|
|
|
Topic: Contra o uso de engines (no engines)
| |
|
|
Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
| Philidor wrote: And never exchange a fianchettoed bishop unless you have a good reason to. |
Never do anything unless you have a good reason to! 
|
|
|
| GileCAR wrote: I've learned basic chess concepts from Chessmaster 10th edition:) Maye that's why I'm so low rated :) |
Yes, it is the reason your rating's so low but not for the reason you think. The reason is that Chessmaster 10 has only been out for a fairly short time so, since you learnt the basics from it, you must have learnt the basics quite recently. Your strength will increase as you get more practice and become familiar with more advanced ideas! 
|
|
|
| Philidor wrote: Find a particular player to study, and study alot of they're games. You'll learn alot of what they know and would help you plan better at the board. |
Capablanca is a good place to start. Alekhine if you prefer your games a bit more firy; Fischer if you prefer something a little more modern. Oh, and Morphy but be aware that many of his games are against rather weak players.
| GileCAR wrote: why is finding particular player so important? |
In many positions, there are several reasonable ways of proceeding. Often, which of those is best is just a matter of personal style or taste. By studying just one player at a time, you get a much more consistent picture. You can compare your player's move in the current game to other moves he played in similar positions and start to see links between the games. Chess is all about patterns.
On the other hand, if you study many different players, these connections aren't nearly so clear.
There are no patterns to follow, just isolated ideas. One player will do one thing, another may do something completely different in a very similar position. Not because one of these players is wrong and the other right, but because there's more than one way to do it and the two players have different styles.
|
|
|
well, thanks for the explanation richeby. The way I was studying was to pick up as many ideas as I can, and I never thought about this approach. I've played more than 2000 blitz games, and over 400 standard time control, since September last year when I joined FICS, so I guess I gained some experience. At first I strive to closed positions, trying to get some small advantage, and now I strive more to open and tactical positions. Also I find it fun (as black) to let opponent build a center and then try to break it... I've tried a lot of ideas. Now just to find out what work best for me, and than pick up a player that suits me to study
One more question:
Is there some easy way to find out witch lines in openings I study are good, and witch are bad? :) Only way I know such thing for now are annotated games I have. But I don't have annotated games in all openings I'm playing ... let's say spanish and sicilian ... witch are very diverse .
|
|
|
"One more question:
Is there some easy way to find out witch lines in openings I study are good, and witch are bad? :) Only way I know such thing for now are annotated games I have. But I don't have annotated games in all openings I'm playing ... let's say spanish and sicilian ... witch are very diverse"
Of course :D Enter the games into a computer and if your studying for white and it "gives advantage to black" (think plus under minus sign, plus under equal sign means white will have to fight harder to draw provided both sides played the best moves).
And on studying players, Capablanca's a good player to study, Leko and Kramnik I especially recommend. The Spanish game is good to study, I played the sicilian before with success though have to memorize too much and it goes against my style. I prefer to make moves based on ideas rather then memorize from a book, you may even play best move novelties with that approach :D
|
| Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next |
|
|
|
