place, often because the
opponent takes measures to prevent them. Sometimes the
tactical picture is as quiet as the strategic one, but all the same
one must be able to calculate forcing variations to see how they
might turn out, whether for good or bad.
The creation of forcing variations is crucial to a chessplayer's
development. In a sharp position involving many forcing moves,
variations with sacrifices may be worked out several moves
ahead.
Palatnik, Sam, and Lev Alburt. 2013. Chess Tactics for the Tournament Player. New York, NY: Chess Information & Research Center.
Boy do I recognize myself in the initial post. We are humans not robots lol.I am only a novice so it may be a little presumptuous of me to post something on on this topic but I recently discovered the writings of Phillip Ochman and the videos on his website. In terms of his hierarchy of analysis he recommends assessing your opponents threats 1st before searching for offensive tactics-i.e. threats,captures or checks/mates. Having a relatively fixed process of analysis-structure -will automatically slow down your thinking
Thank you for your insights,
Shell_knight, you said "But we must check on every move of every game. " I do see the necessity of this, but to me it's a real challenge, because it demands a constant effort & focus, over and over again. I do see the necessity of it though. The question remains , do I have to drill myself in doing so, like a rule of thumb? That's how i think i should handle it. Is this a standard procedure of yours before you make the move?
@nils78: I've been working on endgames, tactics & openings and last week started analysing my own gmes, that's how I found out..also I think Salov is a great reference :p
@Sqod: Forcing moves on my opponents can be a consequence, but I wasn't talking about this exclusively.
@DavidDeMar: Interesting point to make it the top priority on the list,thanks!
You are very welcome. I've also had a light bulb moment regarding a type of error I make all the time-both in the tactical puzzles and in games against the computer program that I put on my smartphone. Very often I will jump on the first good move that I spot-like a hanging piece. That has often meant that I've failed to spot other more fruitful stuff like multiple combinations, worthwhile sacrifices, etc. Now I try to remind myself that my goal is not to find a GOOD move, but the BEST move on the board when it's my turn. So even if you instantly find an offensive quick tactic, take a breath and remind yourself to keep searching the board bc there might be something even better out there. By the way, EVERYONE struggles with the issue at the core of your post, on the chessboard and in the rest of life, too....
Well, a friend of mine asked a GM once on how to play the game.
Basically he said,
"DONT BLUNDER"
As long as you dont blunder, everything should be alright.
It comes very natural to seek for offensive moves of your opponent after his/her move if you don't want to lose quickly. And sometimes you feel that this position demands more time investment. This is feeling comes with practice. In my case it's true i'm more careful than before and sometimes can defend my camp well enough.
It's interesting but in my case it depends on my form/contition very much. For instance today i'm playing very impulsively because my brain doesn't want to work well. I lost several games in a very advantages positions. In one i had 2 queens against a rook. I still can believe in it. It was similar when i lost 300 points during one day. I think it's the reason why people have streaks.
I think it depends on the time controls. If you're playing blitz or bullet, just keeping creating threats and eventually your opponent wont find the best defense (or won't see your threat!).
If you're playing slow time controls, then you need to add one step to your thinking -- after you've identified a move you'd like to make, do a quick blunder check. Visualize the board as it will look after you make your candidate move, and pretend it is a tactical puzzle. You "know" there is a tactic on the board and you just have to find it. You want to prove that your move is bad because that is what your opponent is going to do.
Of course if you don't find anything, you can go ahead and make your move. If you always look before making your move but miss strong replies because you didn't "see" it (but you really did look), then go study that tactical theme until you always see it.
Also, it is much easier when your move creates a threat because your opponent's replies are more limited.
This will be my second post in this thread.I learned a big lesson this weekend which was my first foray into playing competitive chess on chess.com. in two of my games I was leading significantly in space and material. I threw them away bc I lost my queen to be captured without getting anything in return. I don't want to take anything away from my opponents. They deserved do win I lost bc of two reasons which are connected. I had become overly cocky and enamored of my newly accomplished ability to see offensive combinations and DUH I forgot to play defense...it's a lesson I hope I don't foget.
Actually my last post was my 3rd one. I went through this whole thread and discovered my 2nd post. It turns out that it is very good advice. Unfortunately I haven't been following it myself lately. I humbly apologize for my ego and I hope that this reminder helps lots of other people besides me.
Once again I want to credit my opponents in the two games lost bc of major blunders.my opponents won not just bc I blundered.they won bc I blundered and THEY capitalized on the blunders to the highest degree.
I think habit plays a big part in this too, if you play bullet and blitz too much then you end up conditioning yourself to make moves quickly without too much thought.
So in my opinion, if you want to improve in this area, the best way is to train yourself to make it a habit or second nature. You don't need to rush or concentrate too hard. Just learn to list out your candidate moves and your opponents candidate moves first, so you can understand your options better.
Hey you guys,
Are there people amongst you who recognize themselves in the following and if so: How did you deal with it?
When you solve a chess puzzle it's often the case that the puzzle consists of a couple of moves, which means you make a couple of moves and so does the opposite colour. When tackling these puzzles we see the necessity of calculation for both sides...
However, lately I've noticed a serious flaw in the way I play/think. When I play a game and the position is not critical, I often skip the part where I think about what my opponents response will be. I don't mean a ton of variations, just a move in 1...this is highly problematic, because it can cost you 1 or more tempi and thus don't always come up with the best move in the given position. I've read about calculation, but knowing doens't always mean you act upon your knowledge. Some advice please,
Thanks