I beat you fair and square!

[DAVOUT]

For those who keep a record of all matters mastered by MtG :

Add chess.



At a much smaller level, I like the gambit Evans which generally creates a surprise in the beginning.

[Provost Harrison]

So now MtG is a chess grandmaster? Sheesh, what hasn't he done?

[Solly]

For those who keep a record of all matters mastered by MtG :

Add chess.

And bullshitting.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
So now MtG is a chess grandmaster? Sheesh, what hasn't he done?

Taking helicopter flying lessons under Fez's instructions?

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
So now MtG is a chess grandmaster? Sheesh, what hasn't he done?

Nope, only high Candidate Master rating. 16 ELO points shy of Master. For one month, I was #50 on the US Chess Federation's top 50 under 16 list, but nowadays, my rating at that time wouldn't get me close to the current top 100 15 year old or 14 year old age lists. (The top USCF player at age 15 has a rating of 2648 Move over Fischer and Kasparov)

I do have a whopping record of 0-8-2 against GM's and IM's. , but that's better than 0-10-0, so I'll take what I can get, thank you.

Oh - and Boddies, you can bend over any time.

MrFunsies - I do have some piddling amount of bootleg time in a Bell JetRanger, and a civilian Huey, but from real pilots.

Drake - what other ideas are you looking for?

[Drake Tungsten]

Drake - what other ideas are you looking for?

Good general tips for an interested laymen who has neither the time nor inclination to memorize openings.

[loinburger]

When I still played I'd usually use the Bishop's Opening as white: p -> K4, b -> QB4, p -> Q3, p -> KB4. There's probably more to it, but that's all I ever bothered to remember (or all I was capable of remembering, whatever). The p -> Q3 counters black's kn -> KB3 by protecting the King's pawn, and it also lets the queen's bishop protect your pawn when you move p -> KB4. This in turn lets you either sacrifice a Bishop's pawn for a K/Q pawn (generally a good trade to make, especially when your rook is going to have free reign on the bishop's vertical once you castle) or else lock down your opponent's queen's bishop by moving p -> KB5 (which can later be used to kill your opponent's pawn structure if he castle's king's side). This was just stupid enough to mess up a lot of my opponents. (It also adapted well to being used against the Sicilian, which was the flavor-of-the-month opening back when I was still playing competitively -- just move p -> K4, p -> KB4, since you wanted to do that anyway and Black's just letting you do it sooner than usual. White isn't supposed to do this against the Sicilian (don't ask me why), so a flavor-of-the-month player usually panicked in the face of my ignorance.)

[Drake Tungsten]

Wutang, loinburger.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Memorization is pretty meaningless. The real point is to understanding why opening moves are made where they are, and what each side is trying to achieve.

www.chessgames.com is a pretty cool research resource, at least for professional games, but doesn't give you annotation or theoretical explanation.

Chess Openings Theory and Practice, by Horowitz, is long out of print, but it's commonly available at used bookstores. You should be able to hook up with a copy at Amazon, or through www.abebooks.com

COTP may get a little more in depth than you want, but if you remind yourself you (a) don't need to learn everything, and (b) need to focus on ideas and theory, rather than memorization, you'll go a lot farther and faster with it.

It's a lot less daunting than my "tools" when I played competitively - about 25 specialty books on specific openings, then my monthly subscriptions to Shakhmantny Byuletin and Shakhmatny Riga from the USSR, plus the (while it lasted) annual 5 volume, 2300 page sets of the Encyclopedia of Chess Openings from Sahovski Informator (IIRC, the official publication arm of the Yugoslav Chess Federation) with the thinnest pages and smallest type you've ever seen - about 4 point type, and a jillion little diagrams, virtually no annotation at all, but the entire professional repertoire of recognized openings was covered up to each year's publication cutoff. Loss of ECO is the real tragegy behind the breakup of Yugoslavia.

That was just my "toolset" for the openings, then I had a ton of specialty books on the endgame, in case I had to actually play endgames.


If you're going to get a second chess book after COTP, I'd recommend another old classic - this one real old (originally from the '30s or '40s, IIRC, and the guy who wrote it is right out of the late 19th century style of German textbooks. The translation preserves that well, but the ideas and approach to understanding tactics and combinations is superb: The Art of Chess Combination, by Eugene Znosko-Borovski.

[Drake Tungsten]

The real point is to understanding why opening moves are made where they are, and what each side is trying to achieve.

That's exactly what I'm after. Thanks for the help.

[loinburger]

A fun strategy I used a few times started out normally, but I changed in mid-streams when it looked like black wasn't playing up to snuff (1. w: p -> K4, b: p -> K5; 2. w: b -> QB4, b: b -> QB5). b -> QB5 isn't a very smart move for black at this point (it doesn't really do anything, unlike, e.g., kn -> KB6), so if I was feeling ballsy I'd move q -> KR6 and threaten checkmate. Black would always recognize the checkmate (how could he not notice my queen breathing down his neck?), and would generally counter with either kn -> KR6 or p -> KKn6, all the while failing to notice that his king's pawn was unguarded. q X K5 (check), game over -- black shouldn't be able to recover at this point as long as you don't make any mistakes. It's a sucker's opening, though -- if black goes kn -> KB6 on the second move like he's supposed to, then keep your queen where it belongs.

[Drake Tungsten]

I really need to work on my ability to plan effective attacks. I'm relatively good at viewing the board and setting up good defensive positions, but I just can't seem to build momentum and "cut out their still beating heart", as MtG so poetically put it.

I hope learning chess theory will help me become better at planning ahead.

[loinburger]

The mistake I always made was to plan too far ahead on my attacks -- I'd have a grandiose 12-move sequence all worked out, and it would all come crashing down when my opponent didn't cooperate. Don't plan for specifics like "taking the other guy's pawn" or whatever as much as you plan for abstractions like "opening a vertical" or whatever. Specific plans are easily defeated, but abstract plans are easily modified.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by loinburger
White isn't supposed to do this against the Sicilian (don't ask me why), so a flavor-of-the-month player usually panicked in the face of my ignorance.)

The white QB in the Sicilian should get active on the K-side early, and a pawn on f4 (white's KB4) interferes with it's development. (The QB should itself be on f4 or g5, or rarely on e3, with the c1-h6 diagonal not blocked by an f pawn until you've committed to an f or g file attack.)

If you end up advancing the f-pawn to f5 (white KB5), when your openent has played c5 (black P-QB4) to initiate the Sicilian, then black has the opportunity to transpose into some line of the Advance variation of the French. In that case, having your KB at c4 (white QB4) is bad, because a black pawn roll at a6, b5, c4 can trap the white Bishop if white hasn't played c3 (P-QB3) so the bishop can escape to c2, where it looks real silly behind a pawn on d3.

The end result can be that black would transpose into an advance French with a gain of two tempi, plus white having a pawn on d3 that ought to be on d4, and the white KB being on the b1-h7 diagonal, at c2 rather than at d3, which is where it belongs in the French. White would lose two more moves correcting the pawn at d3 instead of d4 and KB at c2 instead of d3 deficiencies (loss of two more moves would be unbearable, compared to the defiencies in the position), so white would already be well on the way to a miserable losing game, with black having initiative, lots of Q-side play, and an advantage in space and time to boot. OUCH!!!!

[MrFun]

** reads MTG's posts **

[loinburger]

I always thought that p -> KB4 was used in some goofy white counter-sicilian opening. The Grand Prix or something. (Not that there's much chance that my opening looked anything like the Grand Prix, but that's beside the point.)

[chequita guevara]

I tought my former best friend to play chess, and eventually he surpassed me. When our school splayed chass against each other, he told his teammates what my weaknesses were and the guy who played me remembered and won because of it. Bascially, I have a tendency to leave myself open when I go on the offensive, and when I had the guy on the ropes he was about to surrender when he saw a way out and beat me.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by MrFun
** reads MTG's posts **

That at least gives you an idea of the Candidate Master/Master thought process when playing chess. Essentially, the same as GM's and IM's, just less skilled in the quality of the the thought process and having less knowledge/preparation on theory.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


That at least gives you an idea of the Candidate Master/Master thought process when playing chess. Essentially, the same as GM's and IM's, just less skilled in the quality of the the thought process and having less knowledge/preparation on theory.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I really need to work on my ability to plan effective attacks. I'm relatively good at viewing the board and setting up good defensive positions, but I just can't seem to build momentum and "cut out their still beating heart", as MtG so poetically put it.

I hope learning chess theory will help me become better at planning ahead.

It's a matter (IMO, but I've hear quite a few master and higher level players say the same thing) of forgetting about pieces and pawns, and starting to think in terms of geometry and lines of force.

Here's a start - how many possible moves does a knight have in the corner? 2. How many on the edge? 4. How many in the center? 8. So a knight is far more valuable in the center, in terms of the influence it exerts, but it's also relatively less mobile, depending on the position.

Look at a bishop - worst case in the corner is 7 squares, best case is 13, it can transfer fast, if the pawn structure is right, or it can be trapped. So the value of bishops is based more on pawn structure and ability to get to different diagonals to exert pressure, than it is on location. Whether a bishop is on a particular color, or it's opposite, or both (if you still have a pair), is relevant only to the extent that pawn structrure combines to make it so. Is it a big pawn, stuck behind it's immobile brethren, or an agile little pin-pricker, able to hound and harass and deny access to enemy pieces?

Rook - 14 moves open board movement no matter where it is on the board, but it's ability to maneuver around any board that's not nearly empty is very limited. It's value is based solely on it's ability to provide support or to exert pressure. i.e. on the seventh row, on an open column, or behind a mobile pawn.

Queen - 21 to 28 squares open board movement, but has the best ability to transfer from one part of the board to another, and change the points on which it applies pressure. In other words, it's advantage is in high mobility across the board, which is why it shouldn't be tied to defending anything.

Pawns and pawn structure are susceptible to the same style of analysis, but by different criteria. Are they mobile or locked, and to what degree? Do they support your pieces, or hinder their mobility? Do they allow you to control key squares where your enemy would like to be, or move through, or do they have gaps such that they allow enemy pieces or pawns to be in those gaps, immune from displacement by your other pawns?

Once you start to internalize the geometric/dynamic mobility view of the game, you see attacks as nothing more than bringing more pressure faster on given points than the enemy can bring to defend it. You start looking for ways to overload defenders - exchange them off, kick them, etc. You start seeing the game in terms of advantages in both time and space, and how you can exploit those to crack a defensive position.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by MrFun

Anytime you're up for a whooping, Yankee, just let me know. There is an "other games" forum for that sort of thang.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Anytime you're up for a whooping, Yankee, just let me know. There is an "other games" forum for that sort of thang.

I play chess online through Yahoo sometimes, but I admit that I am but a novice.

[Drake Tungsten]

Once you start to internalize the geometric/dynamic mobility view of the game, you see attacks as nothing more than bringing more pressure faster on given points than the enemy can bring to defend it. You start looking for ways to overload defenders - exchange them off, kick them, etc. You start seeing the game in terms of advantages in both time and space, and how you can exploit those to crack a defensive position.

Sounds like I have a long way to go.

And all I want to do is be able to beat my computer at chess.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Wait, what the Hell is this?

I come back from a weekend away and a chess thread is on top of the 1st page?

Things suuure changed since I was last here .

[Drake Tungsten]

Things suuure changed since I was last here .

You leave and the level of discussion goes up? Maybe there's a lesson there...

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Quote:

Things suuure changed since I was last here .

You leave and the level of discussion goes up? Maybe there's a lesson there...

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Quote:

Once you start to internalize the geometric/dynamic mobility view of the game, you see attacks as nothing more than bringing more pressure faster on given points than the enemy can bring to defend it. You start looking for ways to overload defenders - exchange them off, kick them, etc. You start seeing the game in terms of advantages in both time and space, and how you can exploit those to crack a defensive position.

Sounds like I have a long way to go.

And all I want to do is be able to beat my computer at chess.

Unless you have a real fast time limit set for the computer, or a lame program, beating a computer in an attack oriented game is difficult. It's slow, stodgy positional play where the computer falls apart, because it can't clearly determine advantage between one line of play and another, and then runs short of time.

Znosko-Borovski's book will help a lot, though.

[Drake Tungsten]

I just have a basic, gnuchess based program. It absolutely destroys me, even when I set it to the fastest time limit. I usually end up squandering what seems like a good advantage by making a mistake, upon which the computer rips out my heart. Very disheartening, although not as bad as the humiliation I suffer at the hands of my Go program.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Go is exponentially more deep than chess.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You leave and the level of discussion goes up?

Only if you actually consider this up..