the worst game ever!:)
Sort:
Chess is the most frustrating and driving me nuts game ever. I try to follow the basics and it works the first 10 moves, then it goes nuts. The more I play the more stupid I feel.
"... for those that want to be as good as they can be, they'll have to work hard.
Play opponents who are better than you … . Learn basic endgames. Create a simple opening repertoire (understanding the moves are far more important than memorizing them). Study tactics. And pick up tons of patterns. That’s the drumbeat of success. ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (December 27, 2018)
https://www.chess.com/article/view/little-things-that-help-your-game
https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-to-start-out-in-chess
https://www.chess.com/news/view/a-new-years-resolution-improve-your-chess-with-new-lessons
"... 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
"... If it’s instruction, you look for an author that addresses players at your level (buying something that’s too advanced won’t help you at all). This means that a classic book that is revered by many people might not be useful for you. ..." - IM Jeremy Silman (2015)
https://www.chess.com/article/view/the-best-chess-books-ever
Here are some reading possibilities that I often mention:
Simple Attacking Plans by Fred Wilson (2012)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708090402/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review874.pdf
http://dev.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Simple-Attacking-Plans-77p3731.htm
Logical Chess: Move by Move by Irving Chernev (1957)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708104437/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/logichess.pdf
The Most Instructive Games of Chess Ever Played by Irving Chernev (1965)
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/most-instructive-games-of-chess-ever-played/
http://store.doverpublications.com/0486273024.html
Winning Chess by Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld (1948)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708093415/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review919.pdf
Back to Basics: Tactics by Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708233537/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review585.pdf
https://www.chess.com/article/view/book-review-back-to-basics-tactics
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5856bd64ff7c50433c3803db/t/5895fc0ca5790af7895297e4/1486224396755/btbtactics2excerpt.pdf
Discovering Chess Openings by GM John Emms (2006)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627114655/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen91.pdf
Openings for Amateurs by Pete Tamburro (2014)
http://kenilworthian.blogspot.com/2014/05/review-of-pete-tamburros-openings-for.html
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/openings-for-amateurs/
https://www.mongoosepress.com/catalog/excerpts/openings_amateurs.pdf
Chess Endgames for Kids by Karsten Müller (2015)
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/chess-endgames-for-kids/
http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/Chess_Endgames_for_Kids.pdf
A Guide to Chess Improvement by Dan Heisman (2010)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708105628/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review781.pdf
Studying Chess Made Easy by Andrew Soltis (2009)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708090448/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review750.pdf
Seirawan stuff:
http://seagaard.dk/review/eng/bo_beginner/ev_winning_chess.asp?KATID=BO&ID=BO-Beginner
http://www.nystar.com/tamarkin/review1.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627132508/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen173.pdf
https://www.chess.com/article/view/book-review-winning-chess-endings
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708092617/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review560.pdf
kindaspongey it all sounds easy just study more but I do that...it is jut hard to memorise all of it. I tried books but the more I read the more confoused i get
Perhaps, you were attempting to use a book that was not the right level for you. What was it?
Feb 8, 2019
0
#5
Purposefully throwing away games is not the answer.
I at first thought you where a troll but after seeing that you only recently started to throw away pieces with every move I figure you are getting fat up with chess and thinking of quitting and finding a weird way to vent.
For starters. It seems that you are only playing blitz. Try something longer, like 15|10. And when you play a longer game, try to use all of your time. 20% of your time should be spent on the first 15 moves. So for at 15|10 minute game you should spend at least 3 and a half minutes on the first 15 moves. If you spend more, that may be too much, and if you find yourself spending more than that on most of your games then you should consider playing a game that is even longer than 15|10.
I was once like you. I used to lose like you. I used to not know what to do when someone plays d5 after e4...???? I used to not know what to do when someone plays the Kings Gambit...??? The interesting thing is back when I started to play like you there wasn't a whole lot of information about chess. For starters there was no chess.com, there was no tactics trainer, and there wasn't a sea of opening books like there is now, save for the classics. I actually never even thought of getting a book to learn how to play chess better. I was just playing to mind the time. I had to spend 12 hours a night on a desk doing basically nothing for my job. Like you I was good against people that knew nothing about chess but how to move the pieces. But, when I played against someone my skill level, I was usually dead meat.
The way I got better is not really a good way to get better. I learned by playing someone over 1800 rating over and over again. Such a learning environment is not ideal, and I think I may have developed some psychological issues from playing someone much higher rated than me all the time.
So I can't tell you how I got better and expect you to get better by following my footsteps, but what I can tell you, which everyone knows anyway I am just filling you in, that at least some of the time, you should spend playing people around 200-300 points higher than you. So for you, that will be someone at around 1100 playing strength. Sometimes you should play people that are a lot worse than you, probably 10% of the time, maybe 200-300 points lower.
Anyone reading this should know that I am getting the technical information from my post from a book, written by Dan Heisman, called, "A Guide to Chess Improvement." You can learn more about what I am talking about and more from that book.
But you may not need that book just yet... For starters, like Spongy said, what books have you tried? It would help to know what books you've consulted before we jump to any conclusion here.
Given that I was there before, and know where you are coming from, and know my mistakes, I can tell you that you are going to wade through the mud for awhile before you get better. We've all been there. If you are interested in some free resources to look at check out my post in the improvement section, it should still be close to the top. IMBacon's lists are good to know and is a good practice to start doing, but there are a lot of things other than just changing your thinking process that you need to do in order to become a better chess player. How important is chess to you? You do know that you probably will never make any money off it right? You do know that even if you become a master, this isn't a substitute for a job?
ChessTempo
Rh5 and there is a pin. I didn't see this move, instead, I saw another move, Be4. Be4 still wins material but the win is not as pronounced when you play that move. Why did I make that mistake? Simple. I didn't consider other possibilities. I wasn't looking at the whole board. I didn't look for the "simple" move. You see even someone that is a few hundred points above 800 has the same problems as you. This is something you are going to have to work on for the rest of the time you spend learning the game of chess.
Your openings are not the best, but like IMBacon said it's not the opening that you have problems with. But then again it's always good to study all phases of the game. Since you had problems with knowing what to do when playing e4, and having your opponent play d5, my advice to you, is to look up that opening, and see what other people played while playing that opening. 9 times out of 10 people who ask questions on these forums can find out easily themselves if they just look, and I think this is the case here, unless, you have no idea how to look up moves to games people have played in the past??? you also have bad responses to the Kings Gambit. The problem is that you are learning d4 openings, which are a sea of opening theory... I would say change nothing about your opening right now and just focus on trying to apply what IMBacon is trying to teach you by playing games with longer time controls so you have more time to think, and start to try and notice what your opponent is threatening, wheither is threat is a real threat, and the consequences of his moves. Also, like IMbacon said, always look for your checks captures and threats, in that order, if there are none try and develop pieces or gain space with pawns or something else on the list that IMBacon has. For the most part, IMBacon is right, you need to start doing those things he mentioned, and not only do that, but go over master games, and trying to look for the threats and consequences of their moves, etc, etc, before you look at what the book says on why they made that move? If you do that, combined with playing, and actually thinking about your moves, then your rating will soar. A lot about blunder control is keeping in your mind the attacked, defended, and unprotected squares on the board. So every time you make a move, consider the question, "Is This Move Safe?"
I hope you don't quit, chess can be a very good pasttime. Of course if you quit, then I hope you find something else to fill it with. Good luck with everything!
Haha
Daybreak57 napisał:
ChessTempo
hi, thank you for all the background. I do consider IMBacon advice a great value but my problem is not the time. I played some 30 min games to allow myself thinking. The problem i see is that i can not see the whole board and fail to analyse all possibilities. it seems impossible to see few moves forward and choose the right scenario. how to manage that?
Purposefully throwing away games is not the answer.
I at first thought you where a troll but after seeing that you only recently started to throw away pieces with every move I figure you are getting fat up with chess and thinking of quitting and finding a weird way to vent.
For starters. It seems that you are only playing blitz. Try something longer, like 15|10. And when you play a longer game, try to use all of your time. 20% of your time should be spent on the first 15 moves. So for at 15|10 minute game you should spend at least 3 and a half minutes on the first 15 moves. If you spend more, that may be too much, and if you find yourself spending more than that on most of your games then you should consider playing a game that is even longer than 15|10.
I was once like you. I used to lose like you. I used to not know what to do when someone plays d5 after e4...???? I used to not know what to do when someone plays the Kings Gambit...??? The interesting thing is back when I started to play like you there wasn't a whole lot of information about chess. For starters there was no chess.com, there was no tactics trainer, and there wasn't a sea of opening books like there is now, save for the classics. I actually never even thought of getting a book to learn how to play chess better. I was just playing to mind the time. I had to spend 12 hours a night on a desk doing basically nothing for my job. Like you I was good against people that knew nothing about chess but how to move the pieces. But, when I played against someone my skill level, I was usually dead meat.
The way I got better is not really a good way to get better. I learned by playing someone over 1800 rating over and over again. Such a learning environment is not ideal, and I think I may have developed some psychological issues from playing someone much higher rated than me all the time.
So I can't tell you how I got better and expect you to get better by following my footsteps, but what I can tell you, which everyone knows anyway I am just filling you in, that at least some of the time, you should spend playing people around 200-300 points higher than you. So for you, that will be someone at around 1100 playing strength. Sometimes you should play people that are a lot worse than you, probably 10% of the time, maybe 200-300 points lower.
Anyone reading this should know that I am getting the technical information from my post from a book, written by Dan Heisman, called, "A Guide to Chess Improvement." You can learn more about what I am talking about and more from that book.
But you may not need that book just yet... For starters, like Spongy said, what books have you tried? It would help to know what books you've consulted before we jump to any conclusion here.
Given that I was there before, and know where you are coming from, and know my mistakes, I can tell you that you are going to wade through the mud for awhile before you get better. We've all been there. If you are interested in some free resources to look at check out my post in the improvement section, it should still be close to the top. IMBacon's lists are good to know and is a good practice to start doing, but there are a lot of things other than just changing your thinking process that you need to do in order to become a better chess player. How important is chess to you? You do know that you probably will never make any money off it right? You do know that even if you become a master, this isn't a substitute for a job?
ChessTempo
Rh5 and there is a pin. I didn't see this move, instead, I saw another move, Be4. Be4 still wins material but the win is not as pronounced when you play that move. Why did I make that mistake? Simple. I didn't consider other possibilities. I wasn't looking at the whole board. I didn't look for the "simple" move. You see even someone that is a few hundred points above 800 has the same problems as you. This is something you are going to have to work on for the rest of the time you spend learning the game of chess.
Your openings are not the best, but like IMBacon said it's not the opening that you have problems with. But then again it's always good to study all phases of the game. Since you had problems with knowing what to do when playing e4, and having your opponent play d5, my advice to you, is to look up that opening, and see what other people played while playing that opening. 9 times out of 10 people who ask questions on these forums can find out easily themselves if they just look, and I think this is the case here, unless, you have no idea how to look up moves to games people have played in the past??? you also have bad responses to the Kings Gambit. The problem is that you are learning d4 openings, which are a sea of opening theory... I would say change nothing about your opening right now and just focus on trying to apply what IMBacon is trying to teach you by playing games with longer time controls so you have more time to think, and start to try and notice what your opponent is threatening, wheither is threat is a real threat, and the consequences of his moves. Also, like IMbacon said, always look for your checks captures and threats, in that order, if there are none try and develop pieces or gain space with pawns or something else on the list that IMBacon has. For the most part, IMBacon is right, you need to start doing those things he mentioned, and not only do that, but go over master games, and trying to look for the threats and consequences of their moves, etc, etc, before you look at what the book says on why they made that move? If you do that, combined with playing, and actually thinking about your moves, then your rating will soar. A lot about blunder control is keeping in your mind the attacked, defended, and unprotected squares on the board. So every time you make a move, consider the question, "Is This Move Safe?"
I hope you don't quit, chess can be a very good pasttime. Of course if you quit, then I hope you find something else to fill it with. Good luck with everything!
Feb 8, 2019
0
#8
pwaszut wrote:
Use your aggressive feelings boy, let the hate flow through you...
Chess is the most frustrating and driving me nuts game ever. I try to follow the basics and it works the first 10 moves, then it goes nuts. The more I play the more stupid I feel.
pwaszut wrote"
... The problem i see is that i can not see the whole board and fail to analyse all possibilities. it seems impossible to see few moves forward and choose the right scenario. how to manage that?
I think that nearly everyone has trouble like that in the beginning. People improve at different speeds, but they generally improve with practice. Probably, it would help to do some sort of work on tactics.
https://www.chess.com/lessons/course/winning-with-tactics
Winning Chess by Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld (1948)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708093415/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review919.pdf
Back to Basics: Tactics by Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708233537/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review585.pdf
https://www.chess.com/article/view/book-review-back-to-basics-tactics
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5856bd64ff7c50433c3803db/t/5895fc0ca5790af7895297e4/1486224396755/btbtactics2excerpt.pdf
Awhile ago, I watched a rerun of an old TV cop show called Hawaii 5-0. The chief said something like this to his underlings: "I don't care if you have to search every garbage can in this city, I want you to find" something-or-other. After a commercial, one of the underlings said, "We checked all the cans and this is what we found." The chief picked up one of the objects and said that it was exactly what they needed. I think chess (life?) is a lot like that, except that the searching doesn't happen during a commercial. You have to do it yourself.