Preggo_Basashi wrote:
... Heisman's Back to Basics: Tactics
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
What should I do to improve my game?
Sort:
Preggo_Basashi wrote:
For openings, wiki articles and free databases (where you can look up the most common moves) are plenty. So I agree you don't need to worry about openings. (You shouldn't be clueless, but you also don't need to buy repertoire books). ...
There is more than one way to aim for something between "clueless" and "repertoire books". One can, for example, play over some games from a book like First Steps Queen's Gambit.
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/7652.pdf
"... Overall, I would advise most players to stick to a fairly limited range of openings, and not to worry about learning too much by heart. ..." - FM Steve Giddins (2008)
"... Once you identify an opening you really like and wish to learn in more depth, then should you pick up a book on a particular opening or variation. Start with ones that explain the opening variations and are not just meant for advanced players. ..." - Dan Heisman (2001)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140626180930/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman06.pdf
"... For inexperienced players, I think the model that bases opening discussions on more or less complete games that are fully annotated, though with a main focus on the opening and early middlegame, is the ideal. ..." - FM Carsten Hansen (2010)
"The way I suggest you study this book is to play through the main games once, relatively quickly, and then start playing the variation in actual games. Playing an opening in real games is of vital importance - without this kind of live practice it is impossible to get a 'feel' for the kind of game it leads to. There is time enough later for involvement with the details, after playing your games it is good to look up the line." - GM Nigel Davies (2005)
"... Review each of your games, identifying opening (and other) mistakes with the goal of not repeatedly making the same mistake. ... It is especially critical not to continually fall into opening traps – or even lines that result in difficult positions ..." - NM Dan Heisman (2007)
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627062646/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman81.pdf
Also, it is perhaps worth noting that even repertoire books are not nearly all the same. Moret seems to me to have written with the idea of being helpful to someone like NPAK15.
https://www.newinchess.com/media/wysiwyg/product_pdf/9033.pdf
https://chessbookreviews.wordpress.com/tag/vincent-moret/
BobbyTalparov wrote:
... Seirawan's "Winning Chess Strategies" ...
http://seagaard.dk/review/eng/bo_beginner/ev_winning_chess.asp?KATID=BO&ID=BO-Beginner
AnhVanT wrote:
... John Nunn's Understanding Middle Games ...
https://web.archive.org/web/20140627012322/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/hansen154.pdf
http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/Understanding_Chess_Middlegames.pdf
BobbyTalparov wrote:
AnhVanT wrote:
The videos are good enough to reach 1700+, if you have [the] potential.
I disagree with this. Watching videos is passive learning. It is helpful to reinforce or introduce material, but you need active learning to advance it. If you do nothing but watch videos, you'll be lucky to break into class E.
Puzzles, tactics, reading books, watching videos...Anything would be considered passive if I don't do it myself. However, when you subscribe to chess.com and watch their videos, you have to right to question the knowledge in these videos or to ask for help.
AnhVanT wrote:
However, like I mentioned, you need books like understanding chess move by move to help explain why the Masters made this move instead of the others.
I don't know if "need" is the correct word, but I agree with the concept that most people will learn the material best if they read good books on the right subjects and practice what they learn to reinforce it.
I think need is the correct word if I don't have a coach or I don't know good annotators chess.com. So, I need a source to understand the move choices in instructive master games.
AnhVanT wrote:
And if you trust me enough to give Lucas chess "play like a grandmaster" a try, you will see the result. You make a move which is not what played by the Masters, you read the annotations to understand why. But then, the engine supports your ideas, you take notes and post your discovery to chess.com to ask for opinions. Lucas chess is a powerful free software.
The chess.com Lessons are vastly superior to Lucas Chess for this.
Lucas is free, so I don't see the reasons to not give it a try. Also, the tactics created by Lucas from the pgn I provided is one of the reasons I trust Lucas than other online tactics system (except chess king). First, if I provide a game with annotation, I know the reason of each move. Second, I can use the engine to check my choices. Of course chess.com lessons are excellent. That is the reason I subscribed.
AnhVanT wrote:
If you want good tactics beside chess.com, a subscription to Chess King is very good.
ChessTempo is free and arguably has the better tactics trainer system (it is far less chaotic than the chess.com trainer). However, if you can break 2000 on the chess.com trainer, you can do well on pretty much any trainer.
Chess King puzzles are from Russian puzzles books. They are listed in categories and position (attacking the king/uncastled king/opposite castled king)... I dont' think ChessTempo is better than Chess King. Even if it is better, well, too late, I already subscribed 
BobbyTalparov wrote:
AnhVanT wrote:
Puzzles, tactics, reading books, watching videos...Anything would be considered passive if I don't do it myself. However, when you subscribe to chess.com and watch their videos, you have to right to question the knowledge in these videos or to ask for help.
No, you do not understand. Working on puzzles and tactics is experimental-based learning (a form of active learning). You get feedback in that you look at the answer and see if you are right or wrong (and a good tactic or puzzle book will explain why a move is correct - a great one will also explain why common wrong moves are incorrect!) Watching videos is the most basic form of passive learning you can have. There is (quite literally) no feedback. It is you being spoonfed what the instructor thinks is necessary to learn the material. These are useful, but not as a primary learning device. They are great to give you ideas to further your research or to reinforce what you learned through experimentation or active learning. You will have better luck winning last Saturday's Powerball than you will reaching class B strength by watching videos alone.
AnhVanT wrote:
I think need is the correct word if I don't have a coach or I don't know good annotators chess.com. So, I need a source to understand the move choices in instructive master games.
You need air; you need food; you need water. You do not need chess books. But yes, if you aim to improve, there are good books on many of the key topics that virtually all beginners and low rated players need help with. The amount of material available decreases as you get stronger (imagine Magnus trying to find a book that will help him improve some aspect of his game!)
AnhVanT wrote:
Lucas is free, so I don't see the reasons to not give it a try. Also, the tactics created by Lucas from the pgn I provided is one of the reasons I trust Lucas than other online tactics system (except chess king). First, if I provide a game with annotation, I know the reason of each move. Second, I can use the engine to check my choices. Of course chess.com lessons are excellent. That is the reason I subscribed.
In life, most often you get what you pay for. Lucas Chess is an example of that. It relies on you knowing what you are doing in order to make it useful. The problem: if you are a beginner, you do not know what you are doing!
AnhVanT wrote:
Chess King puzzles are from Russian puzzles books. They are listed in categories and position (attacking the king/uncastled king/opposite castled king)... I dont' think ChessTempo is better than Chess King. Even if it is better, well, too late, I already subscribed
You can spend your money how you see fit. Chess King is fine, but I do find it interesting that you advocate for Lucas Chess (an inferior free tool) and yet want to pay for Chess King when a tool that is on par with it is free (though, parts of it are locked behind a subscription). This sounds more like a justification of your own purchase rather than a reason why someone else might want to do the same.
The best reason to buy a Chess.com subscription is to take advantage of their lessons. Once you have completed the ~4000 lessons, you can either redo them or simply cancel your subscription and use the site to just play.
The best reason to buy a Chess King membership would be if you do not have access to good tactics books.
I wonder why you think Lucas Chess is "an inferior free tool". I use Lucas Chess only for guess-the-move purpose and it is the best free tool available. Guess the Move software from chessimprover is also good so I am using both.
ChessKing is good because it save me tons of time setting up the chess board. I am young so I enjoy technology and anything that saves me time for doing something else more useful than chess.
And, you introduce yourself working with software, so I am not gonna argue with you on this subject. I just simply share what I know, and what I am using. I am not proving that I know all and doing the best things.
Jun 26, 2018
0
#28
BobbyTalparov wrote:
AnhVanT wrote:
I wonder why you think Lucas Chess is "an inferior free tool". I use Lucas Chess only for guess-the-move purpose and it is the best free tool available. Guess the Move software from chessimprover is also good so I am using both.
ChessKing is good because it save me tons of time setting up the chess board. I am young so I enjoy technology and anything that saves me time for doing something else more useful than chess.
And, you introduce yourself working with software, so I am not gonna argue with you on this subject. I just simply share what I know, and what I am using. I am not proving that I know all and doing the best things.
Aside from its hideous, late-1990's style interface, Lucas Chess is fine if you want to spend the time to get all the resources together so it will actually benefit you. The problem is that, for that to be effective, you must know what resources are good and which ones are not. A beginner will not know that, so they are very likely to end up pulling in bad resources and developing bad habits early.
Honestly, guess the move is not all that useful at the beginner levels. You need to have some fundamental understanding (tactical components, basic strategic ideas, etc.) before it becomes a useful training tool.
If you really want to learn, you will set up the positions on a real board. This is especially true when playing through master-level games. For example, you can download all 220 games from Alekhine's "My Greatest Games of Chess" and play through them on a screen in 3-4 hours learning nothing; or you can spend 3-4 months going over a handful of games a day (on a real board) and learn more than you ever wanted to know about the Ruy Lopez and Queen's Gambit. Using technology to save time is fine - when it actually helps you save time. The flaw is that you assume since it is technology that it must save you time (ignoring the fact that you probably spent hours setting up Lucas Chess to way you have it now, and it likely still is not optimized properly to actually help you at your current level).
Each person is different, so do what feels right for you. I'm simply offering my 2 cents based on personal experience (in both the realms of chess and technology).
Technology is a convienence, but real learning still involves a real board, real pieces, and a real book.
my friend is a proffesional player he improves his middle game
I personally think some of the posters in this thread are making the mistake of assuming what is good for them is what is good for someone else. That isn't necessarily the case.
Also, in some cases, the problem isn't necessarily the tool but how it is being used. For example, I personally think videos can be a good instructional format for some kinds of material. Most videos are going to be pretty hideous for learning tactics (although I have seen some that present puzzles - you pause and try to solve), then they go over the puzzle and main lines). On the other hand, they can be pretty good for presenting the main ideas of an opening.
I do agree that spending at least some time looking at a real board, and moving real pieces is helpful, especially if you are going to be playing over the board.
My own feeling tactics is obviously vitally important. It is why I do at least 10 problems a day. But even at low levels, time should be spent on other aspects of the game such as positional ideas. After all, basic opening ideas such as develop your pieces, castle your king, etc. are actually largely positional in nature. And some positional ideas like getting outposts are very accessible to even low level players.
The bottom line is find what works for you. Try something. If you think you are making progress with it, use it. If you don't, jettison it at least for now.
Personally, I am using the following and there is no question I am getting stronger as a result.
1) First book of Yusupov (Build up your chess, the Fundamentals).
2) 10 Tactics problems a day. My tactics rating has gone from around 1350 a few months ago to around 1580 at the moment.
3) A few videos on openings - just trying to understand their main ideas, not every conceivable variation.
I also like watching Simon Williams videos of him playing. When he plays, he explains why he is making moves and those reasons are sometimes positional and some times tactical. I find that very instructive, and some of it has definitely rubbed off in a positive way.
4) Book - the Amateur Mind, to work on my positional play.
5) Chessbase for saving my games and analyzing them with and without engine assistance. Also helps in playing through Games. For example, I have Bobby Fischers, 60 memorable games. I find the game in chessbase and follow along doing the variations in the book trying to understand the game.
6) Playing the game, mostly longer play games, against computers and people, online and over the board at a club.
Your mileage may vary, and as per my comment that I started with, I would expect would vary.
I don't know if you (plural) have been coached or coached in the past. But if you have, you are surely aware that the coaching needs to be tailored to the individual.
Jun 26, 2018
0
#31
And also...
We've probably all done exercises, read entire books, play in tournaments and analyzed afterwards etc, that were basically no help.
You have to get out there, try stuff, and screw it up to find out what works for you.
It helps if you think of your weakest area, or a skill you want to improve (like visualization, or time management). Then you can tailor your activities to focus on that area.
BobbyTalparov wrote:
madratter7 wrote:
I don't know if you (plural) have been coached or coached in the past. But if you have, you are surely aware that the coaching needs to be tailored to the individual.
To this point, yes - but only to a point. That is, there are some things that almost never work for anyone, and there are some things that work for most people but will not necessarily work for some. However, regardless of someone's learning style, the overall process is the same: you start with the fundamentals.
On this we can certainly agree. I wouldn't expect that staring at a stack of marbles an hour a day would improve anyone's chess game.
And I would expect that learning how a pawn moves should be done before learning the Sicilian.
But whether a book or a video is better to teach someone how to move a pawn? That is where some variety may be called for.
I do think that passive learning is usually inferior to more active learning.
Something like video is often good for getting the lay of the land, i.e. getting acquainted with the concepts. But for going deeper, another method is often better.
I like Yusupov because it is very active.
Let me give an example. If we were learning how to multiply, a video could certainly introduce us to the concept and would actually be quite good for that. But if we actually want to put that concept into practice, normally we will do various practice multiplication problems.
In the same way, a video may be vary well suited for getting across a concept or a point in chess. For example, there was an article on this site recently on greed in chess. It was making the point that beginners often don't capture material that is available because they are afraid there might be a trap involved. While this was conveyed in an article, a video could have made the point just as well, or even better.
But then to put that concept into practice, we need to play games and intentionally take material unless we see why we should not. And we could do tactics problems with a mix of how obvious it was that there was a trap/or not.
Jun 28, 2018
0
#35
Well, thanks once again for all your advice, which I will certainly follow up on.
I was watching some interviews with Magnus Carlsen, he says that at the age of 10 he was a wonderful tactician, but had no strategy. So basically Magnus first mastered tatics than started to learn something else, so maybe that's a good way to follow as a beginner focus on tatics and just later learn some more complex strategy.
Is it necessarily a good idea to try to follow the path followed by Magnus?
NPAK15 wrote:
Well, because he's the best in the world it is probably a good Idea.
That is why we should not follow his path. He is a genius in chess. His mind works and sees much differently from most of us.
... Seriwan's Winning Chess Endgames ...
https://www.chess.com/article/view/book-review-winning-chess-endings