gwnn wrote on 04/04/11 at 09:36:46:

If you're doing Yusupov, start with the Fundamentals level (1). There will be a lot of easy chapters, but several challenging ones. Your rating is a little over their nominal target range, but you will benefit and people say the nominal target range might be a little low. Just IMO from my own experience of working with them, I just bought them and am enjoying them a lot.

I admit I am out of book now

gwnn wrote on 04/04/11 at 09:36:46:

Your post is full of very interesting points!

Quote:
 
Correct evaluation of a position is a sign of chess mastery and one of the most difficult tasks within the game of chess, especially during playing itself. In analysis it's easier to "freeze" the position and claim and advantage at some point. In the practical game it is just a snapshot in time (for one move perhaps) in a particular position. During the game it is more important to keep on playing, to "stay in the game" than to tell yourself "I am better here". So at every move it is back to the roots: "What is the threat here?" "Thinking about the next move - do I lose something with it?" - I think that more than 90 % of all the games in chess history were simply LOST due to some kind of one move blunder! If we avoid that and "stay in the game" we pass this task to our opponent. As your opponent did in your game - playing ...Bc7 he saved his piece, you played c4 and lost (he did NOT win - you LOST!).

Quote:
There is a second remark to this - How do you know if it is +/= or +/- and I dare to say, how do you know if it is +- (desicive advantage) during the game? Perhaps your evaluation is just wrong and it is =/+ or -/+ or even -+. It may also be "counterplay", "compensation", "attack" or "initiative" or the marvellous "unclear". During the game - very difficult. Afterwards at analysis - sometimes hard work for a correct assesment

Quote:

Yes! - Avoid yours and find those of your oppenent - it's + 300 Elo at least

Quote:
The GM is of course right: "Space" is something favourable (at least most of the times) - as are "central dominance", "better placement of pieces and pawns", "more safe king", "better development". I don't think one should play openings he doesn't like (e.g. the Colle) but to play chess moves according to classical principles (as mentioned above) - therefore your "Starting out with the Grünfeld" should be something like: d4, c4, Nc3, Nf3, Bf4 or Bg5 to bring your pieces out - by playing the cd5-Variation you have jumped over your chess development; I think you still need time to master somewhat basic features of the game. Jump around through the openings, meet all kind of different pawn structures and play them (not only replay!) - then you come back to the systems you like most and study theory more deeply.

Quote:
I would recommend playing instead of reading - either find yourself a human partner to test various middle game positions or take different types of pawn-structures and play against an engine. E.g. pawn chains, open centre, opposite castling and so on - Why not make your own library of middle-game position with a database? Just replay games you like and sort them by your own themes - for the start I would recommend "older classical" games - perhaps make your way up through chess history? If you can afford Kasparovs "predecessors" books you will get the whole bunch of chess ideas, middlegame motivs, endgames and openings. 

Anyway - I still like J. Rowson most when he says: "Improvement starts at the edge of your comfort zone" - this just means, don't consume chess, but work on it - and work means thinking for yourself, pushing pieces around the board, beeing sceptical about chess moves and evaluations, trying to find your own solution in the chess riddle. It took me more than 20 years to recognize this!

I understood the question to mean: "Will you bluff to your opponent that you're out of book and don't know what you're doing when in fact you know that your move is of Super GM quality". Notice how Gwynn states that you KNOW what you're going to move exactly, there is no question about different variations of move orders, etc.  

This could be critical in a long line where for example maybe your opponent thinks you're falling straight into a trap with your move. I wouldn't play this immediately because your opponent will think: "okay, obviously that is a book move". It's about masking the quality of your moves. Even online blitz, if someone makes a move quickly in the opening, you're going to highly suspect it's a top quality move. 

Sometimes online if I spot a potential trap by my opponent or a favourable zwischenzug for me, I play the moves fast encouraging my opponent also to play fast and falling into the mistake. You might do this yourself without realizing it. 

Sometimes if someone makes an OBVIOUS and heinous mistake, I let it there for a while... just to make sure they see good what a ridiculous move they made, and hold onto the pathetic hope they have that I'll miss it also. I think it messes with their head a bit. They don't immediately go into "desperate struggle" mode, and you're not yet playing the 'unfair' game where you have a huge advantage and under pressure to win. I pretend to think... "surely there's something more to it". I've found this is a good way to get them to resign also, if you take it fast, they often play on with a fast move themselves.

gwnn wrote on 04/03/11 at 16:40:04:


Well some things come to my mind:

(1) 8.Rb1 is a probably the most complicated line within a strategical and tactical complex opening - maybe should look for easier stuff rated 1650?

(2) at some point Black can win a pawn nearly by force by taking on d4 - you really have to know (and in this case I mean "know" (not understand) what to do then, because things following are very concrete) - perhaps there is better use of study time?

(3) you missed an opening principle: King safety is very important - if you played 14.0-0 to bring your king away from the centre, you also would have been safe from tactical tricks

(4) double attack and pins - probably the main reason for losing many games at lower level - keep your eyes open, protect your pieces

(5) understanding moves is more important than knowing them: So after ...Bc7 you should have asked yourself: What is he doing there? Why isn't he going back to g7 - this looks a lot more natural? Where can the bishop go from c7 - what is his function?

My conclusion:
You are rated 1650 but you certainly want to improve. Don't take the wrong bus! Try to get a higher level of your game by avoiding mistakes and raising your general chess understanding. You may reach 2000 without too much chess theory by playing according to classical chess knowledge. Don't waste your time studying complicated lines - it's like wanting to drive a Formula 1 car, but not having a drivers license. If you have the chess driving license you are able to come up with playable moves in every chess position - from this knowledge and practise you come back to openings, because only now you understand the meaning of moves and move orders.

I knew about the manouevre Bg7-e5-c7-a5, but I didn't realise that it pins my queen. Now I know. And I hope I would have seen it in standard time control.

gwnn wrote on 04/03/11 at 14:36:48:

Maybe you should share your moves with us to lighten up the case a bit?

gwnn wrote on 04/03/11 at 13:17:12:

How many of your first 13 moves did you understand? If you really knew why you played them, you would have been able to follow up with reasonable moves.