Your questions answered by Natalia Pogonina-25

Written by Administrator

Saturday, 30 October 2010

The rules are simple - send us your questions and see them featured in the weekly Q&A column!

Q1: Do you or other chessplayers you know do brain training programs (like lumosity, i just
started the free "dual N back" training), or do you consider chess a "brain workout"
in it's self?
A1: Chess memory is different from other types of memory, it's hard to improve it by doing something non-chess related. The same refers to acquiring chess skills. Of course, having a mind that is functioning well is essential for a chess player. However, most people in the chess world get involved in more or less intellectual activity (like reading books, solving puzzles, etc.) because they enjoy the process, not because a coach has prescribed this activity as part of their chess training.

Q2: I don't think that chess pros stare at diagrams in books while solving tactics. Do you set up the position on the board or on your computer? May one move pieces when solving it?
A2: Well, I often do *stare* at diagrams, i.e. when reading my favorite magazines or travelling. At home I prefer to solve tactics using chess software or Chess.com's Tactics Trainer. Maybe an even better way would be to set up the positions on the board, but I'm too lazy to do that.

The second answer is a strict "no". You should never move the pieces or peek into the answers. In a real game you don't have any tips or opportunities to start moving the pieces. Neither should you allow yourself to practice that during your training.

Q3: Why are so many chess players obsessed with poker? It is clear that with the help of internet technologies the game is becoming more and more popular. But chess and poker aren't alike, no?
A3: Poker and chess have a few things in common: both are games, require persistence, patience and an analytical mind, both allow one to avoid working in the office, etc. However, poker is more random (even the worst fish in the world may beat the WSOP ME champion relatively often, while in chess an amateur has no chance whatsoever against the world champion), and many people are tricked into believing that all their losses are bad beats, not indicators of weak play. This allows more proficient players prey on them. Therefore, for most poker-playing chess masters the card game is just a way of earning additional money and entertaining themselves, nothing more.

Q4: Do you think that it is good to use software to play or is it better to work it out
on your own even if it means losing some games?
A4: First of all, in real life one isn't allowed to use chess software at tournaments (unless it is a special advanced chess event). On the other hand, nearly all professional correspondence players use chess engines at least to some extent. Of course, there are some websites that have rules against using computer assistance. Naturally, if you agree to follow the rules (by signing up), you should feel responsible and avoid cheating. One of the counter-arguments is: "he started cheating first, and I also had to use a chess engine to fight back". This doesn't make much sense for a number of reasons: 1) it's very hard to prove that someone is cheating (and if you start analyzing the game using a chess engine, that's also a violation) 2) the fact that someone is doing something illegal doesn't allow you to break the law too. If you are absolutely sure you are playing against a cheater, report him to the administration (or, if you don't like doing that, simply quit the game). Online ratings don't mean much anyway.

Q5: Why do Grandmasters always stress the importance of studying tactics? What if a
player needs to work on their positional chess too?
A5: Let me try to explain this in chess engines' terms. Positional mistakes are generally connected with long-term dangers and intricate matters, often accounting for a fraction of a pawn. Blundering a tactical shot usually means that you get mated quickly or lose material (a pawn, a piece, etc.). These mistakes are much more rough. That is, most players in the world make a few serious tactical mistakes per game that make positional inaccuracies seem insignificant. In their encounters points are scored not by capitalizing on a minor positional weakness (like in some top GMs' games), but by brute force. That's why studying the basics of tactics is more important for amateurs than deep strategic concepts. However, it doesn't mean that one should abandon studying strategy completely.

Q6: Would you like to view a few of my games and tell me what I am doing wrong?
A6: I get a few requests of that type per day. Guys, you need a personal coach, not me!

Comments (2)

	1. Written by This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it on 23:02 30 îêòÿáðÿ 2010 ã.
	Quick Question! Natalia, In a standard match! (Not Blitz) Do you go over each piece on the board before you make your move? Lee

	2. Written by Natalia on 02:31 31 îêòÿáðÿ 2010 ã.
	Quick Question! @Lee No, I need the whole picture, not every piece. Of course, sometimes the "find your worst piece and improve it" approach does work, but by far not in all the positions. http://pogonina.com

Write Comment

Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:
Comment:
Code:*

Last Updated ( Saturday, 30 October 2010 )

< Prev		Next >

[ Back ]