|
|
| From | Message |
|---|---|
|
wrecking_ball 05-Apr-14, 16:51 |
 Proof is in the pudding with playing way,way too many games... game Just take this position alone by move #27: Then black moves 27....Qg6 and then my move 28.Nxa6! Now,its easy to back the game up a bit and see where black could have done better,including not allowing his Queen into a discovered Q check position. Also,Blacks disconnected pawn on a5,wasted Q moves for black and a host of other things. Now keep in mind that my opponent was initially a 2300+rated player.Also,you may not know this but a Ragozin Defense in the Q Gambit Declined statistically has a relatively high draw rate,which the game above is pretty much in line with a D38.Statistically,my opponent "should"have drawn this game with me,especially since he was 2300 rated. But what the heck happened??? Like I have been trying to tell you all....his game load CAUSED him to LOSE!No,I don't want to hear a difference of opinion either!I know better!I know from experience that a true 2300 rated player does NOT play like a 1900 rated player like origin_sin did in this game!His many oversights were due to playing in a kind of "blitz"fashion which became necessary when his game load at the time was close to 200 simultaneous games!!!!!Now,how on Earth are you going to play quality games when you are playing around 198 games at one time?And what is the logic behind playing those many games?Because you love chess?Because you want to get your premium membership moneys worth?Please! I'm not picking on original_sin,believe me...i'm just trying to prove a point.Slow the hell down!Play quality,not quantity!I firmly would bet big money(yes i'm serious!)that if original_sin would have only been playing perhaps 5 to 10 games maximum,that he would have seen the positional and tactical errors in this game and would have been able to draw at the very least,or the game would be going on yet,perhaps to move 60 or so.I may have won in the end,who knows?But I can easily see "haste"in his moves when he played me.One of the ways I can tell is that I had observed his online status a good # of times,and then he moved in my game,only 5 minutes later,even in critical positions!This is due,of course,to the "necessity"of having to move on as quickly as possible to his other 197 games!Wow! So the end result with original_sin? He has now reduced himself from 2300+ to 2110 at the time of this post.Losses,time-outs,tactical errors...the list goes on and on! Is that what you guys want?Build yourself up to a great respectable rating and then simply flatline out or drop down a significant or tons of rating points due to excessive game play at one time?Why?Is that logical?No it is not my friends! How much is too many games?Well,that relative.But 198 games?Way too much! 30 games?Yes,even that could be too much! See,many of you guys play in these GK tournaments,team games,ladders and more.I have nothing against that at all.But many of you guys have a bit of a misconception that playing against all this great competition(like in team games)is definitely going to improve your game play in the end.This may be true,but not necessarily,if you have taken on "too many"games at one time.Believe it or not,sometimes playing even over 5 games with shorter time controls can be detrimental to your chess health!Yes!Is that what you want?Its great to get involved in all these chess activities,having social fun with all your teammates and more,but when is playing too many games,simply too much?Are you going to be aware of when your game is suffering due to excessive overload?Probably not! So,it may be boring to play less than 10 games, dull to crack open the books on theory and time consuming to take a look at your future opponents % game losses on that Sicilian variation before you play him and have a better chance at whipping his butt on the board...but if you care to improve,then its best to play less,not more and take the time you have left in the week to study other areas of chess. I have seen,for example,chess team captains kind of "pressure"some of their better players to play more and more games,even though they "don't have to".But many of you guys know that its easier to say "yes"than no!You don't want to disappoint the captain or your other team members who depend upon you,now do you?So,admit it,it can be a bit of "psychological"pressure to say no. I'll go as far as saying that in many cases its better to not play in a team,leave the team and pinpoint your own opponents,not have someone else give them to you.I know,I know,you may not want to hear this and that sounds ridiculous,right?Don't be so sure of that!Playing in teams is not for everyone(including me)and there are a multitude of reasons to not play in teams.Again,it may be a simple fact that a team may just possibly take you away from the other study avenues and less games that you really need to concentrate on to improve,atleast for the time being. So,can you guys NOW see why I seek out players like original_sin that take on way too many games?Are my chances at beating these mega game players better or worse?Take a wild guess!!!!!!! Now my present and last only opponent...rjmacready is on a vacation time-out right now. I can't speak of the game,but you can always look at it.But why did I pick this opponent?Take a wild guess!!!!!He is playing 45 games.This game load is certainly less than 198 as my above opponents is,but then his rating 2277 is less than original_sin original rating of 2300.Run a little proportional math in your brain. Is 45 games too much?Thats open to opinion.My opinion?Way too many games being played simultaneously!!!!!! And perhaps I might be posting the game results in this thread in a few weeks with rjmacready.I wish him luck,either way. TA |
|
wrecking_ball 05-Apr-14, 16:54 |
Hello all and Happy Halloween!(from last year): And my opponent that I said I would speak about(above) who is rjmacready has opened up his own doorway to hell(voluntarily) against me in the finished game that I will post below. I am posting our game in this "too many games post" for a good reason.Why?Obviously!He plays way too many games and my professional opinion is that this is "one"of the factors that contributed to his loss...period.Hey...some of you guys want the truth and reality?Well,like it or not,I say it the way it is....no reason to tell fibs,exaggerate or smooth it over with whipped cream and cherries and hide the truth!And I think I know what i'm writing about here at my level of experience. Lets start with a "better" formula of success for black: Playing a defense with a much higher stat worldwide win record(for black) especially if white has a rating 200-300 points above black,combined with playing,say 10 games or less simultaneously = a better chance at winning or drawing the game.Sure,there are exceptions,but its better to go with the stats,ESPECIALLY if blacks opponent is rated several hundred rating points above black! So the formula might look something like this: HSW/D/<3 + BSWS + < 10 games = Better game/better winning or drawing possibilities. The formula above stands for: High stat winning and/or drawing games on the popularity list of worldwide games of 3rd or better(HSW/D/<3) plus(+) Better subvariational win statistics(BSWS)within that opening defense plus(+) playing 10 games or less simultaneously equals(=) a probable better game against an opponent stronger than you. So,lets list atleast 4 defenses that par better than the one rjmacready used against me: 1.Nimzo Indian Defense 2.Pirc 3.Sicilian 4.Petrov(for a drawing weapon only) Now let me show you a formula of statistical disaster for players like rjmacready: Its the same as above,EXCEPT,place an "L"(Lower) stat win in place of the "H" and an "L"in front of the subvariational choice of play and put an ">",meaning,playing more than 10 games simultaneously. So how does players like rjmacready fall into the formula?The first or second categorized formula?The second one! He played an Alekhine Defense against me.That has a waning popularity in actual play,approx 5th or 6th on the charts and its win/draw statistics COMPARED to other defenses are a bit sour,indeed!Combine this with playing about 45 games(at the time) and against me(2500+)......and this is a cake recipe that throws sauerkraut into the whipped cream...yuk! See,there are hidden and well know factors about the Alekhine Defense.One of which is that it it designed for "AGGRESSIVE"players.The word "aggressive" is ok in some circumstances,but against a much stronger opponent it is NOT a wise choice of opening defenses(compared to others),especially due to the actual NATURE of the term "aggressive",especially if you are playing (like rjmacready)... over 40 games at one time.When playing "aggressive",you can more easily be prone to tactical errors in judgement and your long term positional play thought patterns will more than probably suffer simply DUE TO THE FACT that an excessive game load will generally PREVENT you from taking enough sensible analytic time to set up the BETTER long term positional play goals needed,especially in corresp chess.Sure,you can post "exceptions"to my formula and TA rules...so can I with Q sacs!But,i'm speaking of an overall better recipe of success in overall broader logical views for most opponents.Thats why there are things like...stats!! Now, the game below that I played against rjmacready: game I suppose,he did a GK computer analysis of our game,I did not.In any case,you can spot the inaccuracies of his play through various spots in the game and my pawn lead though exchange errors he had made.Notice that through the majority of the game we had a classic Knight/Bishop vs Knight /Bishop.But black also had doubled pawns on the f6 and f7 squares,which many times is an inherit end result weakness in the more statistically better modern variant in the Alekhine Defense. Yes,I played the "modern" subvariant against my opponent,rather than a Four pawns Attack or Exchange variation which have a bit less statistical and less popular success rate.Yes, 4 pawns is good,but why did I choose the Modern var? Because I KNEW that rjmacready would play more AGRESSIVELY,take less time to analyze(playing 45+games)and the modern tends to slow the aggressive player down just a bit if he wants to contend with a game that involves more DEPTH of positional play as opposed to the exchange variation,for example.So,if I know that # 1....an opponent chooses a weaker Alk game with me,then I ALREADY have an advantage before the game starts and #2....then,i'll choose the best statistical win advantage(modern)in that opening.Yes,a 4 pawns opening variation would be up there as one of my choices,but not the best choice(in my opinion) against this player in particular! Overall General Alk Defense Stats=white 37% wins,black 33.6% wins subvariant: wins for white: modern 42%,4 pawns= 36% for white and higher win possibilities for black. So guys,even some of you masters like rjmacready....keep up those 40 to 100 games being played simultaneously and combine that with a 5th place Alekhine Defense in the stat department......and i'll be throwing 5 tablespoons of sauerkraut into your cake "recipe" for every tablespoon of whipped cream you put into your childs Birthday cake!Yuk!!!! Ahhh...but some of you masters are thinking,"well,I pared well against 10 other masters using Alekhine Defense"on GK and GM's like Lev Alburt or Fischer used it successfully on occasion". Yes,yes,good point...but your missing the point!Your NOT Lev Alburt or Fischer,your not playing just one game OTB with spectators using the Alkehine and unlike Albert or Fischer your playing an opponent rated several hundred points above you(me) while you are playing 40 other opponents!Show me a good # of WINS or even DRAWS against 2400-2500 players(if you are 2200+) and i'll change my opinion!Yes,i'll settle for 4 or 5 draws against 2400-2500+players,that will suffice for me.I'm waiting.... In the meantime,i'll open another can of sauerkraut!!! Lesson over. TA(now WR) |
|
wrecking_ball 05-Apr-14, 17:08 |
game Now this player is a relatively strong 2181 player.But I beat him.Why?Its my firm belief that he simply plays way too many simultaneous games(now at 132 games)and cannot take enough quality time to access the deeper positional strategy necessary to overcome my simple tactical ploys!Is 132 games really necessary to get your chess fix?Answer:No.For in my humble opinion, original sin could easily become a high 2200 to 2400 rated player if he slowed down a bit,played less games and smelled the roses!So the end result is not even a draw and I destroyed him again....and will do so in the future time and time again!!!!No brag,just fact!And now,you know why.Thanks for the rating points!Now,who else can I spy on thats playing over a 100 games simultaneously so I can crush them?Hmmmmm.See some of my hidden win tips now readers? |