I play pretty boring openings like queen's gambit and closed spanish, so many of my wins I'd describe as clean. Usually I win because my opponent makes some frivolous moves while I set up my play, so when my play gets going their position just collapses. I also don't mind going into an equal endgame, and trying to apply pressure there. Some opponents fall asleep when it's an equal endgame, they just assume it will draw itself no work required.
Observations of chess players - My first 12 months playing tournaments
Sort:
Mar 21, 2017
0
#23
I'm not very good when things get crazy, and it's more about calculation than any kind of standard evaluation. So I tend not to win "messy" games even if I'm objectively better, I find ways to draw or lose 
Mar 21, 2017
0
#24
Players often get stuck on a plateau from being too static and too dogmatic.
But some places like Mexico really aggressive play is more common, apparently. The hombre with the better tactics wins.
But some places like Mexico really aggressive play is more common, apparently. The hombre with the better tactics wins.
Mar 21, 2017
0
#25
When I tried to get clean wins, my opponents always somehow managed to complicate things, especially that game against the 2100 I showed, and from there on out it's a lot of complications. Also, I'm not that experienced, so I don't know how to outplay players in a decent number of positions, while surpressing counterplay / tricks etc. So just pushing the position to be very complicated is a good compromise.
Mar 21, 2017
0
#26
There are wins vs 2600 players where it's super smooth, the GM never had any play, no complications, etc. If you can't get a "clean" win vs 2100 then you're just not good enough lol.
It's just we're not good enough so they seem difficult.
Somewhere in there should be that ALL opposite-colored Bishop endings are drawn. Games where both players still have Rooks count too!
More things that class players seem to believe:
Problem with your game? Losing too many games? Change openings!
Lose to tactics? They just aren't your style! You're a "positional player".
Like playing 1 e4 but do badly against the Sicilian? That's because all your 1500 opponents are super-booked up, not because you missed that pawn fork.
The goal of chess is to win right in the opening. The only big difference between strong and weak players is, the strong players know their openings really well.
Mar 22, 2017
0
#28
Well until you're a very strong master you don't really have a "style", you just have areas in your game where you're weak at.
A 1500 who's good at positional play but weak at tactics isn't a "positional player", he/she's just a player who doesn't have good tactical competency, and should study them more, for example.
Mar 22, 2017
0
#29
Cherub_Enjel wrote:
Well until you're a very strong master you don't really have a "style", you just have areas in your game where you're weak at.
A 1500 who's good at positional play but weak at tactics isn't a "positional player", he/she's just a player who doesn't have good tactical competency, and should study them more, for example.
Well said, Cherub. I can study and do tactics all day long but that doesn't seem to help my natural flaw of being somewhat dismissive. Just ask my wife. My biggest weakness is not considering my opponent's options and tactical chances. Too busy looking for my own. This causes me to drop stuff as well as not see what moves my opponent has to save himself from a tactic I thought would win the game.
Well anything that's an advantage is good when you play against flawed players that are your own strength, and not a GM or something.
BTW, in my whole career, I've probably had a few "clean" victories against a 1800+ FIDE, and no clean wins against 2000+ FIDE players. All those games basically were very complex in nature, and I was losing/much worse or blundered a winning position at some point. In the games I've won, I basically managed to not make the final mistake, more or less.
I notice when I play players around or under 1600 FIDE, the positions I get aren't that complicated, and it's usually just clearly better for me after a while.