|
|
News | |
|
FIDE country stats: Colombia
|
| |
| |
|
|
Written by Administrator
|
|
Tuesday, 17 August 2010 |
by Natalia Pogonina for her
Chess.com Tuesday column
Just like I promised last week, this time we will talk about the middlegame. The middlegame is the main stage of the game. Studying this part of chess is essential to understanding concepts such as weak squares, a strong center, open files, the art of exchanging pieces, etc. One has to be aware of how to evaluate the position and create a plan. All of this is a must-know for an improving player.
The middlegame has two main aspects: strategy and tactics.
Strategy
Strategy implies positional understanding, knowing how to evaluate the position and form a plan. It involves principles on which chess moves are chosen. The must-read book on strategy is My System by Nimzovitch. While some of the opening evaluations and analyses are outdated, it still offers a great overview of the main chess principles. There are many other good books, but My System is a true classic. Also, there are nice software products on the middlegame like Chess Assistant. These have contributed a lot to my chess level by providing critical positions from masters games in which one has to make the correct decision.
Another good idea is to study game collections of the chess legends. As we are talking about strategy, choose a book on, lets say, Capablanca or Karpov. Text annotations are preferred to lengthy chess variations. The former will help you get a touch of what positional play at top level feels like.
Tactics
By tactics we mean chess combinations with sacrifices involved. Tactics dont appear out of nowhere (unless someone blunders), they are based on strategic principles. However, the underlying factors in strategy (see above) and tactics (pins, destroying the defense, deflection, X-ray, etc.) are different. There are tons of books on tactics for people of any chess level, as well as computer programs. You may want to buy both guides (which teach you about different types of tactics) and actual books with chess problems. Dont forget about the classics, such as the games of Alekhine and Tal. Just like with strategy, try to find sources with the underlying ideas written out, not just wordless lines of obscure variations.
A few more tips:
1) IM Mark Dvoretzkys books are excellent in terms of studying the middlegame. The only drawback is that these are intended for strong, master level players.
2) Chess.com has a fantastic Chess Mentor course (as well as Tactics Trainer) and lots of chess videos on different aspects of chess. If you can afford it, buying a premium account is a great investment.
3) Pay special attention to games annotated by top players. Try to understand how they think and why they pick each move.
4) Find the right balance between tactics and strategy. You may try to study them simultaneously, e.g. first review how to take advantage of weak squares (strategic concept) and then solve a few tactical positions exploiting these weaknesses. Keep in mind that an hour of tactics a day keeps the patzer away! (even half an hour can do miracles sometimes).
5) Guess the move is a very nice training exercise recommended by Nimzovitch. Nowadays one can use its improved version. First you look at a position from a masters game and try to find the correct continuation. Write it down. Then see the actual move played in the game and try to understand which choice was better and why. Play the opponents reply and start thinking once again. And so on. When youre through with the game, you might analyze the game with a chess engine and figure out the correct answers. To make the process more entertaining, you may want to evaluate yourself and see what percent of your moves is as good as or better than the masters. Of course, there is also software products of this type, but choosing the games and rules yourself will give you more flexibility.
6) Move from easy to advanced: first learn the basics (center, open files, weak and strong squares, etc.) and then more sophisticated concepts (e.g. chess dynamics).
Now let's take a look at an instructive game from the Mullhouse 2010 GM event featuring both strategical and tactical issues:
The first part of the game was concerned with playing against an isolated pawn. The intricacies of such positions are discussed in detail in the book by GMs Belyavsky and Michalchishin Isolated pawn. Then the game entered the tactical stage and was decided after an incorrect sacrifice.
 Comments (3)
|
|
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 17 August 2010 )
|
|
The long and winding road to mastery-5
|
|
Written by Administrator
|
|
Saturday, 14 August 2010 |
Candidate master Peter Zhdanov's column at Pogonina.com
Today we will deal with the last 4 games from the IM tournament in Moscow that we have been discussing in the previous two episodes. The games proved to be very instructive, so let's take a look at some of the critical moments:
Zhdanov (2049) - Vorobjov (2210)
White to move
Don't let the relatively small rating of my opponent mislead you. He has been rated over 2350 at some point, recently won an IM-norm event (winning the norm, of course) and scored another norm in this tournament. Here we have a typical case of different evaluations by two players. Black is hoping to snatch a pawn and prove that it's a good idea. White says "spank me" and intends to launch a dangerous attack.
The best response was 9.Na3! and if Qa4 then 10.Bb5 Qa5 11.c3 Nc6 12.Bc6 bc 13.b4-> Black's pieces are undeveloped, the king is exposed, so White definitely has an advantage (even being a pawn down). I decided to sacrifice a pawn in a different way: 9.c3. Also playable, but still worse.
Zhdanov (2049) - Vorobjov (2210)
Black to move
White's attack didn't go well. All Black needs is to consolidate and try to convert the extra pawn advantage. My last move (Bf8) sets up a little trap. How should Black proceed?
If you have chosen Rhf8, then you are either a strong or a weak player, depending on what you had in mind. My opponent fell for the greedy 20...Bf3?? and expected me to go for 21.Bf3?? Nd4 22.Qd3 Nf3 23.Rf3 Rhf8-+ winning another pawn. But chess is not checkers, so I almost instantly replied 21.Bc5! Now Black is in serious trouble and, as my opponent said after the game, "I was lucky that there is the move 21...b6, otherwise I would have been totally busted". White still has an advantage after 21...b6 22.Ba6 bc 23.Bc8 Rc8 24.Qf3 Nd4 25.Qd3+/-
Zhdanov (2049) - Vorobjov (2210)
White to move
Another critical position. White is in serious time trouble and should do something about Black's passers. But what?
I played a very lousy move - 30.a6?. Virtually giving up my pawn and eventually losing. The correct idea was 30.h4 - preventing h6 and g5 and creating an escape square for the king while keeping an eye on the a5-pawn. The game is probably a draw after 30...Kb7 31.Rd1 Rb4 32.Kh2 h5 33.Rd2.
IM Reprintsev (2381) - Zhdanov (2049)
Black to move
This game illustrates the concept of intimidation rather well. IM Reprintsev used to be a very strong master, having played the likes of Short and Dreev and beaten many-many GMs. Nowadays he is mostly playing blitz, so his style became somewhat superficial. Nonetheless, he's still a very formidable attacker. So, what should Black do here?
Black is clearly better, but I decided to play it safe and secure a small advantage by exchanging the bishop - 11...Nb4. Not a bad move, but much stronger is 11...Bg4. It leaves White struggling for a draw, e.g. 12.Rf2 (the pin is a real pain for White) d5 13.ed Qd5 14.h3 Be2 15.Be2 f5 16.c3 Qd6 17.Bf3 Re6 18.g3 h5 and Black has an obvious advantage
IM Reprintsev (2381) - Zhdanov (2049)
Black to move
Another important moment. What should Black do?
I went for the development: 13...Bd7. This is slow and passive. A more ambitious line is 13...d5 14.Qf3 de 15.de Qd4 16.Kh1 Bd7 17.d3 Bb5 18.Rad1 Rad8. =/+ Another worthy try is 13...b6 14.Qf3 d5, also with an edge for Black.
IM Reprintsev (2381) - Zhdanov (2049)
Black to move
A typical case of hypnosis. Both my opponent and me thought that White is nearly winning at this point, so I played 19...Rf8?! (trying to get my rook into play) and went down rather quickly after 20.Ne2!. However, 19...Kg7 leaves Black with a defendable position. In fact, all White can hope for there is a blunder, but objectively the position is close to equal.
WGM Mirzoeva (2246) - Zhdanov (2049)
Black to move
WGM Mirzoeva is a charming female grandmaster known for being an eminent chess journalist. She has little time for competitive chess though, so her openings are rather unambitious these days. How should Black treat this position?
I should have played 6...Nh5! 7.Bg5 h6 8.Bh4 c5 9.Nc3 cd 10.Nd4 Nc6 11.Be2 Nf6 and Black has no problems at all. I chose the inferior 6...b6 and found myself under positional pressure pretty soon.
IM Prosviriakov (2269) - Zhdanov (2049)
White to move
IM Prosviriakov is a very experienced master from the USA (of USSR origin). He was in a peaceful mood for this tournament, offering draws to many players (including me). I decided that a game against a master never hurts and went on to obtain a quite nice position (see above, the pawn should be on b7). How should Black continue?
The correct idea is 17...a3, weakening the pawn shield of the White king. I blundered horribly instead: 17...b5?? It's a typical move, very standard, but it runs into...18.Be3, of course! Unbelievable! Black has a move, but can't save his queen from numerous knight jumps. After 18...Qb6 19.Ne6 Qb7 20.Nf8 the game is pretty much over (although I tried to do my best to hang on for another 14 moves).
P.S. There was also a very tense game against FM Rozanov, but I have lost my pgn and notes and will (probably) present it to you at a later point. 
Days to FM: 702
Episode 1: It has begun!
Episode 2: Epic fail
Episode 3: Moscow IM-norm tournament: analysis
Episode 4: Moscow IM-norm tournamen: analysis-2
Be first to comment this article |
|
Last Updated ( Saturday, 14 August 2010 )
|
|
Russia - China Match: Results
|
|
Russia-China: Day 3 (Rapid)
|
|
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-15
|
|
Written by Administrator
|
|
Friday, 13 August 2010 |
The rules are simple - send us your questions and see them featured in the weekly Q&A column!
Q1: Have you ever lost to an amateur?
A1: Most chess players are amateurs, so the answer is yes. However, if you mean casual players, those who don't play in tournaments at all, then no, not in my mature years.
Q2: Natalia, you mentioned in previous answered questions that 1. e4 is unpopular with super GMs because of the higher level of theory involved and the comparatively easier task for Black in equalising. So why do you choose to play 1.e4 more often? Is there really a remarkable difference in styles between e4, d4, c4 players?
1.e4 suits my style better & I am also a rather conservative player who doesn't like switching openings too often. I used to play 1.d4 when I was a girl though. Generally speaking, 1.e4 is more risky, 1.d4 is more positional, 1.c4 is more flexible as compared to each other.
Q3: What score would you get in a simul vs Kenya's male chess team?
A3: The players are in the 2000-2200 range, so probably 4-1. 5-0 if lucky, 3-2 if unlucky (given that people who live in regions with few FIDE-rated tournaments are often underrated).
Q4: I hear women chess players deriding the separate championship for women. They say they would never take part in it because it is demeaning to women. You are a WGM. What is your response to this?
A4: I know just one female player in contention who doesn't compete in the Women World Championship. Judit Polgar. That's her personal choice, while I have a different opinion.
Q5: I have a few hours per day to improve in chess. What should I do?
A5: It depends on your level and weaknesses. A coach would be handy, but if you are on your own, start by solving a test to determine your weak spots. Then create a training plan featuring all chess aspects (opening, middlegame, endgame, tactics, psychology, physical shape, etc.), but concentrate your efforts on eliminating the shortcomings. Realistically speaking, at sub-master level one should dedicate from 60 to 80 percent of the time to playing and analyzing one's own games. Don't get carried away by sophisticated openings or other theoretical stuff at this point. It's hard to answer such a question quickly, but you may check out Pogonina.com for articles on improving in chess. Many people claim them to be helpful. 
Q6: Do you think Allen will be able to get to 2100 from scratch in a year?
A6: I have never seen anyone go from knowing the rules to 2100 in a year. However, a) it doesn't mean that it's impossible b) I can't comment on Allen's case since I have never played him and don't know where he's at (and where he was before the bet).
Q7: What is the highest level an average person can reach without coaching? 2000? 2300?
A7: It's hard to define "average". Also, this leads us to a Guinness-book type of record, something not common. People usually hire coaches not because they wouldn't reach 2000 or 2300 otherwise, but to speed up the process. It's like asking if one can get a decent education at home, without going to the university. The answer is probably yes, but it's much easier to go to college, isn't it?
Related articles:
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-14
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-13
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-12
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-11
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-10
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-9
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-8
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-7
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-6
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-5
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-4
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-3
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-2
Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina
Comments (2) |
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 13 August 2010 )
|
|
| | << Start < Prev 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 Next > End >>
| | Results 2069 - 2079 of 2561 |
|
