| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
mavu 25-Nov-10, 17:11 |
 picking openings at randomexample, I used the Grand Prix Attack against a much higher-graded opponent in a county league match yesterday, and got a draw! I had a very vague idea that white is supposed to move f5 quite early on and perhaps sacrifice a pawn to get a nice kingside attack, something that never came about in the game. Then, when I play openings I know superficially well (such as the Caro-Kann classical variation or the French defence), I often end up in trouble sooner or later, since the game doesn't follow the preconceived strategic ideas I had about the opening. What's more, such games are usually more boring. A little knowledge is worse than no knowledge, isn't it? I'm wondering if it was possible just to follow some generic opening principles and still be a good player. Are there any good books on the subject, for instance? |
||
|
precepts for success But the book that worked for me, taking me from losing 9 out of 10 games to winning most my games, is Aron Nimzovich's CHESS PRAXIS. I will say that if you are relying on passive defenses like the Caro and the French, and just coasting along with the book moves -- you can only coast one way and that is downhill. If the game veers off its pre-conceived course -- you are lost without the vectors of controil you need to steer yourself back into the driving seat. One of the ten basic principles for success in any competitive game -- including chess -- is to seize and hold the initiative. Hold the initiative, and you will hold the game true to its course. You will be in control of your chess destiny. Also, I recommend the games collections of Timman, Anand, Karpov, Smyslov, Boleslavsky, Larsen, and Bologan -- the ones they have annotated themselves. Their books are rich with ideas they tried in the opening phase, ideas behind moves and sequences of moves that define modern chess. |
||
|
mavu 26-Nov-10, 01:36 |
explain why learning may seem to worsen the results. |
Log in 