- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

Do you think trying chess traps is good in rapid or classical games?

#11

@VikrantSupekar said in #10:

Not rapid and classical, blitz can improve your tactical skills as there is less time to think to defend and enough time to find a tactic.
Depend's on You're thinking an skill's ability

@VikrantSupekar said in #10: > Not rapid and classical, blitz can improve your tactical skills as there is less time to think to defend and enough time to find a tactic. Depend's on You're thinking an skill's ability
#13

@Sarg0n said in #12:

You mean ...

en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hope_chess
dude there's no such en.wiktionary.org page at all . please don't post such thing's in the forum or read forum title please .

@Sarg0n said in #12: > You mean ... > > en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hope_chess dude there's no such en.wiktionary.org page at all . please don't post such thing's in the forum or read forum title please .
#15

@Sarg0n said in #14:

Dafuq?

R u a Monty Python coder?
YEP , I m learning Core Python Course Which Is About 6 Month's , Which Includes Web Development Too!! .

@Sarg0n said in #14: > Dafuq? > > R u a Monty Python coder? YEP , I m learning Core Python Course Which Is About 6 Month's , Which Includes Web Development Too!! .
#16

I think traps in longer time controls are only valid if it's deep preparation beforehand, so it's beyond the opponent's discovery horizon, or under some specific circumstances, like a completely lost position as a last ditch effort.

I think traps in longer time controls are only valid if it's deep preparation beforehand, so it's beyond the opponent's discovery horizon, or under some specific circumstances, like a completely lost position as a last ditch effort.
#17

I play the Czech defense which is considered a trap. But how to refute?

I play the Czech defense which is considered a trap. But how to refute?
#18

To make it work, your opponent didn't realize it

To make it work, your opponent didn't realize it
#19

Yes, especially traps that are "with the flow" of the game, so they don't mess up your own position. Sounds like most comments are about traps known to theory. In that case, how well does your opponent know theory? The traps are known to theory for a reason, they appear often, some high rated player fell for them, they are particularly hidden. For example, I notice that Ruy Lopez players fall into the Noah's Ark trap often, a trap that you don't really set up, but just spring when the opponent falls into it.

More important, I think, are original traps that you create yourself in the course of play. If you see a subtle point at the end of a set of exchanges, why not invite your opponent into the web? At rating levels below 1800-2000 almost all games are won or lost on tactical oversights. If you see the potential for a tactical oversight working in your favor, go for it.

Yes, especially traps that are "with the flow" of the game, so they don't mess up your own position. Sounds like most comments are about traps known to theory. In that case, how well does your opponent know theory? The traps are known to theory for a reason, they appear often, some high rated player fell for them, they are particularly hidden. For example, I notice that Ruy Lopez players fall into the Noah's Ark trap often, a trap that you don't really set up, but just spring when the opponent falls into it. More important, I think, are original traps that you create yourself in the course of play. If you see a subtle point at the end of a set of exchanges, why not invite your opponent into the web? At rating levels below 1800-2000 almost all games are won or lost on tactical oversights. If you see the potential for a tactical oversight working in your favor, go for it.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.