Chess newb here. I've played casually for years, but have never ever really studied the game very seriously. I do play pretty seriously at times though, compensating for my lack of studying with decent situational assessments and some half-decent visualization of variations.
Anyways, I just played a game where I blundered pretty badly at the beginning, but was lucky enough to have my opponent blunder and put me at a small piece advantage. But I blundered again near the endgame, although I was lucky enough to force a draw when I realized my clock was running real low. I was looking for some advice for someone like me who has a very good grip on the basics and dynamics of chess, but none of the "booksmarts" of the game.
tcm, you just need to focus on studying tactics. All the 'book training' in the world won't help you one bit if you walk into a fork. Tactics are useful not for just learning tactics, but also improving your board vision.
I love the Botvinnik semi-slav. I think it's so interesting that it's considered such an overanalyzed mega theoretical variation yet as early as move 14 there are already major seemingly unexplored paths (14. dxc5) in the main line. I only have two games between strong players in that line and white has scored 75% with one ridiculously brutal and quick win over a 2400.
It really makes me want to play it as black as well, but I don't like the fact that white can force some really mind numbing variations like the semi-slav exchange. At least with the nimzo indian white is forced to enter interesting positions regardless of whether or not he wants to.
In Shirov's first "Fire on Board", he has a chapter devoted to his games in the Botvinnik Semi-Slav. Obviously very dated by now, but I imagine you'd still find it interesting stuff.
Is that not amazing. Sacrificing a piece planning to trade queens without any mate or way to win more material anywhere near in the future. But black is just completely paralyzed and white wins without problems after 14. .. Nb6 15. Qxd8+. I suppose the fact that white gets 3 pawns kind of takes away some of the beauty, but the material balance has little to do with the value of the sacrifice.
In Shirov's first "Fire on Board", he has a chapter devoted to his games in the Botvinnik Semi-Slav. Obviously very dated by now, but I imagine you'd still find it interesting stuff.
Ah yeah! I loved Fire on Board. It's actually been quite some time since I read it. I should probably pick it up again. I wonder how it would read this time around as my skill level has also changed significantly since when I first read it.
Flying back home to Europe for summer.. Anyone planning to play some big opens in Europe during summer, like Pardubice and etc.? If so, let me know, would be nice to meet some of yall
I am going to play in the Vienna Open (Homepage) in August probably. I won't know for sure until the beginning of August, though.
Fwiw, this is the playing venue: Wiener Rathaus. Very stylish.
But it's not as big as Pardubice, obviously. Based on the two last Vienna Opens, I'd guess there will be about 200 participants, 30 of whom are GM or IM.
Based on the success of some recent threads in the Chess forum, I have some ideas for new interesting threads:
"Chess vs Yahtzee, which game is more complicated?"
"Chess vs Connect_Four, which game is more complicated?"
"Chess vs Tic-Tac-Toe, which game is more complicated?"
"Chess vs Monopoly, which game is more complicated?"
"Chess vs Football, which game is more complicated?" (Real football, not American)
I wonder which of these threads would have the biggest trainwreck potential. Seriously, this absurd "Poker vs Chess" discussion is tilting me.
Two Plus Two
Linear Mode
