How can I learn to understand a GM's games

I am a beginner but I am interested in analysising chess games of grand masters. I am not really interested in the modern GM's like Aronian,Wesley or Carlsen. I am more interested in older GM's games and I want to learn positional chess so specifically Karpov and Petrosian but I never seem to understand what they have in mind when they play certain moves.

It's fantastic to hear that you're interested in analyzing the games of legendary Grandmasters like Karpov and Petrosian, who are renowned for their exceptional positional understanding. As a beginner, it's natural to find it challenging to grasp the ideas behind some of their moves, but don't be discouraged—it's all part of the learning process!

To better understand the thought processes of these great players, I recommend a few strategies. First, study annotated games by looking for collections that provide insights into the rationale behind certain moves. Reading these annotations can help you better understand the strategic ideas at play in their games.

Another helpful approach is to watch video analyses of famous games by strong players and coaches available online. These analyses can offer valuable insights and help you gain a deeper understanding of the games.

Most importantly, practice analyzing games regularly to develop your analytical skills. Be patient with yourself as you work to develop this skill. Engaging with the Lichess community and sharing your thoughts on specific games or positions can also be an invaluable learning tool. You'll find that discussing these games with fellow enthusiasts can provide valuable insights and help deepen your understanding.

Actually, if there is a position and move I dont undersrand, i think its best to turn chess engine on and play few possible variations until point is clear. Its sometimes 10, other times even 20 moves ahead. But often you get the point after few moves into it. I actually never really liked studing GM games from books, because of this question: What happens if he played this.. or that.. ?? And annotations are usually are very limited in explaing why certain moves fail while others not. Analysing those positions with stockfish is lengthy process, but its interactive and thus much more entertaining. And you will sometimes see those subtle GM blunders nobody noticed before .

All being said,i admit i didnt like to do this when i was beginner and neither my beginner daugher likes it (lichess blitz level ~ 1200). I coach kids chess and they improve a lot even without study, just playing lot of games. Just few opening principles and common endgames are crucial.

Of course you can't understand its like a third grader trying to learn a calculus, you're still a beginner try to learn a basic fundamental first and after you're 1800 or something then you can learn advance concept like posititional game

@kont9l said in #4:

Of course you can't understand its like a third grader trying to learn a calculus, you're still a beginner try to learn a basic fundamental first and after you're 1800 or something then you can learn advance concept like posititional game

That sounds a little condescending. I'm pretty sure a 1800 recognizes a backwards pawn when they see one.

But I agree that while it's fancy, it seems pointless to me to analyze a game that is way beyond our heads. I mean do GMs analyze computer games playing at 3600 rating? ... actually when I think about it, they very probably do, lol. At least some aspects of it for preparation.

@janeCMD said in #3:

Actually, if there is a position and move I dont undersrand, i think its best to turn chess engine on and play few possible variations until point is clear. Its sometimes 10, other times even 20 moves ahead. But often you get the point after few moves into it. I actually never really liked studing GM games from books, because of this question: What happens if he played this.. or that.. ?? And annotations are usually are very limited in explaing why certain moves fail while others not. Analysing those positions with stockfish is lengthy process, but its interactive and thus much more entertaining. And you will sometimes see those subtle GM blunders nobody noticed before .

All being said,i admit i didnt like to do this when i was beginner and neither my beginner daugher likes it (lichess blitz level ~ 1200). I coach kids chess and they improve a lot even without study, just playing lot of games. Just few opening principles and common endgames are crucial.

There might be something to be said for this when looking at top players' games in general, though I still have a personal preference for reading annotations by strong human players. And I have serious doubts that engine analysis will be much help when trying to understand positional games, which is what @Ayush_2010 wants to do, especially Petrosian's games. Petrosian, world champion 1963-1969, played ultra-prophylactically, negatively some would say, simply denying his opponent any chances. This type of play, and other positional play in general, does not lend itself to be understood from looking at concrete variations.

Yet ANOTHER way of asking: "How can I improve?" :)