In the analysis I also was able to identify some key errors in positional understanding, for example the thought behind 9. Be3, which should be valuable for improving future play in such types of positions. It's also worth noting sequences like the one beginning on move 19, which serve to illustrate the lesson that just because you can do something fancy on the board using intermediate moves and such, doesn't mean that you should.
29 October 2018
Annotated Game #199: First Master scalp
This first-round game is notable for really only one reason, and that is because it marks the first time I ever defeated a Master-level opponent in tournament play. It's due to a tactical miscalculation on his part, rather than any brilliance on mine, but I was nevertheless happy to take the win. I think it's important for any improving Class player to realize that significantly higher-rated opponents are still quite capable of making blunders or incorrect decisions during the course of play, with no game being an inevitable crushing defeat from start to finish.
In the analysis I also was able to identify some key errors in positional understanding, for example the thought behind 9. Be3, which should be valuable for improving future play in such types of positions. It's also worth noting sequences like the one beginning on move 19, which serve to illustrate the lesson that just because you can do something fancy on the board using intermediate moves and such, doesn't mean that you should.
In the analysis I also was able to identify some key errors in positional understanding, for example the thought behind 9. Be3, which should be valuable for improving future play in such types of positions. It's also worth noting sequences like the one beginning on move 19, which serve to illustrate the lesson that just because you can do something fancy on the board using intermediate moves and such, doesn't mean that you should.
28 October 2018
Streakiness in chess performance
 |
| From "How much does one game affect the next game?" by Michael Richmond |
As with any complex phenomenon, it's nearly impossible to point to a single, definitive explanation for a particular string of results. I do think a large part of it, however, often can be explained by the psychological expectation or "hangover" that is generated from the previous game. Winning generates positive feelings - although this is not always helpful for an improving player, if it masks substantive weaknesses. On the flip side, if you lose, it is common to experience unhelpful emotions such as anger, shame, feelings of worthlessness, etc. This type of personalized reaction is in fact natural - a lot of time, effort and preparation goes into a serious game. As a player, you almost always are mentally invested in even a casual match. It's therefore healthier to experience the emotional reaction and then move on, rather than try to repress it.
So how does a chessplayer break out of a losing streak, which is the most common concern with streakiness? Most of the time we are talking about a short-term losing streak, but in some cases it may be the symptom of a longer period of stagnation or decline in results.
Substantively, it is important for improving chessplayers to work on all aspects of their game, as it's rarely the case that a specific weakness is wholly responsible for a streak of bad results - unless you (perhaps unconsciously) keep playing into situations where you are weak. For example, a player may have little knowledge of endgames, but nevertheless tends to head straight for them by exchanging down material whenever possible. Another common issue is reaching middlegame positions for which you don't know the standard plans and characteristics of the position-types. These weaknesses can be addressed (or at least better avoided) through candid self-assessment, analyzing your own games, and targeted improvement plans. Self-analysis will also directly contribute to understanding and avoiding the repetition of the same types of errors across different games. These long-term practices will tend to boost your overall playing strength over time and contribute to shorter-term success as well. There is no magic pill for instant short-term improvement in chess skills, in other words.
Psychologically, especially in terms of your short-term performance, it is more important for players to overcome the "hangover" of a previous loss or losses by focusing fully on the game in front of them. Success in accomplishing this is partly based on willpower and your ability to focus, but is more strongly underpinned by adopting an attitude of mental toughness in all your games. Getting in the habit of treating each new game as unique, as winnable, and as a stepping stone on the road to mastery goes a long way towards erasing bad vibes from previous games.
Finally, it's important to understand that your opponent "gets a vote" in the result of a chess game - meaning that you may play well and still lose, or alternatively play poorly and still win. In addition to cultivating mental toughness as mentioned above, for improvement purposes it's therefore better to focus on your quality of play in each game, rather than solely on the final outcome. You can't fully control the results you have, but you can dedicate yourself to playing with increasing excellence - which is a reward in itself - and that will inevitably be reflected in your playing strength and future competitive results.
20 October 2018
Annotated Game #198: Winning the queenside race
This last-round tournament game was another much-needed win for me. Strategically, it is a good illustration (at least at the Class level) of how dangerous the English Opening can be when White can get their blows in first on the queenside, without a real response from Black. His 12...f4 looks aggressive, but I can simply ignore it and create a series of threats on the queenside that give me the initiative, which I never relinquish.
Positional pluses for White that helped lead to the win included developing the queen to an ideal square and getting the bishops on very effective diagonals; the dark-square bishop, which is sometimes not as effective in these lines, moves from d2 to b4 at a critical juncture, providing a knockout blow due to its latent pressure on a lineup of Black's pieces on the a3-f8 diagonal. Other effective maneuvers include seizing the a-file and achieving a dominant, centralized knight by exploiting Black's hole on d6.
Positional pluses for White that helped lead to the win included developing the queen to an ideal square and getting the bishops on very effective diagonals; the dark-square bishop, which is sometimes not as effective in these lines, moves from d2 to b4 at a critical juncture, providing a knockout blow due to its latent pressure on a lineup of Black's pieces on the a3-f8 diagonal. Other effective maneuvers include seizing the a-file and achieving a dominant, centralized knight by exploiting Black's hole on d6.
06 October 2018
Annotated Game #197: Play the long game when needing a win
Having lost in the previous two rounds, including rather shamefully in round 3, I very much needed a turnaround win in this tournament. "Needing" a win can, however, be a dangerous state of mind, like when gamblers keep making larger and riskier bets to try to catch back up to where they think they should be; it rarely ends up well. Here I will give myself credit for having enough patience to "play the long game" and recognize the need to patiently maneuver, rather than try to break through prematurely, although my play was not necessarily optimal along the way.
There are a couple of key strategic moments that lead to the win. The first comes at move 26, where I correctly realized that pawn breaks on the queenside, where both my opponent and I had castled, would favor me (Black). About 20 moves later in a double rook endgame, I find the final breakthrough idea, involving a temporary rook sacrifice with a deflection tactic (which the engine awards a '!!' in its analysis).
That said, this game's analysis is perhaps even more valuable for me in the long term for the missed ideas, for both myself and my opponent, which will help me refine my understanding of the middlegame structures in the Classical Caro-Kann.
There are a couple of key strategic moments that lead to the win. The first comes at move 26, where I correctly realized that pawn breaks on the queenside, where both my opponent and I had castled, would favor me (Black). About 20 moves later in a double rook endgame, I find the final breakthrough idea, involving a temporary rook sacrifice with a deflection tactic (which the engine awards a '!!' in its analysis).
That said, this game's analysis is perhaps even more valuable for me in the long term for the missed ideas, for both myself and my opponent, which will help me refine my understanding of the middlegame structures in the Classical Caro-Kann.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)