|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 26, 2022 18:26:40 GMT
You must be the only player I know who still reads chess books, because you mean the paper variety, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 26, 2022 18:34:45 GMT
You must be the only player I know who still reads chess books, because you mean the paper variety, right? When I quote an English language book, it is most of the time in pdf format. I still have most of my Russian books, and a few Serbian language books on paper. I don't like books in pgn/cb format, although I use them most often in combination with the pdf. Whenever I can (especially when I am not tired), I try to use the book without a chess board. |
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 29, 2022 10:28:05 GMT
OK, this isn't particularly difficult, although I failed the first try, BUT is beautiful. Don't look in the notation, unless you want to see the solution.
After all these years playing, I think I've never seen a mate like this one:  |
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 29, 2022 11:15:06 GMT
Beautiful, indeed!
Meanwhile, I played against Chess Titans several games. I made it to level 7. Felt better: I improved my game in the openings, and I was much better tactically. I blundered obviously only in the last games, when I was tired. The board is beautiful, but the 3d pieces are sometimes difficult to see. In a game, after a combination I was sure to have won some material, and I needed several seconds to remember that I have a bishop on h2! and not a pawn. Anyway, at level 6 and 7 the game reminded me the human players in my town, and it was a much more pleasant experience than my usual playing against Maia.
I still have a big problem in my repertoire: the Ruy Lopez. After having a look at the main lines, I eventually reverted to the Kaufman repertoire from 2004, with the exchange variation. It will be OK for a start.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 29, 2022 12:16:37 GMT
At least you're avoiding the Marshall attack with that line. I remember when it was fun to play the RL, with both colors. Now even in human blitz you're likely to encounter the Marshall.
|
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 29, 2022 14:11:32 GMT
At least you're avoiding the Marshall attack with that line. I remember when it was fun to play the RL, with both colors. Now even in human blitz you're likely to encounter the Marshall. I had a look at several repertoires -- the best one was an amateur's with the main lines, and that's what I will probably work on later, when I finish the other things I have to do.
The present repertoire is not too complicated, with a lots of line I already know, avoids the Marshall, the Siesta, the Jaenish gambit (with the now usual d3, although I analyzed, 40 years ago, the main lines -- and while I hardly remember the new lines today, I still know what I did then! Memory is a bitch...). Kaufman usually proposes 0-0 before c3, and it suits me.
I never faced the Ruy Lopez when I was actively playing, with the exception of some off-beat lines in blitz and rapid.
|
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 30, 2022 1:47:56 GMT
Continued playing informal games against Chess Titans. Something between blitz and rapid. I forced myself to be disciplined and do the homework after each move: what has changed, is there a threat, and calculate a bit. So, on the good side: I have not blundered obviously. I am also more familiar with the positions I play. I was surprised how easily I found attacking plans and tactics. But, I missed a few times to calculate one move deeper, and missed sacrifices, combinations because of that, despite seeing the idea.
The tactical training seemed to be really useful. It really did me lot of good. Now I need to focus on developing habits -- things I do at LTC, but are not automatic enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 30, 2022 3:40:26 GMT
The "do the homework after each move: what has changed, is there a threat, and calculate a bit" bit reminded me of a guy I used to spar with 30 years ago. He would even take notes of moves on a paper. Something which isn't allowed, but I saw him so it even on official club games.
|
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 30, 2022 9:27:36 GMT
The "do the homework after each move: what has changed, is there a threat, and calculate a bit" bit reminded me of a guy I used to spar with 30 years ago. He would even take notes of moves on a paper. Something which isn't allowed, but I saw him so it even on official club games. It's difficult to explain.
Several months have passed since I started playing chess again. I lost a lot of time making choices, learning how to learn, but there, it is finally ok.
But I still don't see obvious improvements, while I still see the old same weaknesses. Yes, I play much better the openings. I often know how to play the middlegame. But it's knowledge. I have to improve the "reflexes" -- how I calculate, how deep, how I see threats. I don't feel that I am fundamentally a stronger player.
Today, I will start a tournament against several engines at LTC. After that, I will create a rapid tournament against weaker engines. I guess it should help. I have to play now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 30, 2022 11:16:48 GMT
You're not a new, young player. If you expect to feel stronger after just a few months, maybe you're expecting too much?
|
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 30, 2022 13:55:34 GMT
You're not a new, young player. If you expect to feel stronger after just a few months, maybe you're expecting too much? Perhaps, yes. But, for now, I just want to "iron" my play: discipline, no blunders, do "the homework". At this moment, I play one great game, three games with obvious ups and downs, and one atrocious. Today, e.g., I played a "great game" (still have not analyzed it): most of the time I managed to predict my opponent's answers, when I missed the his moves I evaluated the position correctly; I saw the potential tactics, sacrificed a pawn and an exchange and won handily. Two days ago I played a great opening, had a winning position, and managed to blunder a pawn and let the opponent's Queen become active. In a still better position I blundered a knight.
The difference between these two games was a matter of focus and discipline. I don't expect suddenly to play at an insane level, to know more than I know. I am well aware that it is a process -- lots of analyses, exercises, games. I see some things changing, some improvements happening. But I have to learn, to train, to be more disciplined, more careful.
|
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Nov 20, 2022 8:52:42 GMT
Hello, Ozy. Long time no see -- I guess that's the way to say it? Anyway, while I almost stopped posting (no really good reasons, now, as I have internet access; I just feel tired), I still read regularly your posts here and on prodeo (and CCC). Anyway, I found four of my games in a huge base, and I was... so mad. One win and three losses! In a season where I finished at 50% (4W, 4L and 3=)! Life is simply unfair. But I saw that my opponents had all ratings around 2200 so I feel a bit better. I was destroyed in one game with white, and as black... I was summoned by my captain to play for a win with black and avoided 12...c5 which would have given me equality right away. I lost another game on time, no accustomed to the new regulations (the end position is a draw). From round five (the games were played in the first four rounds) I lost another game (I blundered twice in a row) but won three. I found the game that I lost on chess.com, I think, but not the wins. Alas. We have the moves, the games, but not their history.
Anyway: I feel I improved. Stopped the oversights, blunders, while positionally I play well. I am finally beating Chess Titans at any level easily. I finalized my opening repertoire, but I can't remember a single line. When I analyze my old games, I feel I understand chess better.
I hope you are OK.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Nov 20, 2022 10:03:33 GMT
Not chess-wise, I'm not. I checked back at ChessTempo, after doing tons of practice in Peshk@, and lost a lot of ground. I've concentrated in getting it back, but I'm still more than a 100 point away from my previous level. Age?
You should look on the bright side. If your opponents have only your bad games to prepare against, they will be ill prepared when the play with you, wouldn't you agree?
PS: don't be a stranger.
|
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Nov 30, 2022 11:12:11 GMT
Just like Petrosian, whenever I play with white, I can't get an advantage, and when I analyze or play with black, I cannot equalize. I play training games daily against Maia 1900 to learn my openings (I can peek at my repertoire, and, finally, I discovered that hard work over the board is the only way for me to memorize opening lines), and I am always in difficulties.
Just yesterday... I stumbled on a variation in the Modern which I would avoid both with white and black. At the end of the opening, white has a B+2p against a rook. I discovered first that Maia had the line in her book, but at a greater depth. Then, I lost my way. I felt I should avoid trading rooks, but can trade the remaining knights. I don't have a clue how to play this ending. My technique is really poor. In the post mortem analysis, Fat Fritz found a long, forced line with checks and won a rook for the remaining bishop, then gave his knight for the last black pawn and converted a pawn for the win. I cannot calculate so deep. I saw the checks, but it looked too risky.
My questions remained unanswered -- I will have to analyze deeper this ending -- what can I trade?
I noticed that I play middlegames well -- when I am focused, I see a lot, calculate a lot, and, in most cases, I do well in the first 20 moves (LOL). I manage to remain patient, to improve my pieces until 30, 40 moves. But then... the endings... I am a lost cause. I managed to convert only when I had a clear material advantage.
I reanalyzed my games from 25, 15 years ago. I am better in the openings and I understand better the middlegame. But no improvements in the endgame so far.
|
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Dec 19, 2022 16:54:01 GMT
What do you make of the Chessable courses? Are they worthy of buying?
|
|
