How to Get Good at Chess

[anatta]

How to Get Good at Chess

You don’t have to be a polymath like Beth Harmon in ’The Queen’s Gambit‘ to improve your game.

getpocket.com

• First, by loving chess. “You can only get good at chess if you love the game,” Fischer said. You need to be endlessly fascinated by it and see its infinite potential. Be willing to embrace the complexity; enjoy the adventure. Every game should be an education and teach us something. Losing doesn’t matter. Garry Kasparov, another former world champion, likes to say you learn far more from your defeats than your victories. Eventually you will start winning, but there will be a lot of losses on the way. Play people who are better than you, and be prepared to lose. Then you will learn.
• If you are a beginner, don’t feel the need to set out all the pieces at once. Start with the pawns, and then add the pieces. Understand the potential of each piece – the way a pair of bishops can dominate the board, how the rooks can sweep up pawns in an endgame, why the queen and a knight can work together so harmoniously. Find a good teacher

 

[anatta]

I was exposed at 5 years old. I was fascinated with the pieces and the board - i loved the game
and was a chess nerd during the glory days of Fischer -Spassky

Now there are clubs for kids , but when ever you start get involved. I liked playing old master games with comments
I played on a couple boards at one time ( to play out variations) this was way before computers
so i guess you can do multiple computer screens - but the pieces on the board, the way you pick them up and capture ( in a sweeping motion)is the real fun

I quit tournament chess when the kids started to beat me about 5 years ago, But the game is still fun
And the logic discipline pays off in other activities....enjoy!

 

[The Stars Tremble]

I used to play quite a lot, and particularly one friend at a time (clubs are terrifying) so I noticed that playing a better player makes one better, but winning easily makes one worse.

It's probably fair to say I chose opponents rather equal to me. Neither beating up a weaker player, nor getting beaten up repeatedly, was very satisfying. Over many games though we tended to become more equal, not less.

So many words. Playing someone who's better than you, makes you better. And since even the processor in a phone can whip ordinary players I suppose you could improve by playing against computers or devices.

 

[tshade]

How to Get Good at Chess

You don’t have to be a polymath like Beth Harmon in ’The Queen’s Gambit‘ to improve your game.

getpocket.com

• First, by loving chess. “You can only get good at chess if you love the game,” Fischer said. You need to be endlessly fascinated by it and see its infinite potential. Be willing to embrace the complexity; enjoy the adventure. Every game should be an education and teach us something. Losing doesn’t matter. Garry Kasparov, another former world champion, likes to say you learn far more from your defeats than your victories. Eventually you will start winning, but there will be a lot of losses on the way. Play people who are better than you, and be prepared to lose. Then you will learn.
• If you are a beginner, don’t feel the need to set out all the pieces at once. Start with the pawns, and then add the pieces. Understand the potential of each piece – the way a pair of bishops can dominate the board, how the rooks can sweep up pawns in an endgame, why the queen and a knight can work together so harmoniously. Find a good teacher

The greatest game invented

 

[anatta]

I used to play quite a lot, and particularly one friend at a time (clubs are terrifying) so I noticed that playing a better player makes one better, but winning easily makes one worse.

It's probably fair to say I chose opponents rather equal to me. Neither beating up a weaker player, nor getting beaten up repeatedly, was very satisfying. Over many games though we tended to become more equal, not less.

So many words. Playing someone who's better than you, makes you better. And since even the processor in a phone can whip ordinary players I suppose you could improve by playing against computers or devices.

need both computers and human opponents.. that's correct though - play people about your own level - but dont be afraid to lose to higher players. the key is to do a post mortum -see why you lost if you can see it.
Focus on like 2 opening for black and 2 for white - studying opening theory is best after you master the combinations and basic strategy of those openings..go to clubs for fun.. BE SURE TO PLAY ON BOARDS and not just computer screens

 

[OrphanSlug]

Chess has always fascinated me.

I recall reading somewhere that while the 1st round of moves allows for 400 possibilities, by the end of the 5th round you are close to 5 million possibilities, and by the end of the 10th round you are close to 70 trillion possibilities.

Simple yet complex, easy to learn and next to impossible to master.

My only advice for enjoying chess and becoming relatively good, play as many different people as possible. Not v the game but actual people.

There you learn how to deal with people and how they form strategy, how well they craft their intention and how far ahead in moves they can think.

 

[anatta]

Chess has always fascinated me.

I recall reading somewhere that while the 1st round of moves allows for 400 possibilities, by the end of the 5th round you are close to 5 million possibilities, and by the end of the 10th round you are close to 70 trillion possibilities.

Simple yet complex, easy to learn and next to impossible to master.

My only advice for enjoying chess and becoming relatively good, play as many different people as possible. Not v the game but actual people.

There you learn how to deal with people and how they form strategy, how well they craft their intention and how far ahead in moves they can think.

yep. computers do number crunching. they run down moves and look for the best according to their programming
They can calculate like zillions per second ( OK hyperbole -but you get it)
Human are more intuitive. we reject most moves out of hand and focus on the few possibilities, that meet the combinations,
but also fit our basic idea of where we want the game to go.

Play but study as well. You dont have to study grandmaster right away, but if you want to advance your game you need to after you become confortable on the board

 

[Crovax]

How to Get Good at Chess

You don’t have to be a polymath like Beth Harmon in ’The Queen’s Gambit‘ to improve your game.

getpocket.com

• First, by loving chess. “You can only get good at chess if you love the game,” Fischer said. You need to be endlessly fascinated by it and see its infinite potential. Be willing to embrace the complexity; enjoy the adventure. Every game should be an education and teach us something. Losing doesn’t matter. Garry Kasparov, another former world champion, likes to say you learn far more from your defeats than your victories. Eventually you will start winning, but there will be a lot of losses on the way. Play people who are better than you, and be prepared to lose. Then you will learn.
• If you are a beginner, don’t feel the need to set out all the pieces at once. Start with the pawns, and then add the pieces. Understand the potential of each piece – the way a pair of bishops can dominate the board, how the rooks can sweep up pawns in an endgame, why the queen and a knight can work together so harmoniously. Find a good teacher

Chess is certainly in an interesting place. It's now kind of in the realm of poker where casual play and competitive play are very separate games and jumping from casual to competitive is becoming increasingly harder.

 

[anatta]

Chess is certainly in an interesting place. It's now kind of in the realm of poker where casual play and competitive play are very separate games and jumping from casual to competitive is becoming increasingly harder.

well it's always been a rariefied sport. Grandmasters re relatively rare, and world championships have been around since the 19th century

 

[Crovax]

well it's always been a rariefied sport. Grandmasters re relatively rare, and world championships have been around since the 19th century

What I mean is that in the past the same skills used for casual chess would be the same used in competitive chess. Knowledge of basic openings, defenses and common lines coupled with the ability to see multiple moves ahead. Now for competitive chess you need to play nearly perfect based on what computers have shown us are the best possible plays. The world chess championships had something like 18 straight game ties until Carlsen finally broke through this year.

Also if one started brand new with the goal of playing competitive chess they would likely learn all the top lines played in competition and not develop the intuitive play needed to beat casual players using odd openings and defenses.

By the same token, a good casual player wouldn't fair well against a lesser skilled opponent who has spent a lot of time learning the refutations from perfect computer play

 

[anatta]

What I mean is that in the past the same skills used for casual chess would be the same used in competitive chess. Knowledge of basic openings, defenses and common lines coupled with the ability to see multiple moves ahead. Now for competitive chess you need to play nearly perfect based on what computers have shown us are the best possible plays. The world chess championships had something like 18 straight game ties until Carlsen finally broke through this year.

Also if one started brand new with the goal of playing competitive chess they would likely learn all the top lines played in competition and not develop the intuitive play needed to beat casual players using odd openings and defenses.

I hear you on the over-emphasis on opening "cookers". But it's not just computers that caused the ties in WC
It's been happening ( I think Annand/Kasparov - but i'd have to look it up)

Chess used to be a lot of "swash buckling" daring moves (19th century) but with the spread of the game increasing the knowledge base and yes -computers, it'sbecome much more competative - i suppose by the sheer number of players as well.

PS. I was never great. 1600+ or so, but I could play tournaments and do OK.
Then the kids began to beat me - i knew it was time to quit this because while I had the intuition more then they did
they simply has more mental clarity and ability to calculate (im close to 70)

You know a lot -do you play?

 

[Crovax]

I hear you on the over-emphasis on opening "cookers". But it's not just computers that caused the ties in WC
It's been happening ( I think Annand/Kasparov - but i'd have to look it up)

I looked it up and I'm betting to one you're thinking about was a first to six wins match that ended up not finishing due to draws, 5-3 and 40 draws. The 2018 was the only world championship with all draws.

Chess used to be a lot of "swash buckling" daring moves (19th century) but with the spread of the game increasing the knowledge base and yes -computers, it'sbecome much more competative - i suppose by the sheer number of players as well.

Yes watching a Fischer game is something to behold. I do like the 960 variation he invented that keeps some of that style of play alive.

PS. I was never great. 1600+ or so, but I could play tournaments and do OK.
Then the kids began to beat me - i knew it was time to quit this because while I had the intuition more then they did
they simply has more mental clarity and ability to calculate (im close to 70)

You know a lot -do you play?

I was pretty good when I was young but then I spent more time playing sports like football so getting back into it when the game has changed so much it has been hard

 

[anatta]

I looked it up and I'm betting to one you're thinking about was a first to six wins match that ended up not finishing due to draws, 5-3 and 40 draws. The 2018 was the only world championship with all draws.



Yes watching a Fischer game is something to behold. I do like the 960 variation he invented that keeps some of that style of play alive.



I was pretty good when I was young but then I spent more time playing sports like football so getting back into it when the game has changed so much it has been hard

I meant the old romantic school of chess.

Romantic chess - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Morphy and so forth. Steinitz ( 1st world champion) was the first to dismiss it in favor of sound openings and
and no sacrifices just to gain tempo. I dont know if you study, but I found this invaluable for players of all ages

Chess Fundamentals: Capablanca, Jose Raul: 9781627554633: Amazon.com: Books

Chess Fundamentals [Capablanca, Jose Raul] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Chess Fundamentals

www.amazon.com

Fisher was modern. He preferred 1. P- K4 ( pardon my old school notation) - and really advanced the game
from a lot of Queenside openings. He claimed 1. P-k4 was the strongest move on the board and he was proven correct

play thru these - hotlinks at site

Bobby Fischer's "60 Memorable Games"

The internet's oldest and best chess database and community.

www.chessgames.com

 

[Crovax]

I meant the old romantic school of chess.

Romantic chess - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Morphy and so forth. Steinitz ( 1st world champion) was the first to dismiss it in favor of sound openings and
and no sacrifices just to gain tempo.

To be honest the only thing I know of that era is the immortal game.

I dont know if you study, but I found this invaluable for players of all ages

Chess Fundamentals: Capablanca, Jose Raul: 9781627554633: Amazon.com: Books

Chess Fundamentals [Capablanca, Jose Raul] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Chess Fundamentals

www.amazon.com

Fisher was modern. He preferred 1. P- K4 ( pardon my old school notation) - and really advanced the game
from a lot of Queenside openings. He claimed 1. P-k4 was the strongest move on the board and he was proven correct

play thru these - hotlinks at site

Bobby Fischer's "60 Memorable Games"

The internet's oldest and best chess database and community.

www.chessgames.com

Thanks for the book suggestion and the link, I'll definitely check them out when I have the time.

If you want to play a game sometime send me a PM and we can set one up.

 

[anatta]

To be honest the only thing I know of that era is the immortal game.



Thanks for the book suggestion and the link, I'll definitely check them out when I have the time.

If you want to play a game sometime send me a PM and we can set one up.

sure thanks for the offer. there are lots of places online to play im sure you know.
I havent played in almost 5 years. when I quit tournaments I just put it down,but I should play
ha! I ddin't even know "the immortal game" ill play thru it..thanks

 

[anatta]

Chess, I quickly realised, was giving me far more than just a pleasant distraction. Instead, it was offering a window of clarity into my state of mind, a place where the fog of the day’s stresses and distractions were cleared to show me what was really going on, good or bad. My therapist had often told me: you need to find ways to tune into more of your emotions, not just anxiety but the rest of the “big four”; joy, sadness, and anger. Chess is an extremely fast route to experiencing them all – often within the course of a few moves. At a time when the outside world was too extreme to contemplate, it became a useful internal bellwether. If I was playing with frustration and impatience, I knew tackling that big problem at work or having that difficult conversation with a friend or partner was probably best left until tomorrow. If I was playing with grit and purpose, it clarified that I was strong and gave me the confidence to do what needed to be done elsewhere.

In chess, there is no element of chance: no dice to throw, no bit of kit that can falter (unless the board splits in two, which is fairly unlikely), no adverse weather conditions to point to and curse. It is a pure test of your ability to master your thoughts and emotions in the moment; failure to make a good move is, ultimately, the only thing that leads to your downfall. This is why you punch the air when you win and feel unspeakably furious with yourself when you lose. In chess, there are no ways to downplay your victory or excuse your defeat.

Then there is the obvious matter of resilience.

Check mates: how chess saved my mental wellbeing

Sam Parker’s grandfather taught him to love chess, a joy he rediscovered in the pandemic, along with a deeper understanding of its positive effects on mental and emotional health

www.theguardian.com

 

[anatta]

Today I enjoy chess on an aesthetic level. My competitive career never amounted to much; my fourth-grade Greenwood Elementary championship remains its only highlight. I lacked skill, and, just as important, I lacked the obsession to internalize — to actualize — all those volumes of theory. But even if I’ve never stretched a canvas, I can still appreciate Rothko and de Kooning — appreciate the beauty in the picture. And one can appreciate beauty in a game of chess; it is art. Lengthy tactical combinations, complex and previously unseen, can, like music, unfold as if they were ordained. Essences of gnarly, complex positions can, like painting, be distilled and altered and presented in pure form.


My progression mirrors how we taught our computers to play chess. The earliest programs, gawkish code running on ungainly mainframes, were woodpushers, capable of playing chess technically but not well. Their successors, running on sleeker supercomputers or speedier modern desktops, had mastered theory — openings and endgames, as well as the sophisticated tactics of the middle game — and now played better than any human. And their successors, the latest evolution, ungodly chess beings sprung from the secretive labs of trillion-dollar companies, play a hyper-advanced alien chess, exotic and beautiful, something no human is capable of fully understanding, let alone replicating, but so full of awesome style.

We Taught Computers To Play Chess — And Then They Left Us Behind

The chess machines never stop playing.

fivethirtyeight.com

 

[Stealers Wheel]

The greatest game invented

Meh. My dad taught me to play when I was 12. We'd play 5 games at a sitting. At first he would beat me 5-0. After about a year I would occasionally win one of five. Then two of five. Later, I joined my Jr high chess club. After that my dad couldn't beat me at all.

When I left home I began playing rated players and studying the game in earnest. That is when computers were just coming to the consumer market. I came to realize that the best players had idedic memories (just like the computers). They could simply look at a board and see the best moves 8-10 moves ahead.

Whether you believe it or not, there is always a best move. Human players can feint against other human players, distract them, convince them the threat is somewhere it really isn't. That can't happen against the better computer players.

I lost interest at that point.

 

[anatta]

Meh. My dad taught me to play when I was 12. We'd play 5 games at a sitting. At first he would beat me 5-0. After about a year I would occasionally win one of five. Then two of five. Later, I joined my Jr high chess club. After that my dad couldn't beat me at all.

When I left home I began playing rated players and studying the game in earnest. That is when computers were just coming to the consumer market. I came to realize that the best players had idedic memories (just like the computers). They could simply look at a board and see the best moves 8-10 moves ahead.

Whether you believe it or not, there is always a best move. Human players can feint against other human players, distract them, convince them the threat is somewhere it really isn't. That can't happen against the better computer players.

I lost interest at that point.

what's interesting is how humans analyze a position by some counting,but more pattern recognition
where as computers are just number crunchers..I have heard talk of AI actually now using pattern recognition

I agree it took a lot of fun out of the game. What did it for me was losing to school kids at my local chess club.
At my best i'm 1600 - but my old mind just cant concentrate at that level that long (nevermind the "cookers"

 

[Antiwar]

In chess, there is no element of chance ...

I disagree, but I call it luck. There is some luck in chess because many moves have uncertainty. The game becomes too complex to be able to understand the implications of every move, so there is guessing involved.

 

[anatta]

I disagree, but I call it luck. There is some luck in chess because many moves have uncertainty. The game becomes too complex to be able to understand the implications of every move, so there is guessing involved.

no.every move has a reason -some bad reasoning by players, but every move is reasoned out

 

[dmpi]

I'm surprised nobody mentioned it but chess.com has a set of tools that are incredibly useful in honing your chess skills. First off their chess bot can play at different levels, so you can pick the right level to play against. Next you can play in three ways: 1) without any aids, 2) with a real-time bar graph displaying black & white's relative, with the ability to take back moves, and 3) includes an aid that tells you your three best moves, and a indicator to tell you if any of your pieces are under attack.
The aids are 'cheating' but it dumbs down the game so you can actually get to the end (or mid) game so you can practice it. I use all three ways. It keeps the game interesting so you actually work on diffrent parts of your game. The death blow for many chess players is they get stuck at a level and they can't make progress and then they just quit. Or they they want to be a master and then they spend all their energy memorizing book openings... which is about as much fun as going to the dentist.

 

[anatta]

I'm surprised nobody mentioned it but chess.com has a set of tools that are incredibly useful in honing your chess skills. First off their chess bot can play at different levels, so you can pick the right level to play against. Next you can play in three ways: 1) without any aids, 2) with a real-time bar graph displaying black & white's relative, with the ability to take back moves, and 3) includes an aid that tells you your three best moves, and a indicator to tell you if any of your pieces are under attack.
The aids are 'cheating' but it dumbs down the game so you can actually get to the end (or mid) game so you can practice it. I use all three ways. It keeps the game interesting so you actually work on diffrent parts of your game. The death blow for many chess players is they get stuck at a level and they can't make progress and then they just quit. Or they they want to be a master and then they spend all their energy memorizing book openings... which is about as much fun as going to the dentist.

very nice only one blunder ( I havent played in years ) I played 1. d4 and got a win on white (Dutch Defense -Queens night variation)
I like the instant analysis. I learned back in the 1960's and had to rely on chess books..Im going to sign up

 

[trouble13]

I very much enjoy the game. I'm not into tournament play. I like to play on a social level.

 

[dmpi]

very nice only one blunder ( I havent played in years ) I played 1. d4 and got a win on white (Dutch Defense -Queens night variation)
I like the instant analysis. I learned back in the 1960's and had to rely on chess books..Im going to sign up

Wow... you know all the book openings. I played informally when I was a kid and I wasn't all that good. Now as an older adult I think I've got to a level that's equal to where I was as a kid which isn't saying all that much but I proud of it. You don't have to actually join chess.com unless you want to play against real people. As a guest you can play against as fixed set of bots and work on your chess skills. I think it's all about having fun and keeping it interesting.