Playing a lot without studying is not very effective in my experience.

I actually thought that I'd made most of my rating gains over the past few years in just a few tournaments, but then I checked my history and that appears not to have been the case. So another vote that activity is necessary, and I would add that playing in class tournaments is especially helpful when rating points are a goal.

I absolutely concur about the importance of playing tournament games for improvement. The intensity of twenty plus hours of trying your hardest at the chessboard over three days completely overshadows any home study you could do in several times that duration. It's hard to conceive of putting in that kind of effort at home. You're also usually attached enough to your games to seriously want to study and learn something from them.

Personally, I feel that if I studied hours a day for the next three months I might see a little improvement. If instead I played a serious tournament every weekend for three months with little bookish study, my strength would shoot up 100 points. (Neither will happen.)

The best chess practice, is over the board tournament play.

Sure that would be greatly appreciated. I realized that the setting, chess board and pieces are a great factor in determining how I play.

Earlier today I got crushed by my opponents many times (5 minute and 3 minute Blitz games). The reason? Most pieces had their weight removed, were scratched and were easily falling over (quite common in blitz games). They were small, slipping, etc. In a speed game like that it's quite easy to make an illegal move or hang a piece.

We later went to his place. He had NICE pieces with a smooth bottom and low center of gravity. They were just beautiful and the environment was quiet. 4 times in a row I beat him, no wait, I CRUSHED him with plenty of time remaining. Won my money back I even offered him 6:00 to my 4:00 on the last game. He resigned before my clock hit 2:00. And he almost never resigns since both of us had our turns of getting lucky spotting an illegal move.


Then perhaps there are less atoms in the known universe than the number of possible combinations of moves (in all order) within the first 10 moves.

Well I lost over 50 points in 6 months when I stopped studying and only played a few tournaments.

Nope, that would require there to be over 1000 possible moves in many, many positions. The record is 218. The figure ganstaman cited is based on 40 full moves and an average branching factor of 35.

Brag: while cleaning my room out yesterday, I found a specific book recommended in How to Reasses your chess. "Think like a grandmaster" by Kotov, and I've heard it's a really good book despite never reading it. Apparently, I bought it for only $6 at a half-priced books a few years ago.

This game was one of the most enjoyable I've played in awhile. The effort:move ratio was pretty high and things stayed nice and complicated throughout.

http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=62721

You weren't kidding about it being complicated, good grief.

I'm on a roll today for fun games.

http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=62741

Beat: I didn't mean to click on the 45-minute pool, I was aiming for 15-minute and then going to bed.

Variance: I drew against a similarly-rated player

Brag: I went for an interesting, early-game positional piece sacrifice

Brag: Houdini confirms that white has equal compensation for the sacced piece. There's some pretty sick stuff in there if you start playing with the various lines.

Beat: I got outplayed from there and ended up down to R+N+4P vs. R+4P

Brag: I swindled the draw out of it anyway.

if it were a restaurant in australia, would it be a check, mate?

Yes it would hang, pass the sugar mate.

what are your ratings on the icc

1650 in the 45-minute pool,though that's deflated by a string of connection problems last week. I usually run in the 1700s and have been known to poke up to 1800.

cool, i havent played on the ICC in a long time so I wanted a feel for how strong the play is over there. how is it these days?

Strong enough for me I'd say in the 45-minute pool, about half my games are easy wins, about 30% are interesting, and 20% are squashes for my opponents.

update on my first tourney experience. had a 2-0 score going into this game, now had to face a 2340 lol. i was very content with how i played until 28. Rc1 ?!. even that move wasnt that bad, but was inactive and became a trend for my endgame play which was too passive and allowed black to go into an easy forced sequence after my d4 pawn.

i play the exchange french because the mainline french is the only opening i have never studied, but im comfortable with the exchange setup.

http://www.caissa.com/htbin/chessview?pgn=pgnbox

That link does not work I think, at least for me there is no game when I click :/

Vgdffddfsfhysdhyffs. I will fix that soon

http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=62841

Excited. I was given sunday off from work. Despite only doing problems on chesstempo for about 3 weeks and re-studying HTRYC for a week, I feel it's best to play in the local tournament despite not exactly being in top form. What do you guys think, considering it's been ~3 years since my last OTB tournament?

I completely agree with the idea of playing in a tournament. That will quickly show you what you need to work on. Plus, the best way to get back into playing shape is to start playing and knocking the rust off.

ugh, i keep ****ing up the pgn, the move order was wrong in my OP. this was the actual game:

http://www.chessvideos.tv/chess-game...r.php?id=62854

Began playing more 15-minute when I don't have time for a full 45-minute (rather than just trying to hurry through 45/45). It took awhile, but I finally got the hang of the rhythm of the time control. Gained 125 points in the ICC 15-minute pool tonight.