I am an average chess player but wanted some advices to evolve. I have probelams in finals and they told me that to evolve in chess I had to do a lot of tactics and study chess games more than that is all?
@alanguedesferreira
All cookie-cutter, ambiguous, carpet-bomb, 'hope something sticks' methods of learning chess aside, let's focus on a process that is 100% value-added and targeted to your own specific strengths and weaknesses.
-
Every time you find yourself faced with a decision to either do X, Y, or Z in a game, take a mental note. Highlight the perceived cost-benefit of each variation, and particularly your reasons for each move.
Then, after the game is finished, go back to these kinds of "forks in the road" and see exactly how your decision worked out for you. What did you have right? What did you miss? What factors supported your argument? What factors disabled your argument?
If you wish, you could even ask an engine about "the paths not taken".
This method is what's known as "studying your own games", and it will only endeavour to teach you what you don't already know, and it will cause you to ask the most appropriate questions, where the answers to those questions will all be information that you can use and apply in subsequent games.
-
Example:
You can choose to:
x) Pin his N for unclear reasons.
y) Win a race to an open file with your rook, where you can control that file instead of your opponent.
z) Prevent your opponent from taking too much space with his bc/fg pawns.
-
As the game played, you chose "x", and then went on to lose because your opponent dominated an open file that you couldn't easily contest without causing additional problems.
In retrospect, you learn that controlling files can SOMETIMES be more important than making ambiguous moves for unclear reasons.
After checking that, you might decide to cross-check with the engine and realize that even winning that race to the file was insufficient, because while your opponent's control of that file was a problem, there was actually a "blink and you'll miss it" opportunity to stop him from moving a pawn to the 6th/3rd, where your castle would be under permanent and irresistible attack.
As a result of this study, you learn that depending on the tactical justifications, preventing pawn attackers from taking too much space around your castle, can SOMETIMES be a primary consideration.
-
This entire process starts with being very self-aware of your reasons for making your moves, paying close attention to EVERYTHING that pieces do and influence, and then revisiting those ideas after the game and studying them in retrospect.
- You'll begin to learn that things that you once used to put a priority on, don't necessarily deserve to be a primary factor.
- You'll begin to distinguish between when these ideas are, and are not, primary.
- You'll begin to understand ways of exploiting these lessons when you see your opponents incorrectly putting a priority on secondary issues.
Your study will serve as both shield and sword.
Your study will always address and improve your own specific perspective, and it will deal with all of the exact ideas that you need to learn.
-
*** !IMPORTANT! ***
Be very patient!!
I can't stress this enough.
Be very very very patient.
There are at least 1000s of different ideas to recognize, learn, and perfect, but none of them occur every single game.
This means that even if you are spending time after your games to better understand and prioritize your decision making process, and taking time to understand the nuances of when and why those decisions are better/worse, or are more applicable/less applicable, you will still only be seeing these instances once every 10-25-50 games depending on the theory, and your capacity to recognize it.
In other words, ideas that you take time to learn about in January, might only reoccur in March. That's just enough time to forget what you learned a few months ago.
So this continuous process will take some time, but as you continue on the path, you'll begin to see separate lessons merge into a more basic, umbrella, fundamental, and absolute kind of a paradigm. Likewise, when playing games and faced with x/y/z, you'll be much better equipped to measure the 3 against each other, and to more efficiently assign a priority that simultaneously encompasses all three variations.
Eventually, you'll start finding tandem variations that simultaneously justify and satiate all three variations, and you'll then begin arguing between a/b/c instead.
A metaphor might help what I'm trying to get across:
I liken it to children learning to read.
Initially, they're aware of every single letter.
Then they become aware of letter combinations.
Then they begin to use those combinations to 'sound-out' entire words.
In this process, they make note of all of the wEIrd and strange PHenomena, where the language appears to break it's own rules, and where there are counter-intuitive nuances; however, these instances are eventually fully understood and seamlessly committed to the sub-conscious.
The end result is seeing all words as their whole; and moreover, the ideas that they were intended to communicate.
-
Now, this is a TERRIBLE way to describe chess to someone asking "how best to improve", because it seems like an inordinate amount of work, and is probably just as discouraging as it is productive.
So let's make sure that we qualify what we've spoken about here with some iron-clad mandates that shall not be trespassed upon...
*
**
***
Only so far as chess remains completely enjoyable, exciting, and worthwhile, should rigorous study be invested!!
***
**
*
Right now, new players and lower-rated players have a certain excitement and energy about the game.
At the end of the day, this is the only thing that will keep anyone at the chess board.
So by all means, study as much as you please...but make sure it's "as you please" and never "as you detest".
Chess growth occurs when you're in the middle of a game, lecture, live coverage, book, etc., and you think, "Hmmm....I never thought of that before...but I can see how that's probably an important idea..." and then having that same idea, about that same position, reoccur again and again and again, until it's second nature and habit. To where that idea is easily recognized, understood, considered, and included.
Ultimately, by simply playing lots and unintentionally picking up tidbits here and there as you explore the chess world, you will grow, learn, and improve.
It's inevitable.
If you want to hyper-accelerate that learning, simply pay attention to the questions you asked yourself during the game, and then take time to find those answers when it's done.
Self-study is the most underrated form of improvement.
It's so simple, obvious, and "do-it-yourself" that novices will often overlook this as being their most principle, most accessible, and most efficient form of development.
Very simple. Very straightforward.
-
So.
The most important rule to studying is...
*
**
***
1. Always make sure that you are having fun and enjoyment at the chess board.
***
**
*
-
Bonus Section:
Try to find the core of chess (the fundamentals) which has very little to do with "You move here, then I move there, then you do this, and I do that."
While this process takes place in every single move, it's not chess itself, and it's senseless to have this kind of a 'bug-brain' approach. It will only get you so far. We should use tactics to justify the viability of bigger-picture ideas. Not just to aimlessly play, in an of themselves.
At some point, we have to elevate our game to start paying attention to how the strengths and weaknesses of our/our opponents' light/dark coloured bishops are affected by changes in the pawn-structures (an aspect of colour complex).
For example (one out of *MANY*):
We might consider what happens if every single pawn moves / doesn't move / captures, and what the resulting influence that the newly opened/closed lines/diagonal/colours mean to the scope of the pieces on the board.
In this kind of a situation, we'd be using the "you do this and I do that" tactical calculation in order to justify the prognosis of certain pieces being more or less viable, for/against us, and for/against our opponents in the later stages.
- Very very very subtle.
- Has nothing to do with "winning a piece outright".
- Has everything to do with a frustrated opponent that can't find a plan 10 moves down the road, because everything that they want to do is ineffective and "magically" on the wrong squares, or one tempo short.
In other words, "the fundamentals".
So for bonus marks, try to pay careful attention to focusing your questions on matters of chess fundamentals, and not so much chess tactics.
Focus your reasons for moving a piece to address the improvement of the fundamentals within the position.
=
It goes without saying that overlooking a mate in 2, just so that you'll have a better endgame, is folly.
So again, it's not like we wouldn't pay careful attention to the tactics at all times...it's just to say that there is a whole bigger, better, badder side to chess that deals with chess itself. These are the chess fundamentals.
-
CAUTION:
On this note, while it's interesting to sometimes study engine lines regarding tactical justifications, it's important to realize that some/many of these variations are literally not something that you're capable of. I bought Fritz 9 mid-2000s, and I took a long break from chess a few months later. And this is why.
So make sure that when you're asking questions and consulting engines, that you're mainly doing it to absorb fundamental truths about chess that you will be able to recognize and navigate the next time that those instances occur in your game.
Getting wrapped up with attempting to calculate like an engine, is a great way to go insane and zap any and all enjoyment out of chess.
Just ask Kasparov. Any lesser man, and Deep Blue would have absolutely retired 'said' chess player.
A very good rule of thumb for computer study is:
*Only bring the engine specific questions that it can answer for you.*
*Computer, I notice 'xyz' in a position. I chose 'x', but I'm very interested if my assessment of 'y' and 'z' were correct. Computer, was my assessment regarding 'y' and 'z' accurate? If so, why? If not, why not?*
Notice how this is the reverse of: "Computer, what's the best move on move 14?"; where you'll then be trying to assess computer lines outside of a framework that you're privy to and fully understand.
-
So.
Study in order to learn to ask questions like a chess master? YES!
Study in order to learn to calculate like an engine? NO!
-
Good luck and keep us all posted.
We're all interested to see your progress.
Most of all, HAVE FUN and ENJOY CHESS.
All cookie-cutter, ambiguous, carpet-bomb, 'hope something sticks' methods of learning chess aside, let's focus on a process that is 100% value-added and targeted to your own specific strengths and weaknesses.
-
Every time you find yourself faced with a decision to either do X, Y, or Z in a game, take a mental note. Highlight the perceived cost-benefit of each variation, and particularly your reasons for each move.
Then, after the game is finished, go back to these kinds of "forks in the road" and see exactly how your decision worked out for you. What did you have right? What did you miss? What factors supported your argument? What factors disabled your argument?
If you wish, you could even ask an engine about "the paths not taken".
This method is what's known as "studying your own games", and it will only endeavour to teach you what you don't already know, and it will cause you to ask the most appropriate questions, where the answers to those questions will all be information that you can use and apply in subsequent games.
-
Example:
You can choose to:
x) Pin his N for unclear reasons.
y) Win a race to an open file with your rook, where you can control that file instead of your opponent.
z) Prevent your opponent from taking too much space with his bc/fg pawns.
-
As the game played, you chose "x", and then went on to lose because your opponent dominated an open file that you couldn't easily contest without causing additional problems.
In retrospect, you learn that controlling files can SOMETIMES be more important than making ambiguous moves for unclear reasons.
After checking that, you might decide to cross-check with the engine and realize that even winning that race to the file was insufficient, because while your opponent's control of that file was a problem, there was actually a "blink and you'll miss it" opportunity to stop him from moving a pawn to the 6th/3rd, where your castle would be under permanent and irresistible attack.
As a result of this study, you learn that depending on the tactical justifications, preventing pawn attackers from taking too much space around your castle, can SOMETIMES be a primary consideration.
-
This entire process starts with being very self-aware of your reasons for making your moves, paying close attention to EVERYTHING that pieces do and influence, and then revisiting those ideas after the game and studying them in retrospect.
- You'll begin to learn that things that you once used to put a priority on, don't necessarily deserve to be a primary factor.
- You'll begin to distinguish between when these ideas are, and are not, primary.
- You'll begin to understand ways of exploiting these lessons when you see your opponents incorrectly putting a priority on secondary issues.
Your study will serve as both shield and sword.
Your study will always address and improve your own specific perspective, and it will deal with all of the exact ideas that you need to learn.
-
*** !IMPORTANT! ***
Be very patient!!
I can't stress this enough.
Be very very very patient.
There are at least 1000s of different ideas to recognize, learn, and perfect, but none of them occur every single game.
This means that even if you are spending time after your games to better understand and prioritize your decision making process, and taking time to understand the nuances of when and why those decisions are better/worse, or are more applicable/less applicable, you will still only be seeing these instances once every 10-25-50 games depending on the theory, and your capacity to recognize it.
In other words, ideas that you take time to learn about in January, might only reoccur in March. That's just enough time to forget what you learned a few months ago.
So this continuous process will take some time, but as you continue on the path, you'll begin to see separate lessons merge into a more basic, umbrella, fundamental, and absolute kind of a paradigm. Likewise, when playing games and faced with x/y/z, you'll be much better equipped to measure the 3 against each other, and to more efficiently assign a priority that simultaneously encompasses all three variations.
Eventually, you'll start finding tandem variations that simultaneously justify and satiate all three variations, and you'll then begin arguing between a/b/c instead.
A metaphor might help what I'm trying to get across:
I liken it to children learning to read.
Initially, they're aware of every single letter.
Then they become aware of letter combinations.
Then they begin to use those combinations to 'sound-out' entire words.
In this process, they make note of all of the wEIrd and strange PHenomena, where the language appears to break it's own rules, and where there are counter-intuitive nuances; however, these instances are eventually fully understood and seamlessly committed to the sub-conscious.
The end result is seeing all words as their whole; and moreover, the ideas that they were intended to communicate.
-
Now, this is a TERRIBLE way to describe chess to someone asking "how best to improve", because it seems like an inordinate amount of work, and is probably just as discouraging as it is productive.
So let's make sure that we qualify what we've spoken about here with some iron-clad mandates that shall not be trespassed upon...
*
**
***
Only so far as chess remains completely enjoyable, exciting, and worthwhile, should rigorous study be invested!!
***
**
*
Right now, new players and lower-rated players have a certain excitement and energy about the game.
At the end of the day, this is the only thing that will keep anyone at the chess board.
So by all means, study as much as you please...but make sure it's "as you please" and never "as you detest".
Chess growth occurs when you're in the middle of a game, lecture, live coverage, book, etc., and you think, "Hmmm....I never thought of that before...but I can see how that's probably an important idea..." and then having that same idea, about that same position, reoccur again and again and again, until it's second nature and habit. To where that idea is easily recognized, understood, considered, and included.
Ultimately, by simply playing lots and unintentionally picking up tidbits here and there as you explore the chess world, you will grow, learn, and improve.
It's inevitable.
If you want to hyper-accelerate that learning, simply pay attention to the questions you asked yourself during the game, and then take time to find those answers when it's done.
Self-study is the most underrated form of improvement.
It's so simple, obvious, and "do-it-yourself" that novices will often overlook this as being their most principle, most accessible, and most efficient form of development.
Very simple. Very straightforward.
-
So.
The most important rule to studying is...
*
**
***
1. Always make sure that you are having fun and enjoyment at the chess board.
***
**
*
-
Bonus Section:
Try to find the core of chess (the fundamentals) which has very little to do with "You move here, then I move there, then you do this, and I do that."
While this process takes place in every single move, it's not chess itself, and it's senseless to have this kind of a 'bug-brain' approach. It will only get you so far. We should use tactics to justify the viability of bigger-picture ideas. Not just to aimlessly play, in an of themselves.
At some point, we have to elevate our game to start paying attention to how the strengths and weaknesses of our/our opponents' light/dark coloured bishops are affected by changes in the pawn-structures (an aspect of colour complex).
For example (one out of *MANY*):
We might consider what happens if every single pawn moves / doesn't move / captures, and what the resulting influence that the newly opened/closed lines/diagonal/colours mean to the scope of the pieces on the board.
In this kind of a situation, we'd be using the "you do this and I do that" tactical calculation in order to justify the prognosis of certain pieces being more or less viable, for/against us, and for/against our opponents in the later stages.
- Very very very subtle.
- Has nothing to do with "winning a piece outright".
- Has everything to do with a frustrated opponent that can't find a plan 10 moves down the road, because everything that they want to do is ineffective and "magically" on the wrong squares, or one tempo short.
In other words, "the fundamentals".
So for bonus marks, try to pay careful attention to focusing your questions on matters of chess fundamentals, and not so much chess tactics.
Focus your reasons for moving a piece to address the improvement of the fundamentals within the position.
=
It goes without saying that overlooking a mate in 2, just so that you'll have a better endgame, is folly.
So again, it's not like we wouldn't pay careful attention to the tactics at all times...it's just to say that there is a whole bigger, better, badder side to chess that deals with chess itself. These are the chess fundamentals.
-
CAUTION:
On this note, while it's interesting to sometimes study engine lines regarding tactical justifications, it's important to realize that some/many of these variations are literally not something that you're capable of. I bought Fritz 9 mid-2000s, and I took a long break from chess a few months later. And this is why.
So make sure that when you're asking questions and consulting engines, that you're mainly doing it to absorb fundamental truths about chess that you will be able to recognize and navigate the next time that those instances occur in your game.
Getting wrapped up with attempting to calculate like an engine, is a great way to go insane and zap any and all enjoyment out of chess.
Just ask Kasparov. Any lesser man, and Deep Blue would have absolutely retired 'said' chess player.
A very good rule of thumb for computer study is:
*Only bring the engine specific questions that it can answer for you.*
*Computer, I notice 'xyz' in a position. I chose 'x', but I'm very interested if my assessment of 'y' and 'z' were correct. Computer, was my assessment regarding 'y' and 'z' accurate? If so, why? If not, why not?*
Notice how this is the reverse of: "Computer, what's the best move on move 14?"; where you'll then be trying to assess computer lines outside of a framework that you're privy to and fully understand.
-
So.
Study in order to learn to ask questions like a chess master? YES!
Study in order to learn to calculate like an engine? NO!
-
Good luck and keep us all posted.
We're all interested to see your progress.
Most of all, HAVE FUN and ENJOY CHESS.
Tactics are the single most important aspect to improve our chess strenth. It doesn't matter if you have Carlsen's level of positional understanding if you are unable to spot tactical opportunities. If you are seriously trying to improve, tactics should be number one priority. Puzzle rush ranking made visible that the top GMs are usually also better tacticians than the lower rated ones (with a few exceptions)...so, even among GMs better tactical recognition plays a huge role. For us, mortals, I think that's even truer. Most of our games are decided by tactics (overlooking opponents tactics also).
Then, about endgames... also very important, but at our level there's no need to complicate. Keep it simple. Try to understand the simplest endgames by heart. There's no need to try to read Dvoretsky endgame manual if you still have problems mating with rook and king versus king despite time pressure...
Ok, that's what I have, good luck!
Then, about endgames... also very important, but at our level there's no need to complicate. Keep it simple. Try to understand the simplest endgames by heart. There's no need to try to read Dvoretsky endgame manual if you still have problems mating with rook and king versus king despite time pressure...
Ok, that's what I have, good luck!
I totally agree with Onyx_chess, but i would still advise you learn a lot of endgames. Ofcourse not only theoretical endgames, but also practical endgames.
Knowing a lot of pawn endings is the the most important. You often can trade an advantage into a won pawn endgame.
Rook endings are very complicated, but occur in 50% of all chess games, so i would advise you to look at the rook-endgame-principals and at the philidor and lucena position (others are just a waste of time).
Minor piece endgames are what i focused most on, but aren't necessary. I would suggest you to look how to draw a position with pawn down and how to win a position with a pawn up. Mating with two bishops is also important.
Queen endgames are the most annoying (in my opinion). I would suggest you to look at the game Maroczy vs Marshall and then stop (the Queen vs pawns and Queen vs piece endgames are also important).
About the opening choice:
I'd suggest you to play simple openings with simple ideas first (Italian game and Queens gambit declined are very good choices) and the opening principals.
Then look at openings that fit your playstyle (as an instance: i like interesting positions and hate drawing so i play the Sicilian dragon and the King's indian defense).
Also DON'T learn variations but typical manuvers and starting positions (Closed ruy lopez has a very late starting position (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. 0-0 Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d6)).
About the middlegame:
Try to solve as many tactics as possible and the strategic concepts.
Look at games with players that fit your playstyle. IMPORTANT: Don't look too much at games from nowadays, as they are 20 move preparation and a draw in a position with equal material in the endgame. The games of the old russian masters or Bobby fischer are great to look at, as they hold a lot of great ideas (I myself like complicated positions, so i look at the games from Botvinnik vs Tal or Spassky vs Fischer).
But still most important is to enjoy the game, keep the motivation and to play on real boards against real opponents. Also long time-controls are better than short ones, because the art is to evaluate are position deep and in every detail.
Knowing a lot of pawn endings is the the most important. You often can trade an advantage into a won pawn endgame.
Rook endings are very complicated, but occur in 50% of all chess games, so i would advise you to look at the rook-endgame-principals and at the philidor and lucena position (others are just a waste of time).
Minor piece endgames are what i focused most on, but aren't necessary. I would suggest you to look how to draw a position with pawn down and how to win a position with a pawn up. Mating with two bishops is also important.
Queen endgames are the most annoying (in my opinion). I would suggest you to look at the game Maroczy vs Marshall and then stop (the Queen vs pawns and Queen vs piece endgames are also important).
About the opening choice:
I'd suggest you to play simple openings with simple ideas first (Italian game and Queens gambit declined are very good choices) and the opening principals.
Then look at openings that fit your playstyle (as an instance: i like interesting positions and hate drawing so i play the Sicilian dragon and the King's indian defense).
Also DON'T learn variations but typical manuvers and starting positions (Closed ruy lopez has a very late starting position (1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. 0-0 Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d6)).
About the middlegame:
Try to solve as many tactics as possible and the strategic concepts.
Look at games with players that fit your playstyle. IMPORTANT: Don't look too much at games from nowadays, as they are 20 move preparation and a draw in a position with equal material in the endgame. The games of the old russian masters or Bobby fischer are great to look at, as they hold a lot of great ideas (I myself like complicated positions, so i look at the games from Botvinnik vs Tal or Spassky vs Fischer).
But still most important is to enjoy the game, keep the motivation and to play on real boards against real opponents. Also long time-controls are better than short ones, because the art is to evaluate are position deep and in every detail.
I bet a lot of people would say just play more, but my rating shot up after I stopped playing altogether for a few months and all I did was watch chess games on youtube. I particularly liked the games by Alpha Zero and talks given by yasser seirawan. I also really like a youtuber called agadmater. www.youtube.com/c/agadmator. Tactics puzzles are also good for developing tactical instincts but I personally think a deeper understanding of space and position is more important than tactics. Tactics are exciting but you also have to know how to set them up.
@Onyx_Chess very well written! 👍
@Onyx_Chess Damn boi! that is one heck of a writing... Beautifully written..
@Onyx_Chess @etaLaskera dude thank you very much for your help, you guys opened my brain about chess. @alkapwn3d you can let me stop playing and study chess more and always with love because you only play chess and only study chess even if you have love for what you do
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.