This indicates that their higher level of understanding must be related to something other than "move horizon" or investment of time. He found that grandmasters do not think at greater depth than club players and that they take about the same amount of time to consider a position as players of lower strength. He made some interesting peripheral observations in the course of his experiments. His recorded "protocols" (de Groot's term) would then provide clues about the various levels of positional understanding of differently rated players. The goal in such cases is not to find a checkmate, but to find the best possible move - or even the second- or third-best possible move. de Groot did not use composed problems, but instead chose complex studies (positions from actual games) that offered many possibilities. His objective was to compare their respective approaches to analyzing positions in order to glean insight into the differences that might account for advanced chess perception versus rudimentary sight of board.ĭr. He also did this for Masters, Experts (candidate masters), and some class players. In the late 1930s, Dutch psychologist Adriaan de Groot recorded the thinking processes of many prominent players of that time: Alekhine, Euwe, Fine, Keres, etc. I note that Amazon is currently offering pre-orders for Improve Your Chess Pattern Recognition: Typical Tools in Key Positions by IM Arthur van de Outdeweetering (a contributor to 's magazine The Master's Bulletin). The author wrote a follow up that I bought but have not yet read. Now if I can only get someone to accept the gambit pawn!īut in any event there are general ideas that should be learned. I read some good books on the benko gambit that I think improved my play quite a bit. Especially if they are more closed positions. With time I would like to focus on the pawn structures of the openings I play. The chess mentor courses are great for this. I tend to focus on the endgames with few pieces left because its often possible to simplify games to these situations. (Nevermind Fishcher appearantly flubbing this in his Match with Spassky) If you take the h pawn with your bishop will it get trapped? This is just a simple idea that most chess players know about. I think there is no question certain concepts come into play. And Benedictine thanks for the good post. Of course I'm not just doing tactics, I'm doing other stuff, like playing through a lot of master games etc. Unlike say some tactics databases with 5000+ tactics in them. I'm sure that I can easily memorise these 300 position by the end of the month, maybe sooner. I'm doing the first 100 several times, then moving on the second 100 etc, and then periodically going back to the first set. I think it is easier to do it with less positions at first though. I think you can do it with just about any good tactics though. I think it will be useful though, but I'll anyway I can only try it and see how I feel.Īt first I didn't just intend to do with the positions in this book, but seeing as I have it and they are good ones I might as well. There's also a debate it seems that whether going over the same tactics, key tactics, several times to remember them, is of any benefit than just doing lots of random tactics. I find the la Maza stuff interesting and such a thing clearly worked for him, proving that very strong tactical play will get you far. Of course there are debates whether these are the "300 most important positions and ideas" as that's clearly a strong statement, they are very good though. CT-ART is something that keeps cropping up, I'll pencil that one it and the SCID sounds useful too.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |