Chess?

[Mike Hart]

anyone here a USCF or FIDE rated chess player?

[Jdwags]

Sorry Mike,

Im a "rookie rated"...

[Dennyz]

I haven't made it to the minors yet.

[Snow]

I never got certified or anything, but I played with a few rated players for a little while (along with a lot of chessmaster) and was beating 1200 and 1300 players - if I remember their ratings correctly...I am sure I am severly rusty now

[johnstewart]

I've not played in a tournament for probably 5 years or so, but 10 years ago I was a big chess nut:

http://www.64.com/uscf/ratings/?nm=12529058

Looks like I'm a 1670... these days I'm sure I suck... probably around 1300 strength, although with a little tactics work I'm sure I could improve.

After I went to college in 1990, I discovered sex, drugs, and rock and roll. Chess just didn't have quite the same impact after that.

However, it sounds stupid to those that have never played in one, but when you're knee deep in a hairy situation in a tournament game with your rating on the line, man your adrenaline really gets flowing.

I might take it up again when I'm older and fatter. =)

[Mike Hart]

Originally posted by johnstewart
I might take it up again when I'm older and fatter. =)

Ha! I'm older, was fatter but getting thinner, but somehow that isn't keeping me from getting older! After a 30 year layoff from 'social' chess, I've been bitten by an intense interest, am playing in tournaments and getting beat, but learning. I'm guessing my first rating will be 1300-1400, as I'm mostly losing to anyone over 1500, but mostly winning against those under 1400.

I do some tactics study every day, it seems to be giving me the quickest results in improvement. I figure if I can get to 1600, then I may put the necessary time into studying openings.

[johnstewart]

The three things you should study until you are at least a 1500-1600 are tactics, tactics, and more tactics!!!

Nearly all games under the expert level (2000) are won on a tactical combination.

The next thing you should work on is your endgame. Most players under expert are surprisingly weak on it. Always play out your games, even if you're down a piece. I can't tell you how many games I've pulled out of my ass by just hanging in there. Learn the quickest wins given different piece combinations. Definitely get your pawn + king endgames down. An errant move can easily mean the difference between a win and a draw (or even loss).

Then work on general strategies (i.e. when is a bishop more valuable than a knight and vice versa, when is it advantageous to have an open file or not, etc).

The absolute LAST thing you should do is spend a lot of time memorizing opening lines. This is what almost everyone does, and it's an almost complete waste of time.

There are more books written on chess than on any other sport or pasttime, and the majority of them are on openings. It's really one of the reasons I stopped playing chess - it's so annoying to have everyone booked up on all of these opening lines. And if you are booked up on a line and your opponent deviates from the presumed "best" line, then if you've just memorized it, are you going to know how to exploit it?

Probably not, so really the best thing to do is pick a couple of decent openings and then strive to understand the common themes used in them. For example, I always liked the King's Gambit - that is all about bringing pressure onto the f7 square and going for the throat... OR if they succsessfully defend then using that pressure to get an advantageous position and development to have an advantage going into the endgame. It's fun to know some lines that end in death for black, but to spend time memorizing line after line of it is time better spent by working on something else (tactics, endgames, etc...).

As for *what* opening to play, I'd say until you're expert level you're better off with an open system (e4) than a closed (d4), because you generally end up with positions that are tactically rich and will help develop your tactical skill more quickly.

Anyway, that's just my $0.02. Obviously I'm no master of the game, so your mileage may vary. =)

Oh, and in regards to tactics being the most important thing to work on: There was this master player (whose name I forget) in WI that was playing when I started back in the late '80s. He had been a 1500 player for years and years (decades?), until all of a sudden he just shot up to master (2200+) level. One of my chess buddies once asked him what was the secret to being a master, and his reply was simply:

"Learn to not drop pieces."

So it's all about the tactics. =)

Good luck; maybe we should play online sometime if I ever get into it again.

[Mike Hart]

Thanks John! I totally agree! I traded some computer stuff for some lessons from a ~2200 player, and he says exactly what you are saying, so I am very encouraged to hear that seconded.

I'm putting in at least an hour a day on tactics, sometimes more. I've found free tactics downloads for Chessbase Lite (at http://webplaza.pt.lu/ckaber/Chess.htm#Chess%20training. I started with Yasser Seirawan's tactics book (he's a Seattle area resident), and am using Lazlo Polgar's "5334 Problems, Combinations, and Games" and Fred Reinfeld's "1001 Winning Chess Sacrifices and Combinations". Another helpful book was "How to Beat Your Dad at Chess" which is an absurd title with an even more absurd cover, but it is 50 mating themes. I also have Yuri Averbakh's "Tactics for Advanced Players", whew the title says it all. Maybe next year...

I am dropping fewer pieces, but still too often forget to ask myself "am I leaving anything hanging? does the opponent have any checks? does this move improve my position?" etc.

Learning how to think, how to analyze - Jeremy Silman's "Reassess Your Chess" and Seirawan's "Winning Chess Strategies" are really helping there.

Speaking of e4 openings, I'm still looking for an affordable copy of Bobby Fischer's "My 60 Best Games of Chess", which I hear has really great annotation by him, but every time I see a copy on ebay it goes for $60 and up, yikes.

Anyway, I'm emphasizing tactics, but also studying strategy and endgame situations. I'm getting to where I don't step on my **** in the opening, using logic rather than memorization, now if I can manage to NOT DROP PIECES (or even pawns!) in the middle game, maybe I'll get more wins.

I was just in my first two tournaments - I won 2 out of 3 in a Quad against weak opposition (1100-1400), and scored 2 pts in a 5 round Swiss, I think I tied for first in the 'bottom third' (UNR - 1500) and made my entry fee back! Got beat by a 1900, 1753, and a 1568 who was beating higher-rated opponents.

I had a good game as black (QGD) against the 1753 last night, but dropped my a-pawn at about move 28 and that was all she wrote.

Thanks again