Studying GM Games

I had a really great moment while studying today. I set up my board and watched a video on the 1963 Fischer v Larry Evans match. I played along with the match while watching the lesson, taking notes and trying to figure out what their next move may be and comparing it to mine, finding the reason why my moves were poor. This took me 3 hours to go through it (obviously not in great depth. I could have spent the day or more studying it). I did this again, then went to my games.

Already, I am "better" able to see tactics and strategy. I can see good moves better and plan out a rough strategy around the tactics finally (which I have been struggling with) . Anyway, I have been playing constantly, reading books, etc., but this was the best 3h of studying I have done to date. I feel like that three hours, studying that game the way I did, helped me more than reading the books did over a two week period.

Maybe for newer players like me, this can help. I am vry happy I decided to study this way today and not focus so much on playing.

I think studying like that can benefit any chess player. 

My 3 tips for all players to improve is 1.study endgame 2. Study Tactics 3. Go over master games

:)

You just discovered one of the many ways that professional chess players study. Personally, I found that going over Grandmaster games with books was extremely beneficial. I believe that the combination of the kinesthetic interaction with the pieces and the external analytical opinion of experts allows one to learn a lot more than from just playing a game of chess or just reading a book. 

I generally focus on my own games for deep study because any mistakes made in the game directly pertain or pertained to me. When I miss a certain mating idea that could have won me a nice game, firstly I have proof of something I need to work on, and secondly the idea has a lot more meaning to me because it has a personal history. After all, if one can diagnose what is causing their losses, and get rid of them, then you won't lose anymore!

I used to study grandmaster games at a lower level though, back when it was harder for me to figure out ideas myself, and I do think it was pretty helpful. I used to just annotate a GM game with no comments, as if I were teaching someone, even though I was often under 1500 when I did this! I think now though, at the point where I am, I can generally figure out (ok, maybe approximate is a better word!) the truth of the position, eventually, myself, with the help of houdini (using computers can be great for finding missed resources and ideas, as long as you are also thinking about the position). I think every position in chess is a puzzle, and if you just logically break it down, step by step, you can learn new concepts, without being a grandmaster.

Anyway, at this point the stuff that occurs in my games seems more relevant to analyze for me, because it tells me exactly what my problems are. And there are always interesting positions to explore, maybe positions that could have occurred in a game of mine but didn't. Even if you are a lower rated player, pretty much any position you reach will have a lot of complicated, interesting ideas in them, even if you didn't find them in the game

Right! I saw a documentary about Fischer not so long ago and he had a book and a 12''x12'' (or a pocket) chess board set up. Reading...playing through the games... I figured that reading by itself is NOT helpful (for me at least) because lower level players cannot see the plays in their head or go over the multiple variations. I thought I was learning this way, but I wasn't. So, if Fischer used the method, then I should too, right! Man...its so much more fun that way. I can see this as my stepping stone to the next level.

Yes, if you are going to read books, it's good to think about the position yourself first, come up with an opinion of the best idea, etc, and only then compare it to the move played or the annotator's comments. That way you can see what's wrong with your thinking. If you just read a book passively you make take in some information, but you are not being actively involved in the learning.

As soon as I get better at seeing the positions, I want to try this with my games too. I'll need to buy an engine program for that though, since I wont know if what I am seeing is right or not. For now, for me, this is great.

Yes I love going through master games. I have the board set up now in fact, as I do at this time of night. I'm going through Chernev's Logical Chess, which is a move by move annotation of master games. After about move 4 I look for good candidate moves and then check the actual move played. The benefit of Chernev's book is that every single move is given a reason - obviously yes but in some annotated collections you can get 5 or 6 moves by each side with no reasoning. Anyway I'm finding this very useful study all round. Depending on what time I've got I can go through the games at my own pace, usually about an hour on average. Sometimes I find the game in a computer database and go through it online as this saves time, but I do like to use the board. This I feel is definitely helping me along with going through my own longer games (I do that with my chess coach) and tactics study. I wonder what the most effective time spent on one game is though?

Hmmm NaturalProduct. I keep that "Eng.... " thing on the low. That is a curse word around here. A sure way to hear rumors about your playing skills that will last for months as players here hate to lose and will do anything to get revenge. 

I have seen many players here exit. Only way i seen them come back was play in tournaments to justify their wins. Not sure if there is another way. I prefer the old fashion way they did in the past. May take longer but i think  in the long run i will have less problems with game when me and my opponent reach the same level of play.

I agree 100%

Wow. O.K. Thanks for the advice. I didn't know it was that bad. I can stick to my coaches advice for my games I guess. He has helped me improve a lot.

Mike

I personally believe that a world is available to those not afraid of getting their boards out and going through their own games, and GM games that isn't available to those only looking throught games in a book or online. I believe that any book can be implemented to much more effect with a board set up, so you have it in front of you in reality. You can (I can) visualize so much more clearly on that board than a 2d board on a computer. I'm a bit older, though, so that may just be me. So, to the OP, I say congrats, I believe you are on a fantastic path. You are doing the work needed to become better. Funny, how the work is enjoyable, eh?

Yeah they have a group for that here. They fight like cat and dogs. They complain, complain and complain. It is really about popularity and who is on the Leader boards and which group is currently #1 in a league here.

We need to get back to just playing. No stats on rank, wins, trophies. Just login and play games. That would fix everything. Back to having pure fun.

My wife is handling it O.K. I guess. I have been playing/studying 12-16 h a day the past 2 weeks (on my vacation). "Mike, Do you want to spend some time with me...?" and "Your obsessed" are a couple things I used to hear before she gave up, lol. Never had more fun working so hard on something! Then again its back to work for me Wednesday so the fun has to stop. I'll be back to playing 3 - 4h a day. Have my first tournament in April so...got to get ready.

Wow that's great, good dedication. I put in 4-6 hours ish a day and I thought that was good. Do you always spend around three hours going through the master games? I wonder what is best spending longer on one game or fitting more in? Regardless I find it great fun going through games, some moves are just pure art - even small subtle moves I am pleased with (for example gaining a free tempo that excites me).

If i was going to a tournament i want to know who won it the last 5 years and who did they beat to win! There is a chance you will face on of them early in the tournament. Getting a copy of those games could help also.

Like i find some sites where they favor e4 openings over d4 openings hint hint. Look for games with traps as they will want to move on early to next round. Hate to lose the game on your 7th move. Know what i mean. Your the walking dead....... Dead man walking. Hate to have the guy smirk at the other players like you were an easy win.

Excellent advice! Never thought of it.....I need to contact the guy who runs the chess league to find out what I can.

Mike

I do spend a lot of time with studying methods that works for me. So, yes, I will be spending considerable time on masters games. Your question about studying one game in depth or more, generally: I tell my students "When you study, study the topic it until you master it, only then move on to the next topic." If not, you're using what I call "the shotgun effect". Studying a little of everything and learning/mastering nothing. Its better to know one game really well, then 2 superficially. My opinion...

Isnt that kinda curious when a wife suddenly stops pestering a husband who works on chess 12-16 hrs a day? I wonder what shes doing while the husband concentrates 12- 16hrs. a day at chess. Just wondering (thinking aloud) no insults intended.

I've tried going through master games and I couldn't relate to them, the type of game me and my opponents play is completely different, i'd rather study 1200-1400 rated games