roadblock

Singling out a low-rated player in a video would not be cool, so I really hope @gothamchess does not make a video. I mean how would you feel if it happened to you?

Hehe are you sure he's not trolling you a little bit?

But seriously it's so hard to put oneself in the shoes of a beginner with a few months of experience, I'm sure there must be some nuggets of information that we grapped a while ago but that could help a lot in conjunction with fixing the tactical errors. 

Dude *I'm* a beginner with a few months of experience. I've made dramatic ELO increases purely because I accept that in order to improve, I need to take good advice, whether that's from videos/books, individual people who are better than me, or researching chess principles. Doker point-blank refuses to do any of those things because he's decided that there is a secret unconventional way to play chess which breaks all the rules, and he's going to discover it. He, and I *quote*, doesn't want to 'play like everyone else'. It doesn't matter to him that the best computers generating decision trees for every possible move, tens of moves ahead, all mathematically confirm the established opening principles. It doesn't matter to him that centuries of intelligent, talented, creative chess players have tried and tested alternatives and also settled on those opening principles. He has decided he knows better.

People keep trying to help him like he's just forgetful and needs reminding of the basics every 5 minutes, but he doesn't. He has heard all of the advice, analysis and appeals to common sense from numerous people with an understanding of the game far beyond him, and he's decided that Doker Knows Better. So yes, of course the information he's been given would help him. But is he going to absorb any of it whatsoever? Not on your life. Not because he's old, because he doesn't want to. He has repeatedly said that he wants to find some elusive opening which works in all circumstances and will make him good at chess without having to learn anything. He has complained that Capablanca's book gave him principles it is his job to follow, instead of giving him step by step instructions on how to play perfectly. He has such a profound lack of understanding of the inherently strategic nature of the game of chess, that he genuinely believes and has insisted that there is a hidden formula or sequence to play well in all circumstances. That is, without having to learn how to defend against certain attacks, or how to keep your king safe or pieces defended, and has said that he ISN'T INTERESTED in anything which isn't a foolproof method to ensure that his opponents don't do any of the things which he can't be bothered to learn how to respond to. He doesn't want to have to learn and he doesn't need people to keep trying to teach him, he is actively searching for a way to win and feel good without having to learn.

I've worked with older people for most of my adult life, and part of treating them like humans is calling them out on their s***. Doker isn't just insulting the game with the way he is approaching it, he's insulting all the people who have repeatedly, patiently and kindly tried to help him. Flame me if you like, but after 10 months of taking the lazy, egotistical route, you're off your rocker if you think he's going to start listening now.

And yes I'll go and make a cup of tea now

wow you are a hateful person i see - i guess i put a burr  up your rear end and iam sorry -- i do appreciate all the help i have gotten over the last couple of months a lot i tried to put in to practice some work with me some do not -- all is greatly appreciated by me  -- i do not write this blog as a troll operation - i do it to pass my  days i have left-  and read back what my  my thoughts where -- i don't insult anyone nor chess as a whole -- i do admit i am stub bard old guy who believes there is a key to this game -- trying to find that key -- is my quest rightly or wrongly -- i am spending  time to not run the beaten path but find a new one --- if that explains my journey  i hope so - i am impressed you wrote and took so much time to criticize me for my actions -- it was well written and made a lot of valid points -- which i will take in --  i guess i should thank-you as i made me realize i should stop the  moaning about my lossing and just state facts 

like  today Sunday morning -- i lost all my games - do to major blunders late in the game on my part - also my opponents just didn't do what i thought they would do-- thats a joke i know --

well i will try a couple games  now then stop  till late this afternoon -- i going for a walk --the day is very nice and walks a good for my legs which are getting weaker - so a brisk walk may help my brain  straighten up   looking  around  and up as spring just starts to unfold crokes are out now  love that purple colour - so        bye for now  

Lol okay, maybe I'm a hateful person, or maybe I know your type and I'm just tired of all these nice people putting themselves out so you can repeatedly ignore their expertise for the sake of your ego. Enjoy your "quest" for the "key" to chess.

yes thank-you--- and lets be done with this nonsense and just play chess

Monday afternoon was a good day a couple wins in a row -- not great wins mainly blunders of my opponents gave me the win -- but i am trying something new and so far it seems to be working -- but only against those that blunder alot -- any body that doesn't blunder alot i guess iam done for -- but i will keep plugin along see you tonight after supper

doker bohm

But there isn't. Why not just try to get better normally?

Well Doker, I wish at least you had the courage to be upfront with all the people who try to help you and actually admit to them that you're not actually trying to improve, and aren't planning on taking their guidance or any of the mathematical, proven evidence about what types of moves are good in chess on-board. That's why I'm so annoyed. You brush all these people off and let them continue wasting their time trying to help you- the number of game analyses that one person did just for you to ignore most of them and barely give lip service to the rest.

People pay big bucks for the kind of one on one coaching you turn your nose up at, so you seriously need to start telling them directly that you're just looking for a trick to go from zero to hero so that they don't keep trying to teach you to actually play chess. You had people rooting for you and eager to help you, thinking that you had the humility to learn. There is no key. If you don't believe any of us, ask stockfish. You're not cutting a new path, you're banging your head against a brick wall.

what is your problem are you trolling me or something i have stated many times i appreciate all the help i get just iam going on a different way to beat this game -- not your way but mine -- i don't brush any one off and respond personally to each who have given help - what else do you want me to do - i don't understand why it brothers you so much that i don't follow your path to playing chess ??? i don't have a lot of time left and need to find a different way to at least win a few games -- and if am banging my head against a brick wall old dogs really don't change and its been my way all my life not to tread the beaten path -- to find the back door - iam sure there is one out here - just trying to beat the clock to find it -- by the way just so show you what i know i don't know who stockfish is ?is it a engine to cheat or something -- or show you moves maybe -- thats great -- but iam trying to do this with out using mechanical or software help -- i don't even have a cell phone or twitter facebook accounts -- jut me and my brain whats left of it trying to play a game i can't walk away from

by the way today wed morning not going so well more losses than wins - but big storm coming in a few hours so i have to get to honey dew lists things done before that rolls in then i will get back to playing maybe early this afternoon going to try another way to start a non moving system making the other player come to me -- who knows

AHH, well if you don't know about chess engines then no wonder you think you can find an undiscovered secret to chess lol

Stockfish is a chess 'engine' or computer which calculates every possible continuation of moves from a position in order to mathematically prove whether a move is good or bad. It's not for cheating, it's a tool used to help us to understand chess more deeply, since it sees and recommends possible move sequences which even the top grandmasters don't spot. Since stockfish uses mathematics instead of opinions or conventional wisdom, by studying its recommendations, we can find out what the objective best moves are and compare them to commonly used openings. That way, "chess theory" can evolve, players develop 'sharper' lines with new attacking ideas by modifying existing openings etc. And so it goes, chess theory is indeed evolving, by the combined efforts of GMs and stockfish, and trends come and go, being tried and tested by the top players to see whether they can, in practice, secure the advantages which stockfish says are present based on its calculations for a novel move.

By using stockfish to assess possible openings, such as the ones which you can come up with as well as the established, named openings, we can discover what *types* of moves are good. Of course, it confirms obvious things, like how hanging your queen is a bad move and taking a free piece is a good move. But it also has mathematically proven that moves in the opening which take space in the centre, develop all the pieces, and castling, result in better positions into the midgame. By "better positions", I mean things like not having doubled pawns (which are harder to defend and harder to get to the other side to promote to queens), and having a clear plan to go and attack the enemy king without your own pieces being in bad positions or stuck in your own way. Chess engines like stockfish have mathematically proven that the common wisdom about openings (which was originally discovered by the trial and error of many talented people) is correct, and that if you follow it, you are statistically much more likely to win

The point is- yes you can keep trying out different strategies for the opening by trial and error if you want to. Even if we didn't have stockfish, this would be a bit silly considering that expert players have done what you're doing for centuries and still ended up landing on the same opening principles for achieving consistently good positions. But stockfish has actually proven that moves which don't follow the opening principles are almost always bad moves. I say "almost" because there are rare situations where the opponent blunders early and you can win material or get an early attack by deviating from the opening principles. But those are the exception, rather than the rule. For example, you have been recently opening your games with what is called a "rook lift", before developing your other pieces, and stockfish says that based on its extensive calculations this is a bad move. That means that by playing it, you are actively worsening your own chances of getting a good middlegame position and increasing your chances of losing material. You can find that our for yourself by clicking the game analysis button on any of your games where you did this. Since stockfish always says this is a bad move statistically speaking, we can derive the general principle from it: "rook lifting before you complete development is a bad move". Amazing, with modern technology you can save so much of your own time by eliminating bad strategies based on objective evidence rather than based on your own games against 100-200s.

Nonetheless, even the fact that the opening principles should in some specific cases be broken, demonstrates that there is no one secret method to chess to guarantee you to always be winning (or never losing) after the opening, because which move is best changes based on what your opponent does. We know there is no key, because we know it's not possible for there to be one. Whilst with lots of practice it's possible to predict your opponent's moves to some degree, it's no guarantee.

Without being stockfish yourself, it's impossible to play the best responding move on every move, when it changes based on the opponent's move. There are 18 possible first moves for white, and then 18 possible first responding moves for black. That means there are already 324 different positions possible just by move 2, and memorising the mathematically best move options for every possible move the opponent will play, would get very difficult. Stockfish can do it, but we can't.

Named openings are designed to either give you an attacking advantage in some area (such as the Sicilian or the English), or to give you a solid defense which makes it difficult for your king to be attacked (such as the London system). None of them are comprised exclusively of the best moves on each turn, but they each hope to confer an advantage out of the opening.

I would really recommend that before putting your time and energy into looking for a strategy which works in all circumstances, you try to understand that as well as the best moves changing wildly based on what move the opponent just played, the best way to play also VARIES, based on things like what type of moves the opponent is playing, what style of player this particular opponent is, and what plan you want to follow for ultimately attacking. You only start to really get a grip on these themes and start to alter how you play an opening based on what kind of moves your opponent is making, beyond a certain level of base chess competence (around 1500 ELO), because it takes that much experience to be able to quickly recognise what your opponent's plan is and adapt to it, to be able to formulate attacking ideas, etc. They're difficult things to do.

To sum up- stockfish has helped us to understand that there is no key to chess, some strategy of opening which works against everything, because it recommends you play different types of moves depending on what the opponent is playing. Again, Stockfish proves its recommendations using statistics where it checks every possible response far into the future and then reports how much of an advantage or disadvantage you would get by playing a certain move. Its recommendations aren't an opinion, they're objective, mathematically proven facts.

The fact that the best strategy varies based on what your opponent does is actually part of what makes the rest of us enjoy chess so much- so much to learn and experience and explore. Chess is a strategy game of pattern recognition and quick adaptation to the moves and plans of your opponent. Even besides being against the spirit and the whole point of the game, it has been proven that there is no way to play which gives you an advantage no matter what the opponent does. You have to adapt. The closest thing you could get is maybe the London system, which can be played as white against pretty much any opening moves black chooses- it almost always results in a safe, fortified king and your pieces on good squares. But of course you would still have to adapt and deviate from the opening if black does something crazy.

I'm afraid there's no shortcut. If you want to be good at chess, you'll just have to learn how to play chess. I hope you do decide to do that. It would be a joy to everyone to see the enthusiasm you'd gain after even just a few weeks of learning to play according to the mathematically proven principles. I gained like 200 ELO in my first month of doing that and never went back down again and it felt great. It still took time to learn to move more slowly and check for blunders, but with patience I managed it. I learned how to defend against scholar's mate and early queen attacks, I learned to pay attention to what my opponent wants instead of just what I wanted, I felt my brain making new connections every single day. I didn't just take instruction on everything, I mostly learned by looking at what I did wrong in each game, learning from my mistakes and striving not to repeat the exact same ones. It's not about copying what other people do, it's much more difficult than that.

Doker, you spent the last 10 months gaining no ELO at all because of not trying to learn from each game you play and refusing to follow the opening principles. ELO being a measurement of your competence in chess, you shouldn't be satisfied with that result. I gained 750 ELO in 5 months and gained some small understanding of chess strategy and tactics because I took advice, tried to follow it consistently, and ultimately came to recognise for myself precisely WHY that advice was good. I don't think there's any more information I can give you, but I will check back in on the thread in another 5 months. If I have continued to improve my chess, by building my mental bank of pattern recognition and sharpening my tactical awareness and opening knowledge, and you are still in the basement, then I hope you will finally consider changing your approach to the game.

TL : DR

whats tlr ?????????????????????????

thursday morning more slipage again more losses than wins -- maybe afternnoon will be different -- storm i was worried about the other day was a dud -- only light rain -- thank goodness others where not so fortunate i will speak to a higher power about that later

still sounds like a cheating device to me -- but then iam what iam -- i just play chess -- looking for the the holy grail

well one more win than loss here tonight thursday late late -- off to bed morning might be better too tired to continue

thought it would better but not soo this morning one more loss than win - maybe this afternnon maybe

Using Stockfish during the game is indeed cheating.

Using it when the game is done in order to figure some things out, is one of the ways to get better.

another losing sat morning plus my chat got banned -- losing so much i get hot headed and swear at myself of course in chat -- guess i can't use the word mother @# lesson learned will try a couple more- back down at bottom can't do any worse today 100 again after i read all the forum posts which i do every day -- thanks for the info on stockfish - this always amazes me - when you lose to rehash what you already know you did wrong -- you see the move a milli second before your opponent pulls the trigger you know what you did was wrong -- i guess this software shows you what at that precise moment you should have done instaed of making the wrong move -- guess i should try that firgure how to use it -- where do you get this program ???-

sunday morning two wins one loss -- guess its ok 174 now-- so all is not lost ---yet-- back to the grind for two more games then off outside weather prefect right now need to rake leaves near the front door before easter brunch starts but after leaves will need a slight nap -- 4pm today have big poker game start-- figures!!!! right before other kids come for easter dinner -- but big bucks so will have to play with grandkids jumping on my lap maybe they will make better desicions than me ? who knows ?-- won a free ticket to get in this so no pressure hope i make the money cut so see you later maybe tonight when i get knocked out of this tourney and back to chess ---have a great easter visit with your relatives and outlaws if any

MONDAY MORNING more losses than wins - playing at this 175 to 200 level much better thinking players less likely to blunder as much as me maybe this afternoon will be better hope so