What I was trying to say....
Steinitz says much better. I have been studying my tactics like all the Knights. Not as much as some, more than others. My ratings have improved some, but not as much as I had hoped. Every increase in tactical ability has to be tempered by cautious play. My tactical play is definately stronger so why hasn't my rating supported it?
Steinitz has the accumulation theory:
Each advantage, no matter how small, is important becuase a few small advantages added together can mean a winning postion.
Pandolfini explains it well too:
Play positional chess. Seize the opend diagonals with your bishops. Induce weaknesses in your oppenents camp, then use them to launch an invasion. The weight of your accumulated advantages will be too much for your opponent to bear.
These statements basically describe why my play has not been improving much. Rather than making the best move I often play the most aggressive move or moves that are likely to lead to tactical combinations.
When I learned how to play chess I took the tactical path by accident. I am aggressive so maybe it was by nature. Any first I learned how the pieces moved and I thought I could play. I played into my adult life never knowing about tactics or positional chess. When my interest turned serious in college and I started playing on FICS and playing friends I got tired of losing. The combinations were like magic. So I went to the bookstore and browsed the chess books. I found one that was easy to read and interesting and happened to be some book on basic tactics tactics. So I stopped hanging so many pieces, stopped being a victim of cheap tactics and got stronger with discovered attacks, mates and forks. So then I started playing to set up cheap tactics and started winning more games. So I continued on in this fashion buying books on attacking and aggressive chess play and openings. My play continued to improve but then peaked. I discovered the Knights and joined thinking that I would really be a great chess player if I mastered these tactics. But I have discovered just as the cheap tactics stopped working so do the more complicated ones when you play better players. They generally do not give you the same opportunities. So once again I experienced being beaten by magic.... I could not get any tactics going and even had trouble developing my pieces into aggressive postions.... heh, or sometimes at all. Some games I would get constricted and some games there would be this annoying piece that I could not get rid of.
Most of the tactics in my games are in the 10 - 30 level range in CT-Art. Rarely is there a mate/combination in 6 or 10. So what good is it if I can solve all the CT-Art problems? So my plan is to continue tactical study on the Chess tactics server, it serves me the problems I am ready for and continue working the 10-30 problems on CT-Art while I bone up on some positional chess. When I start losing games because I missed 4 or more move combinations then I will work on building my tactical muscle some more.
Steinitz has the accumulation theory:
Each advantage, no matter how small, is important becuase a few small advantages added together can mean a winning postion.
Pandolfini explains it well too:
Play positional chess. Seize the opend diagonals with your bishops. Induce weaknesses in your oppenents camp, then use them to launch an invasion. The weight of your accumulated advantages will be too much for your opponent to bear.
These statements basically describe why my play has not been improving much. Rather than making the best move I often play the most aggressive move or moves that are likely to lead to tactical combinations.
When I learned how to play chess I took the tactical path by accident. I am aggressive so maybe it was by nature. Any first I learned how the pieces moved and I thought I could play. I played into my adult life never knowing about tactics or positional chess. When my interest turned serious in college and I started playing on FICS and playing friends I got tired of losing. The combinations were like magic. So I went to the bookstore and browsed the chess books. I found one that was easy to read and interesting and happened to be some book on basic tactics tactics. So I stopped hanging so many pieces, stopped being a victim of cheap tactics and got stronger with discovered attacks, mates and forks. So then I started playing to set up cheap tactics and started winning more games. So I continued on in this fashion buying books on attacking and aggressive chess play and openings. My play continued to improve but then peaked. I discovered the Knights and joined thinking that I would really be a great chess player if I mastered these tactics. But I have discovered just as the cheap tactics stopped working so do the more complicated ones when you play better players. They generally do not give you the same opportunities. So once again I experienced being beaten by magic.... I could not get any tactics going and even had trouble developing my pieces into aggressive postions.... heh, or sometimes at all. Some games I would get constricted and some games there would be this annoying piece that I could not get rid of.
Most of the tactics in my games are in the 10 - 30 level range in CT-Art. Rarely is there a mate/combination in 6 or 10. So what good is it if I can solve all the CT-Art problems? So my plan is to continue tactical study on the Chess tactics server, it serves me the problems I am ready for and continue working the 10-30 problems on CT-Art while I bone up on some positional chess. When I start losing games because I missed 4 or more move combinations then I will work on building my tactical muscle some more.
posted by phorku at
5:36 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home