Pros and Cons of reading chess books

It's more fun than reading chess books though

An important chess lesson is winning a game doesn't mean you made no mistakes.  It doesn't even mean you made fewer mistakes :)

You can neglect development in the opening for a number of reasons.  Maybe the position is closed and your opponents greater force can't punish your lack of development.  Maybe like you said the pieces you do have out are doing such a good job that your opponent is temporarily tied up (allowing you to catch up in development later).

Your game wasn't decided on opening mistakes but later in the game.  Your early Qf6 is a nice way to play for tricks, and no one at your level is likely to be able to punish you for this minor inaccuracy.  For future reference though you'll find it harder and harder to make it work as you face stronger opponents.

I've seen this opening online a number of times before, and funnily enough your opponant came really close to playing it right :)  Here's the game and how white can take advantage of the queen's aquward development:

Oh, this is what I usually see, and is very comfortable to play as white.

On move 16, why not Bxg5? I don't care how bad your opening play is, you didn't notice a free piece. I don't know if that's worse than hanging your own material or not. The next move it's an even trade rather than a free piece.

did not see that. thanks

Back to the thread....

in my youth I spent many, many hours learning by heart the main lines of the French Winawer and the Scicilian Flank Game from books by Moles and O'Kelly. In the 40-odd years since, I have actually played the Main Line Winawer once, and the SFG..erm...never.

However, I still look back on that time of learning with pleasure. It created a refuge from a difficult present, and taught me how calm and beautiful a place one can make in the quiet of one's own mind.

I'm still cr*p at chess, though.

huh. so i got lucky. i def wouldnt mind playing a game against a higher up and getting criticism after my mistakes

Well, we all make mistakes... I wouldn't go so far as to say your win was lucky, it's not like he had you on the ropes and you found a lucky mate

I have a few pet trappy lines I play in blitz.  Sometimes I meet a player who knows them and I get squished really quick though heh.

@waffles

the "lucky" part was aimed at him not noticing the moves Rosequeen proposed

@rainbow

when compared to my fellow club members who taught me how to play, then the "student becomes teacher" transpires, then yes. dont take things out of context

I proposed the same moves 4 posts earlier, so yeah, I was aware of how the opening isn't so hot.

17 years old and sub-1400 USCF seems to indicate normal talent--right in the meaty part of the curve.

Chess is simply to enjoy for most of us, so don't worry about being average.

confidence doesn't seem to be a problem

A bit off point, but Smyslov would beat me with 2...Ke7 10 out of 10 games :p

@ golden

i started when i was about to turn 16. 1st time i learned what the pieces did and what not. i really like the game and want to get better. thats why im here. to learn new things

One thing you'll learn is that we are not nice to people who think they are something.

yeah rudy-clark you can count on what ivandh said.

Am I the only one who thinks 1300 USCF is a pretty decent level? You can't expect from everyone who plays chess that they naturally reach the 1800 level after a couple of years, as is implied in another thread,... I forgot which exact one.

Yeah, if it's one thing chess teaches it's humility.  When someone walks in like they've never met the guy they can't mate in under 20 moves, you can pretty much be sure they're a fish.

One of the interesting things about chess to me is it's largely a matter of opinion what "decent" is.  It just matters what circles you play in.  For example when I first realized I liked chess and was playing every day and anyone I could find, 1300s were like gods, they never made a mistake.

I can relate though.  After getting better and 1700s were the god rating I hated how people talked about class A (1800 USCF) rating as if anyone and everyone was able to get there.  It pissed me off :)

My story is like Rosequeen though, I eventually got a few books and went over them seriously and it really helped out.

1800 is very hard to get to for the average player if all you do is play online, don't go though books, and never analyze your games after they're done.  For those that do put in a lot of effort I think it's certain you will eventually make it to 1800 after a few years.  It seemed impossible to me, but now class A players aren't so invulnerable.

Truth in advertising.... my last tourney I actually fell below 1800... boooo!  IMO it was a bad tourney for me, but I suppose you'd want a 2nd opinion lol so I'll leave it at that.