Very interesting article. I feel like the part about endgames does not "draw a conclusion" for the discussion, but rather adds more points to it. Nevertheless interesting. I agree about the Blitz part as well. It mostly matters what you make of your games.
This article really fails to tackle what an endgame is. The provided examples of two pieces against one are far from all endgames. One would even argue that if the queens are exchanged and one-two other pieces, it counts as an endgame. For example, in endgames, one would have to think about improving his king or blocking and targeting pawns, far more than in the middlegame. Even many pawn endgames might have pawn sacrifices to create a passer. There are whole books written about bishop vs knight, with many pawns. And these books are filled with practical positions, not just some theoretical endgames.
There are practical endgames to study. I would recommend Insane in the Endgame of Saint Louis Chess Club just for a few hours of examples, not trivial even for players in 2000 bracket.
There are practical endgames to study. I would recommend Insane in the Endgame of Saint Louis Chess Club just for a few hours of examples, not trivial even for players in 2000 bracket.
I like the article and mostly agree with your point. Still, I'd like to add that the knowledge of theoretical endgames or common practical endgames with their typical plans is very important. Even if you don't get the theoretical endgames or common practical endgames (rook + a passer +3p: R+3p) too often, they might occur in variations and it's very important to know which you had better avoid and which should you head for, as well as what to do when such an endgame appears. All the more that many of us approach endgames with little time and/or tired and it's mostly impossible to calculate over the board what one could have learned well before the game. I've twice played the R vs. R+B endgame with 2 sec/move against GMs, and saved both games. It pays off to study endgames. Endgames are not boring, you just need the right mindset and the right book/course/trainer.
Well from a mathematical or scientific point of view that relies on reducing complexity to its essential elements and recombining into systemic (or atic) understanding (or mechanistic) of the whole, endgame problems are both where the core rules of chess material mobility and termination of games are best isolated.
One can then think clearly and mathematically about anything, without overcrowding the short term memory, the working memory (which is not the same) or any other small brain characteristics that most of us are born with.
And it is where the most empty square combinatorics can be reduced using non-chess spatial intuition from the get go. The natural place to start.
I may be using a more general understanding of the word "endgame", though, just to mean in the direction of less material species, and more empty squares, possibly also near tangible terminal outcomes like mate, or non consensual draws, or clear end-points like promotion.
This is also where EGTB started... retrograde analysis being at the root. likely because of the above points.
I am lazy but love chess.. I like to use all the existing intuition bits I have already going for me....
what is the smallest imbalance i can see and keep and fructify seems enough for me to see endless motivating problems for a very long while.... going backward of course.... (and a healthy regimen blending all sorts of initial conditions)..
Good excellent blog topic..I mean the first part about endgames. I did not see how connected it was to the second part.
There is one thing that the context or framing or your blog is not considering, and i think it is the learning benefits from studying endgames problems, not the estalblished or tabelbase canonical solutions.
figuring what the problems are is more likely to reap generalizable benefits both consciously (for the intake) and intuitively for the fast application of such learning experience. I think the assumption that training has to be about learning specific solutions is restricting the opportunities. I think chewing on the problems prior to seeing known solution, is what is rewarding about endgames (chewing= debating with known solutions, or experiencing such mini-games).
One can then think clearly and mathematically about anything, without overcrowding the short term memory, the working memory (which is not the same) or any other small brain characteristics that most of us are born with.
And it is where the most empty square combinatorics can be reduced using non-chess spatial intuition from the get go. The natural place to start.
I may be using a more general understanding of the word "endgame", though, just to mean in the direction of less material species, and more empty squares, possibly also near tangible terminal outcomes like mate, or non consensual draws, or clear end-points like promotion.
This is also where EGTB started... retrograde analysis being at the root. likely because of the above points.
I am lazy but love chess.. I like to use all the existing intuition bits I have already going for me....
what is the smallest imbalance i can see and keep and fructify seems enough for me to see endless motivating problems for a very long while.... going backward of course.... (and a healthy regimen blending all sorts of initial conditions)..
Good excellent blog topic..I mean the first part about endgames. I did not see how connected it was to the second part.
There is one thing that the context or framing or your blog is not considering, and i think it is the learning benefits from studying endgames problems, not the estalblished or tabelbase canonical solutions.
figuring what the problems are is more likely to reap generalizable benefits both consciously (for the intake) and intuitively for the fast application of such learning experience. I think the assumption that training has to be about learning specific solutions is restricting the opportunities. I think chewing on the problems prior to seeing known solution, is what is rewarding about endgames (chewing= debating with known solutions, or experiencing such mini-games).
<Comment deleted by user>
I won a pawn endgame today (that was drawn with perfect play) because I understood key squares and reserve tempo and simplified to a position identical to one in 100 Endgames. I'd say endgame is worth practicing.
On blitz: This question is akin to asking whether you should do 100 push-ups a day or lift heavy and focus on the bench press. Both approaches will improve your overall strength a little and lead to significant development of your chest and triceps. So, which strategy is better? The answer, of course, what is your goal? If you are training for a military fitness test that requires you to do 60 push-ups in 2 minutes, you should skip the bench and do 100 push-ups a day. If your goal is to improve your personal best in the bench, well you know the answer.
On endgames: How sad would you be if you lost half a point because you haven't analyzed Q vs R? If I were a chess professional, I might be embarrassed. As a recreational player, honestly, it is no worse than blundering a pawn for no reason, which happens to me all the time anyways, so I don't study these theoretical end games.
On endgames: How sad would you be if you lost half a point because you haven't analyzed Q vs R? If I were a chess professional, I might be embarrassed. As a recreational player, honestly, it is no worse than blundering a pawn for no reason, which happens to me all the time anyways, so I don't study these theoretical end games.
@zwokzwozwo said in #6:
> dont buy any books. they are all legally free to borrow on archive.org/.
After all, the authors spend a lot of time and effort to write books, and if no one bought the books, there would be little point in publishing them.
> dont buy any books. they are all legally free to borrow on archive.org/.
After all, the authors spend a lot of time and effort to write books, and if no one bought the books, there would be little point in publishing them.
The end is the beginning and the beginning the end of your studies.
The purpose is to learn how to reach a destination.
The purpose is to learn how to reach a destination.