- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

How can I improve positional chess? I keep losing because I get myself into a bad position

#41

@MrPushwood said in #3:

Nope. And there's your first lesson: positional chess is what you have to resort to when there are no combinative solutions. ;)

Perhaps people should not rely on buzz words to express their chess mysteries.

I find that using many dichotomies with different angles might help cerning and discerning what one might mean.

tactical versus strategic (is one a mini-me of the other?)
material versus positional (but hey, what do you think material is anyway?)
static versus dynamic

oh, and a simpler one:
short term versus long term

within human rational horizon versus beyond
(adapt to your calculation short term (human time) cognitive processes parameters)

material count being likely an average relative mobility power for material mobility classes (R,B, P, N,K and Q=RB)

I would suggest perhaps instead or refusing the op question, to try in your own words to understand it.

I understand what the op is asking for I think. And the dogma of tactics is everything is making chess very boring.

Yes, once a game is done, all is left as a trace of it is a sequences of many alternating moves. And yes, one could narrate the whole game with just a slightly higher level seqeunce of tactical loops (patterns and what not). And that is how SF does it.

So when is it allowed to a learner, to start considering what happens beyond their calculation limits. Is tactics first or die, and then, plans. Is tactics mastery a rite of passage before anyone with knowledge will consent to pour some of their tea into the poor imploring soul?

In my words, projecting my own constant curiosity about chess in the question, I think the op is asking, where or how before any material amputation happens, can one find the smallest imblances that prepare the more short term ones. And that before and after can happen at any phase of the game, or any depth of the game.

That question is clearest at long term position information possible associations (ok not translating that, i have to finnish my thoughts first, and I might run out of typing stamina doing so).

And if looking close enough, it turns out it also can be used to look at short term, things that can also be calculated already. Hence the buzz word reliance inadequacy to express what I think is a common inquiry, quest or curiosity about the big world of chess, even that without the social competition layer (not translating that either).

@MrPushwood said in #3: > Nope. And there's your first lesson: positional chess is what you have to resort to when there are no combinative solutions. ;) Perhaps people should not rely on buzz words to express their chess mysteries. I find that using many dichotomies with different angles might help cerning and discerning what one might mean. tactical versus strategic (is one a mini-me of the other?) material versus positional (but hey, what do you think material is anyway?) static versus dynamic oh, and a simpler one: short term versus long term within human rational horizon versus beyond (adapt to your calculation short term (human time) cognitive processes parameters) material count being likely an average relative mobility power for material mobility classes (R,B, P, N,K and Q=RB) I would suggest perhaps instead or refusing the op question, to try in your own words to understand it. I understand what the op is asking for I think. And the dogma of tactics is everything is making chess very boring. Yes, once a game is done, all is left as a trace of it is a sequences of many alternating moves. And yes, one could narrate the whole game with just a slightly higher level seqeunce of tactical loops (patterns and what not). And that is how SF does it. So when is it allowed to a learner, to start considering what happens beyond their calculation limits. Is tactics first or die, and then, plans. Is tactics mastery a rite of passage before anyone with knowledge will consent to pour some of their tea into the poor imploring soul? In my words, projecting my own constant curiosity about chess in the question, I think the op is asking, where or how before any material amputation happens, can one find the smallest imblances that prepare the more short term ones. And that before and after can happen at any phase of the game, or any depth of the game. That question is clearest at long term position information possible associations (ok not translating that, i have to finnish my thoughts first, and I might run out of typing stamina doing so). And if looking close enough, it turns out it also can be used to look at short term, things that can also be calculated already. Hence the buzz word reliance inadequacy to express what I think is a common inquiry, quest or curiosity about the big world of chess, even that without the social competition layer (not translating that either).
#42

I watched your games, I can sure you should improve more in tactical. Even in 2000-rated blitz games, the most effective way to win is just to take the hanging pieces, maybe sometimes need to find a 2-3 moves tactic, when you play puzzles will aware of that.

I watched your games, I can sure you should improve more in tactical. Even in 2000-rated blitz games, the most effective way to win is just to take the hanging pieces, maybe sometimes need to find a 2-3 moves tactic, when you play puzzles will aware of that.
#43

Do mate puzzles. or if not thematic ones. .I assume your puzzle satistfaction is reliable.

There is no limit to tactical honing. So it is an easy thing to reply to you. It will never be enough.

The point of op is the discrepancy. between his puzzle (short term, spectacular tactical challenges) and his full games.

Time control rating differences does not change the chess in game full game depth (well it might, depending on pair rating difference, but not the point).

I would listen to the op. before jumping to the canned response about tactics.. too easy. The op was careful to avoid such reflex.

Do mate puzzles. or if not thematic ones. .I assume your puzzle satistfaction is reliable. There is no limit to tactical honing. So it is an easy thing to reply to you. It will never be enough. The point of op is the discrepancy. between his puzzle (short term, spectacular tactical challenges) and his full games. Time control rating differences does not change the chess in game full game depth (well it might, depending on pair rating difference, but not the point). I would listen to the op. before jumping to the canned response about tactics.. too easy. The op was careful to avoid such reflex.
#44

So I'm going to advise you to read My Best Games Of Chess by Alexander Alekhine ... former world Chess Champion as he explains his Ideas well . also on the internet you should go to You Tube & play over listen to Chess Videos on COMPLETE Games of Chess also Smirnov can explain some ides to you @spectraltheory ... There are other works on Chess sucj as Modern Chess Strategy by L Pachman that you should read & The Art of Logical Thinking in Chess by Neil MCdonald You also can start with logical Chess Move by Move by I Chernev , In short YES there is PLENT of information on Positional Chess out there so enjoy Chess & learning good luck @spectraltheory ... you have no problembs only to Play study study Play Play Study Play Play Chess

So I'm going to advise you to read My Best Games Of Chess by Alexander Alekhine ... former world Chess Champion as he explains his Ideas well . also on the internet you should go to You Tube & play over listen to Chess Videos on COMPLETE Games of Chess also Smirnov can explain some ides to you @spectraltheory ... There are other works on Chess sucj as Modern Chess Strategy by L Pachman that you should read & The Art of Logical Thinking in Chess by Neil MCdonald You also can start with logical Chess Move by Move by I Chernev , In short YES there is PLENT of information on Positional Chess out there so enjoy Chess & learning good luck @spectraltheory ... you have no problembs only to Play study study Play Play Study Play Play Chess
#46

My System an old book but I think my positional understanding doesn't go beyond what is teached in the book.

  • Control open files or semi-open files with your rooks.
  • Develop your pieces
  • Create holes on the 5, 6th, 7th rank for your knights.
  • Always have an eye on pawn breaks
  • Try to make sure pieces are always protecting one another
  • Learn about minority attacks & the greek sacrifice

And simply attack! Slowly, first you put your king to safety, try not waste moves. And push the pawns, redirect your pieces towards the enemy king. Before I push the pieces I often try to weakens the king by initiating a pawn break towards it.

And don't overuse your queen, think about all your pieces.

My System an old book but I think my positional understanding doesn't go beyond what is teached in the book. - Control open files or semi-open files with your rooks. - Develop your pieces - Create holes on the 5, 6th, 7th rank for your knights. - Always have an eye on pawn breaks - Try to make sure pieces are always protecting one another - Learn about minority attacks & the greek sacrifice And simply attack! Slowly, first you put your king to safety, try not waste moves. And push the pawns, redirect your pieces towards the enemy king. Before I push the pieces I often try to weakens the king by initiating a pawn break towards it. And don't overuse your queen, think about all your pieces.
#47

@kindaspongey said in #37:

During the ~9 seconds that you thought after 3...f5, did you consider how you would have reacted if Rolauten had replied to 4 exf5 with 4...e4 ? (The machine thinks that 4 d3 or even 4 d4 would have been a lot better than 4 exf5.)

I was more afraid of what if Rolauten had played fxe4

After 4 exf5 d5 5 Bb5 e4, did you consider the problems that Rolauten would have had after 6 Ne5 ?

Now I see it, I was afraid that their knight could've taken my knight, but it wasn't possible because it was pinned.

During the ~4 seconds that you thought after 6 Bxc6+ bxc6 7 Ne5 Qd6, did you consider 8 Qh5+ ?

I was more focused on defending my knight

After 8 d4 Bxf5, 9 Qh5+ doesn’t accomplish much does it? Did you consider 9 O-O ?

My plan was that if they play g6, then I'd take it with my knight, so if then hxNg7 then I could take the rook. For some reason I didn't say that the bishop could simply take the knight instead.

@kindaspongey said in #37: > During the ~9 seconds that you thought after 3...f5, did you consider how you would have reacted if Rolauten had replied to 4 exf5 with 4...e4 ? (The machine thinks that 4 d3 or even 4 d4 would have been a lot better than 4 exf5.) I was more afraid of what if Rolauten had played fxe4 > After 4 exf5 d5 5 Bb5 e4, did you consider the problems that Rolauten would have had after 6 Ne5 ? Now I see it, I was afraid that their knight could've taken my knight, but it wasn't possible because it was pinned. > During the ~4 seconds that you thought after 6 Bxc6+ bxc6 7 Ne5 Qd6, did you consider 8 Qh5+ ? I was more focused on defending my knight > After 8 d4 Bxf5, 9 Qh5+ doesn’t accomplish much does it? Did you consider 9 O-O ? My plan was that if they play g6, then I'd take it with my knight, so if then hxNg7 then I could take the rook. For some reason I didn't say that the bishop could simply take the knight instead.
#48

@kindaspongey said in #39:

httpscolon//lichess.org/FQfZFcX8
After 9 Qh5+ g6 10 Qd1 c5, 11 g4 wasn't giving much attention to king-safety or the activity of the pieces on a1, b1, c1, d1, and h1.

I was trying to kick back the bishop.

After 11 g4 Be6 12 Nc3 Bg7, 13 h4 was still leaving pieces inactive and doing nothing about the coming danger to the two knights after 13...cxd4.

My plan was to go h5 and then try to capture the g6 pawn, so I could check my opponent's king again

14 f4 worsened king safety while leaving a knight to its fate.

I was trying to attack the g6 pawn from another side

@kindaspongey said in #39: > httpscolon//lichess.org/FQfZFcX8 > After 9 Qh5+ g6 10 Qd1 c5, 11 g4 wasn't giving much attention to king-safety or the activity of the pieces on a1, b1, c1, d1, and h1. I was trying to kick back the bishop. > After 11 g4 Be6 12 Nc3 Bg7, 13 h4 was still leaving pieces inactive and doing nothing about the coming danger to the two knights after 13...cxd4. My plan was to go h5 and then try to capture the g6 pawn, so I could check my opponent's king again > 14 f4 worsened king safety while leaving a knight to its fate. I was trying to attack the g6 pawn from another side
#49

@kindaspongey said in #37:

During the ~9 seconds that you thought after [1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 f5], did you consider how you would have reacted if Rolauten had replied to 4 exf5 with 4...e4 ? (The machine thinks that 4 d3 or even 4 d4 would have been a lot better than 4 exf5.)
@spectraltheory said in #47:
I was more afraid of what if Rolauten had played fxe4
"Fear is the mind-killer."
During those ~9 seconds, did you settle on anything specific as a suitable reaction after 4 exf5 e4 ? Did you think about whether or not there would have been anything specific to fear after 4 d3 fxe4 5 dxe4 or 4 d4 fxe4 5 Nxe5 ?
@kindaspongey said in #37:
After 4 exf5 d5 5 Bb5 e4, did you consider the problems that Rolauten would have had after 6 Ne5 ?
@spectraltheory said in #47:
Now I see it, I was afraid that their knight could've taken
my knight, but it wasn't possible because it was pinned.
"You must learn to govern your passions. They will be your undoing."
Tactical practice could help you to be aware of opportunities to take advantage of a pinned piece.
@kindaspongey said in #37:
During the ~4 seconds that you thought after 6 Bxc6+ bxc6 7 Ne5 Qd6, did you consider 8 Qh5+ ?
@spectraltheory said in #47:
I was more focused on defending my knight
"I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over."
Tactical practice (and a willingness to use more time for searching) could help you to notice attacking opportunities.
@kindaspongey said in #37:
After 8 d4 Bxf5, 9 Qh5+ doesn’t accomplish much does it? Did you consider 9 O-O ?
@spectraltheory said in #47:
My plan was that if they play g6, then I'd take it with my knight,
so if then hxNg7 then I could take the rook. For some reason I
didn't say that the bishop could simply take the knight instead.
Are you aware that, after 9 Qh5+ g6 10 Nxg6, 10...Qxg6 would also have been possible? Tactical practice could help you to develop the habit of checking for such details.
@kindaspongey said in #39:
After 9 Qh5+ g6 10 Qd1 c5, 11 g4 wasn't giving much attention to king-safety or the activity of the pieces on a1, b1, c1, d1, and h1.
@spectraltheory said in #48:
I was trying to kick back the bishop.
Was there a reason to consider that more important than king-safety and the activity of the pieces that were still on their home squares?
@kindaspongey said in #39:
After 11 g4 Be6 12 Nc3 Bg7, 13 h4 was still leaving pieces inactive and doing nothing about the coming danger to the two knights after 13...cxd4.
@spectraltheory said in #48:
My plan was to go h5 and then try to capture the g6
pawn, so I could check my opponent's king again
To get the queen to h5 again, you would have to get the g4 pawn out of the way, and, in the meantime, if you do not do something about the 13...cxd4 danger, you will be losing a knight.
@kindaspongey said in #39:
14 f4 worsened king safety while leaving a knight to its fate.
@spectraltheory said in #48:
I was trying to attack the g6 pawn from another side
"Try not. Do or do not. There is no try."
The attack-from-another-side would not have got very far if Rolauten had reacted with 14...exf3.

https://lichess.org/FQfZFcX8

"Begun the clone war has."

@kindaspongey said in #37: > During the ~9 seconds that you thought after [1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 f5], did you consider how you would have reacted if Rolauten had replied to 4 exf5 with 4...e4 ? (The machine thinks that 4 d3 or even 4 d4 would have been a lot better than 4 exf5.) @spectraltheory said in #47: > I was more afraid of what if Rolauten had played fxe4 "Fear is the mind-killer." During those ~9 seconds, did you settle on anything specific as a suitable reaction after 4 exf5 e4 ? Did you think about whether or not there would have been anything specific to fear after 4 d3 fxe4 5 dxe4 or 4 d4 fxe4 5 Nxe5 ? @kindaspongey said in #37: > After 4 exf5 d5 5 Bb5 e4, did you consider the problems that Rolauten would have had after 6 Ne5 ? @spectraltheory said in #47: > Now I see it, I was afraid that their knight could've taken > my knight, but it wasn't possible because it was pinned. "You must learn to govern your passions. They will be your undoing." Tactical practice could help you to be aware of opportunities to take advantage of a pinned piece. @kindaspongey said in #37: > During the ~4 seconds that you thought after 6 Bxc6+ bxc6 7 Ne5 Qd6, did you consider 8 Qh5+ ? @spectraltheory said in #47: > I was more focused on defending my knight "I honestly think you ought to sit down calmly, take a stress pill, and think things over." Tactical practice (and a willingness to use more time for searching) could help you to notice attacking opportunities. @kindaspongey said in #37: > After 8 d4 Bxf5, 9 Qh5+ doesn’t accomplish much does it? Did you consider 9 O-O ? @spectraltheory said in #47: > My plan was that if they play g6, then I'd take it with my knight, > so if then hxNg7 then I could take the rook. For some reason I > didn't say that the bishop could simply take the knight instead. Are you aware that, after 9 Qh5+ g6 10 Nxg6, 10...Qxg6 would also have been possible? Tactical practice could help you to develop the habit of checking for such details. @kindaspongey said in #39: > After 9 Qh5+ g6 10 Qd1 c5, 11 g4 wasn't giving much attention to king-safety or the activity of the pieces on a1, b1, c1, d1, and h1. @spectraltheory said in #48: > I was trying to kick back the bishop. Was there a reason to consider that more important than king-safety and the activity of the pieces that were still on their home squares? @kindaspongey said in #39: > After 11 g4 Be6 12 Nc3 Bg7, 13 h4 was still leaving pieces inactive and doing nothing about the coming danger to the two knights after 13...cxd4. @spectraltheory said in #48: > My plan was to go h5 and then try to capture the g6 > pawn, so I could check my opponent's king again To get the queen to h5 again, you would have to get the g4 pawn out of the way, and, in the meantime, if you do not do something about the 13...cxd4 danger, you will be losing a knight. @kindaspongey said in #39: 14 f4 worsened king safety while leaving a knight to its fate. @spectraltheory said in #48: > I was trying to attack the g6 pawn from another side "Try not. Do or do not. There is no try." The attack-from-another-side would not have got very far if Rolauten had reacted with 14...exf3. https://lichess.org/FQfZFcX8 "Begun the clone war has."
#50

@Hitsugaya said in #46:

My System ...
"... In my view, you should be at least 1800 strength to benefit fully from [My System]." - GM Jonathan Levitt (1997)
@ThunderClap said in #44:
... There are other works on Chess sucj as Modern
Chess Strategy by L Pachman that you should read & ...
I do not know of an online assessment of the appropriate time to attempt to learn this material, but one can perhaps get some idea by looking at the sample that is available at http://store.doverpublications.com/0486202909.html . Beginning on page 4, the book undertakes to explain the choice of "strategical plans" in the "Samisch Variation of the King's Indian". ("1 P-Q4, N-KB3; 2 P-QB4, P-KN3; 3 N-QB3, B-N2; 4 P-K4, P-Q3; 5 P-B3, O-O; 6 B-K3, P-K4; 7 P-Q5, N-R4; 8 Q-Q2, P-KB4")
@Toscani said in #45:
... www.goodreads.com/book/show/85213.Improve_Your_Positional_Chess
A sample of that book can be seen at http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/Improve_Your_Positional_Chess.pdf and a review can be seen at https://web.archive.org/web/20140708091818/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review478.pdf .
@ThunderClap said in #44:
... You also can start with logical Chess Move by Move by I Chernev ...
That sounds good to me. Maybe wait until the Chernev book is finished before deciding on more positional reading.

@Hitsugaya said in #46: > My System ... "... In my view, you should be at least 1800 strength to benefit fully from [My System]." - GM Jonathan Levitt (1997) @ThunderClap said in #44: > ... There are other works on Chess sucj as Modern > Chess Strategy by L Pachman that you should read & ... I do not know of an online assessment of the appropriate time to attempt to learn this material, but one can perhaps get some idea by looking at the sample that is available at http://store.doverpublications.com/0486202909.html . Beginning on page 4, the book undertakes to explain the choice of "strategical plans" in the "Samisch Variation of the King's Indian". ("1 P-Q4, N-KB3; 2 P-QB4, P-KN3; 3 N-QB3, B-N2; 4 P-K4, P-Q3; 5 P-B3, O-O; 6 B-K3, P-K4; 7 P-Q5, N-R4; 8 Q-Q2, P-KB4") @Toscani said in #45: > ... www.goodreads.com/book/show/85213.Improve_Your_Positional_Chess A sample of that book can be seen at http://www.gambitbooks.com/pdfs/Improve_Your_Positional_Chess.pdf and a review can be seen at https://web.archive.org/web/20140708091818/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review478.pdf . @ThunderClap said in #44: > ... You also can start with logical Chess Move by Move by I Chernev ... That sounds good to me. Maybe wait until the Chernev book is finished before deciding on more positional reading.

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