Taskinen wrote:
... protect all of your pieces. ...
Almost never happens in sensible play.
The more I play, the worse I get
Sort:
To be honest, its something you do, sexually. Yeah how stupid I am to say that, but in the two weeks I abstained from any act, even from self pleasure, I climbed to 1981, my highest. Check out my profile but after that I did, I became lower again.
Immortal 101: you can't say that on television! I once tried to suggest that chess was a symbolization of the Oedipal conflict, since while the whole point of the game is to attack the king, the king cannot actually be captured, because that would expose the underlying psychological complex too frankly, like a dream that becomes too vivid so that instead of protecting sleep from being disturbed by psychic conflicts, it awakens the person. If chess really does just symbolize the Oedipal conflict, that would also explain why males predominate among players, since the females would need a game where you try to take the queen, so that the Electra Complex could be acted out.
Oye. Psycho-babble warning.
I hate to even ponder the transformation of a mere pawn into a poweful oueen or the myriad other choices one may face. Oye indeed!
The real problem is translating theory into practice. For example, after having read two chess books and had 31 hours of training with a grandmaster, I know all the basic tactical and strategic principles of chess, yet my rating remains pitifully low. Interestingly, the advice I hear being given to players at my level or even somewhat above seems simple and even banal to me, so I assume that others at my level don't know the chess principles I do. So for some reason, the knowledge I have doesn't seem to constitute a resource I can mobilize for winning chess games.
Pay more attention, the more you relay on learned steps the less you actually think.
Immortal101 a écrit :
To be honest, its something you do, sexually. Yeah how stupid I am to say that, but in the two weeks I abstained from any act, even from self pleasure, I climbed to 1981, my highest. Check out my profile but after that I did, I became lower again.
Fake news ! your best rating was 1979 (blitz, your under that in all the rest)
Play less, study and analyse more seems to be the general drift?
Luitpoldt wrote:
The real problem is translating theory into practice. For example, after having read two chess books and had 31 hours of training with a grandmaster, I know all the basic tactical and strategic principles of chess, yet my rating remains pitifully low. ...
Which two books? What sort of games against humans were you playing?
Luitpoldt wrote:
... I've earned a good academic reputation in my field and work as a university professor. Even things that don't come easily to me, I always found that if I applied myself I could learn them, and get good return on the time I invested. But chess is something completely different, ...
The academic world has a considerable amount of evolved infrastructure to help people learn.
Luitpoldt wrote:
... I gave up playing humans back in December, ...
"... In order to maximize the benefits of [theory and practice], these two should be approached in a balanced manner. ... Play as many slow games (60 5 or preferably slower) as possible, ... The other side of improvement is theory. ... This can be reading books, taking lessons, watching videos, doing problems on software, etc. ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2002)https://web.archive.org/web/20140627084053/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman19.pdf
snoozingnewt wrote:
Immortal101 wrote:
To be honest, its something you do, sexually. Yeah how stupid I am to say that, but in the two weeks I abstained from any act, even from self pleasure, I climbed to 1981, my highest. Check out my profile but after that I did, I became lower again.
:cringe
The truth is just so cringey and that's why you stay below average.
Luitpoldt wrote:
Immortal 101: you can't say that on television! I once tried to suggest that chess was a symbolization of the Oedipal conflict, since while the whole point of the game is to attack the king, the king cannot actually be captured, because that would expose the underlying psychological complex too frankly, like a dream that becomes too vivid so that instead of protecting sleep from being disturbed by psychic conflicts, it awakens the person. If chess really does just symbolize the Oedipal conflict, that would also explain why males predominate among players, since the females would need a game where you try to take the queen, so that the Electra Complex could be acted out.
I don't care. Someone has just to say it. In fact, people just refuse to believe because they never have tried it. Theories are made to be rebutted logically rather than just shutting it down.
I don't think the problem is skill, the problem is psychology. If you have demonstrated a clear capacity to play at a higher level you may be self-sabotaging. People self-sabotage in countless ways in countless areas; weather its relationships, careers, projects, or games, everyone is susceptible. Try taking a step back, lay off chess for a little while. Often I find myself self-sabotaging when I am unhappy or depressed. I feel like my poor performance is a reflection of myself as a human being and since I already feel like I'm not a valuable person I self-sabotage because I am trying to affirm that thought pattern. If you feel like its getting you down and frustrated because you keep making stupid mistakes, forgive yourself and take a deep breath, its just a game after all. Play chess because its a fun outlet for problem solving, don't play it if you are basing your self worth on weather you win or loose each game.
Luitpoldt wrote:
After 31 hours of tutorial from a grandmaster, lots of chess videos studied, plus countless practice games, I am also getting steadily worse. I used to beat the chess computer at level 5 about a third of time, now I can never win against it, and I recently had to shift down to level 3, and now occasionally I even lose at level 1. How do I improve, by not playing and not studying?
How many hours have you been on before playing? What I have found that works for me best is playing first then going into my studies. No one plays good chess when tired.
I’ve been playing for years here and rating barely changed. That’s because I don’t study chess that much. It’s like cooking, just because you cook everyday doesn’t mean you become Gordon Ramsey.
Jan 16, 2021
0
#40
fellotransit wrote:
It is occurring like I'm actually getting worse at this game the more I play. My rating is terrible and diminishing, my stats on daily tactics are also dropping.
Is this normal?
GM's must have very very high IQ's because I feel really stupid.
**** I* totally feel your pain! I am an OK player, played in USCF, but I was playing so much here I think I got numb. Take a break for a few days. do a few puzzles. It will come back. 
I just looked at your latest loss, to highlight what I'm talking about.
Move 7: Your opponent backs of with bishop playing Bh5. You have two attackers against the bishop, your bishop and your queen. Your opponent has only one defender, the knight on f6. You can win a piece by capturing the bishop. Instead you put knight in front of your attackers, letting the bishop get off the hook.
Move 8: Opponent daringly moves queen to f5, see the problem? You could play pawn to g4 - attacking both the queen and the bishop. You would win a piece, with just cost of one pawn.
Next moves you launch a weird knight hop attack and sacrifice your pony against the f7 pawn. Somehow you end up winning the exchange, because your opponent doesn't move rook out of the way.
Move 13: Good stuff, you finally hit him with that fork. That will show him!
Next sequence is surprisingly accurate...
Move 20: You are forced to block the bishop check with your queen. Your opponent refuses to trade his bishop to your queen. Instead he moves another piece and leaves his bishop hanging. You take it, good stuff!
Move 29: You have a mate in one, if you take the pawn on e6 with your queen. Your rook is protected by the bishop.
The ending I guess was a time scramble, but you had multiple mating opportunities, but you just kept randomly checking your opponent. Opponent wins on time.
By simply following these two rules: 1) have your pieces protected by more defenders than opponent has attackers against them 2) take opponents pieces if they have less defenders than you have attackers, you should easily start winning a lot of games. And don't trade your knight for a pawn, knight is a good piece!