Responsive moves than my own plans

Hi all

In a recent local tournament I felt that irrespective of myself playing white or black, I am always responding to the opponent and not having any plans. In case the opponent makes a bad move, I tend to see and trying to capitalize on that. But I do not have any plans and during the game I felt that I am only responding to the opponent rather than playing my own game plans.

Any advises please?

You have given no examples, no analysis, and no games.  What answer are you looking for?

I know this doesn't answer the question, but it brings up a topic I think is fun.

And that is, while non-players tend to imagine chess players as some sort of geniuses, hunched over the board, concocting schemes and strategies and elaborate plans... in reality most amateur players are hunched over the board madly calculating random moves hoping they don't accidentally blunder material

So first of all I'd say it's too ambitious to want to have a plan.

Instead you want to seek a generally healthy position. This means things like a safe king, active pieces, and a sound pawn structure.

If you want to talk about any one of those 3 topics, then I think that would be productive, but talking about making a plan will not be helpful at your level, as counter intuitive as that may sound.

As far as feeling forced to respond to your opponent, that's often a consequence of not having a healthy position. For example in the beginning of the game it's very important to limit your pawn moves to only those that help you control the center, and to get your knights and bishops off the back rank as quickly as possible. If one player plays the opening well and creates a sound position for themselves while the other player is slower to develop his forces, then the slower player will likely be faced with a middlegame where the opponent is able to bully him.

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 moves: Checks, captures, threats. You want to look at ALL forcing moves (even the bad ones) as 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?"

Middlegame Planning:

1. Expand your position:

            a. Gain more space.

            b. Improve the position of your pieces.

2. Decide on what side of the board to play.

            a. Queenside: a-c files.

            b. Center: d-e files.

            c. Kingside: f-h files.

            Compare, space, material, and weakness(es)

            Play where you have the advantage.

3. DO NOT HURRY.  Regroup your pieces, and be patient.

I was gonna post it eventually, if you didn't

I had a moment of weakness :-)

Oh, I see you added stuff too.

I think for what the OP is asking about, the middlegame planning part might be what he is looking for.

Thanks @IMBacon & @Preggo_Basashi for quick responses, I will post 1-2 games with comments tonight.

This is one such game with annotations on how I was responding. 

I even have a cheat sheet on opposite side castling:

Let’s take a look at when it makes sense to castle opposite sides and when it doesn't.

You should castle on the opposite side when at least one of the following factors is true:

1. When you are up in development and your opponent has already castled, you should consider castling in the opposite side. That way you will have a clear game plan and will also be able to capitalize on your development advantage.
2. When you have a damaged pawn structure (doubled paws, missing pawns, far advanced pawns, etc.) on one of the sides you should consider castling on the other side.
3. When opponent’s pieces are especially active on one side of the board, it is usually best to castle on the opposite side.
4. If you want to complicate the game you may consider this option. That may be true if you must play for a win due to a tournament situation, when the draw is not enough. Also that maybe done when you're playing against a stronger opponent, who is much better in simple/technical positions. That maybe your best bet.

You should not castle on the opposite sides when at least one of the following factors in true:

1. When you are behind in development and you need extra time to develop your pieces, it is usually not a good idea to give your opponent a straight forward way of launching an attack.
2. When the opponent’s pawns are advanced towards the side you’re about to castle, it is not a good idea to castle there (especially if the opponent’s king is castled on the opposite side). It will just give him a positional edge in the attack.
3. When there are open/semi-open files in-front of the side you’re about to castle, you should probably reconsider your decision to castle there (especially if your opponent has castled on the other side). That will give him more attacking possibilities, such as rook lifts, various sacrifices, doubling of pieces on the file, etc.
4. If you playing against a weaker opponent you may want to avoid castling opposite sides, in order to avoid sharp game and keep everything under control.

Note: These are general rules, not laws, meaning that there are always exceptions to them. When you’re making a decision what side to castle you should always take your time and evaluate all “pros” and “cons” and base your decision upon your own analysis. This is a very important decision. It pretty much dictates which way the game will continue. Take your time and think twice.

 Just off the cuff analysis, clicking through 1 move at a time, reading your comments, and making my own sort of thing.

@IMBacon - wow... this is going to help me a lot, and clearly shows that king side castle in my game is against those suggestions.

@Preggo_Basashi - thanks for your analysis. Few more clarifications.

5.Bb3 - The bishop on c4 is loose to ideas like sacing on e4 then pushing d5, and it's loose to d5 in general. Also just Na5 or even an eventual b5. 

I could not understand this sacrificing idea on e4, what piece/pawn are we thinking about the sacrifice? 

6... h6 I'm not sure about this. I'd rather see developing moves.

I was worried about Bg4 attack on Qd4 and was not sure if the pin on Nf6 continues. I understand this is passive, so I will try to avoid this.

8...  Bh5Better was retreating along the c8-h5 diagonal. Since white isn't even castled and there's a pawn on d3 reinforcing e4, this bishop really does nothing on h5 or g6.

I am not used to this idea of moving that B along c8-h5 diagonal, so I will keep looking at when the h3 attacks. However, what is the destination for the B? Is it Be3 or A6.

9. The knight (for both players) usually goes to g3 (g6 for black) this reinforces the e pawn, and also unblocks the c pawn 

Again this is something I do not understand. Which N are we trying to get to g3? My initial learning says that we should not move same piece twice in the opening, but I assume it is OK to do it here?

14...  Nh7You say you're protecting g5, but that makes no sense to me. If g5 then hxg and white has hurt his structure. This is just a passive move.

I was worried about the castling options; queen side a pawn has gone far away. If pawns are exchanged in king side, I might not be able to castle.

24... Rh6Odd move. At least at the moment white's f2 pawn is more vulnerable than the h3 pawn because there's no minor piece defending the f2 pawn. Also your rook on a8 is doing nothing, so this was a wasted move.

Here I wanted to stop Qh5 followed by a Qh8#

25... Re8This is actually a really common deadly pin. A minor piece on your 2nd rank pinned ot a heavy piece. You just killed both your knight and the e8 rook with this move which is to say they're both passive pieces now.

This is something I do not understand correctly. Ne2 is attacked 2 times and protected two times. It is true that this N is pinned, but my Re8 move was trying to protect the attacked piece. Maybe I should look for moving it away rather than trying to defend.

h6 is a common move in the Italian, so it's not like it was horrible, I'm just making comments as I go.

It is good though, that you scrutinize such moves. Earlier today I was playing the black side of an Italian and played a6, a common move, but in that particular position I wasted time.

Be6 might run into a fork because of d4 and d5 by white.

I'd probably play Bd7, but Bc8 doesn't look bad either. I know Bc8 is totally counter intuitive, but this piece is actually pretty good on c8. In the Italian there are often opportunities to sacrifice with Bxh3 for example. Putting it on c8 makes sure it's not blocking the queen, so you may be able to play d5.

Yeah, it's not an easy decision, but sometimes the cure is worse than the disease. We all make moves like this (give ourselves passive pieces out of fear of something else).

You can wait for the queen to come to h5 first, that way you can play Rh6 with a gain of tempo.

Mostly I wanted to introduce the idea of minor pieces defending pawns. You probably already realize that when a pawn defends a pawn it's a solid defense. This is because pawns are not valuable, and so other pieces are not willing to trade themselves. When a pawn is a defender it scares away all the more valuable attackers.

So logically, the next best defender is a minor piece (a knight or bishop)

This is probably not very useful for you at the moment, but as I said, I'm just giving off the cuff analysis.

Hmm, I can't find the game, I think it was a Steinitz game where he or his opponent had a pinned knight like this. As a result that player lost.

For example though