Monday, August 08, 2005
Practical Play + Analysis
Being a little bit adrift right now since I still dont have a focused chess-improvement plan, I have taken to analyzing my games. Particularly games that I lost or drew. Sometimes even if I win, if the game was interesting enough, I analyze it. But mostly I concentrate on games I lost because I'm really interested in trying to understand why I lose games.

What I saw was dreadfull. The positions I go into time and again, are a positional player's worst nightmare. I continously give outposts, concede open files, swap my good bishop for an opponents bad bishop, go into pawn endgames without me having pawns, etc. I win only when my opponents fall for my tactics. But 1850 players above doesnt fall for them so much, that my structural deficiencies starts to tell sooner or later. Its no wonder I lose against U2000 opponents, and its a wonder how I win at all. You must have a bad hair day or something to lose to me.

You know, I have studied whole books on positional play and always assumed that I was putting what I learned into practice. But this is entirely false. Reading something from a book, and applying it are two separate things. Analysis revealed just how pathetic my positional sense is. But the good news is, since doing game analysis, I have remembered my blunders, and is starting to see positions more deeply. What I learned from my games has really emphasized and complemented what I read from my books. I lost count on the number of "so that's what the book was talking about" moment I had.

One more thing is - analysis is more powerfull when done with a higher rated opponent. Lately, a couple of 2000+ players had been picking on me =>, and had been accepting my seeks. I havent won against one of them, so I am really hesitant to play against someone of that rating. But when they started analysing with me after the game, the experience became far more palatable. They would recommend certain moves on certain positions, and analysis reveals the moves to be the correct ones(and crafty tends to agree with them too). The thing is, I actually considered those moves but considered it second best. Clearly my level of judgement is lacking, but from conversations with them, at least I am starting to understand now why they do what they do.

Now with regards to its effects - I certainly feel more knowledgable than before. But my rating hasnt improved yet. I'm still Mr. 1763 (Down from 1782 =<). I feel like a tactics puzzle right now. You know there is a solution, but you just cant find it. I mean, I know I should be better than this, but what is hindering me? What is the key move that will solve the problem and unlock the potential within? Look, this may sound sappy and cornball but, I really believe inside me is a far better player struggling to get out.

So comeon innerman, beat the living crap out of my outer person. Get out now!
posted by Nezha at 2:14 AM | Permalink |


  • At 1:53 PM, Blogger Blue Devil Knight

    Could it be you need a.....THINKING PROCESS, which I know you hate?

    I think it is probably possible for a thinking 'algorithm' to become habitual and automated, like Tempo's board scan, or Knight sight, so it doesn't actually feel like work.

    At my level of play, though, I HAVE to do blundercheck or I end up hanging my pieces. Those poor little pieces. They'd much rather be on Kasparov's side than Blue Devil's side....


  • At 6:55 PM, Blogger Nezha

    I already have a thinking process - the infamous kotov tree. But implementing it is really hard.. I always forget to think..

    btw, I read about our friend quandoman and his "spat" with DG. It provided me with a few minutes of entertainment. We need a lot more of this i think => - "To mix it up" as chessplayers say.