|
Main
Date: 02 Jan 2005 23:57:19
From: Martin Euredjian
Subject: Calculation, how?
|
Looking for a tutorial/book/web link that deals with tips, techniques and in general learning how to calculate moves and strategies. In studying master games, the one thing that always stands out is the depth to which they can analyze positions sometimes. I'm wondering what techniques can be used to learn and hone skills in this regard. For example, in a king vs. pawn race to promotion, if the king is within the smallest rectangular area defined by the pawn and the board edges the king can win the race. There is no need to mentally calculate all possible moves step-by-step. I'm sure that there are many other tricks out there just like this one. Thanks, -tin
|
|
|
Date: 05 Jan 2005 19:09:04
From:
Subject: Re: Calculation, how?
|
On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 23:57:19 GMT, "tin Euredjian" <[email protected] > wrote: >Looking for a tutorial/book/web link that deals with tips, techniques and in >general learning how to calculate moves and strategies. In studying master >games, the one thing that always stands out is the depth to which they can >analyze positions sometimes. I'm wondering what techniques can be used to >learn and hone skills in this regard. > >For example, in a king vs. pawn race to promotion, if the king is within the >smallest rectangular area defined by the pawn and the board edges the king >can win the race. There is no need to mentally calculate all possible moves >step-by-step. I'm sure that there are many other tricks out there just like >this one. > >Thanks, > >-tin > I've been at this one for a while and I've concluded the best way to calculate variations is to study chess puzzles. Get some nice chess puzzle books like the recently released "365 Ways to Checkmate" by Joe Gallagher from Gambit Press. Another one is "Excelling at Combinational Play" by Jacob Aagaard by Everyman Chess that's chock full of puzzles to solve. A juicy 500 chess puzzles, very difficult...but helps alot. Yet another is "The Ultimate Chess Puzzle Book" by John Emms by Gambit Press. This one is a monster...1000 chess puzzles to solve. All of them from actual games played in top level competition. And finally I bought this book the other day..."The ChessCafe Puzzle Book" by Karsten Muller, that has another 500 or so chess puzzles to solve. So solving chess puzzles is one way to learn to calculate variations better. Another way...and this is my way of calculating variations better. I choose a game played at random from the 2 million games in my Chessbase database files and randomly select a position that looks interesting. From this point...I copy and paste the game position into a chess playing program like Fritz or Junior...or whatever your fancy and play against the computer from that point. I find this to be yet another way of testing one's calculation skills. An added bonus using this method proves even more interesting...I deliberately choose the side that LOSES the game...so I can play from the loser's side and see where he/she went wrong. This way I can choose a move that would have allowed that side a better chance in the game. You'd be surprised at how many games I've played this way makes me more alert to tactical possibilities that were'nt found over the board during the actual games played. Finally, get Gary Kasparov's books..."My Great Predecessors" Why? Because those books are chock full of variations you can go over with a board and pieces. This makes you more aware of how to see the positions that arise in various opening setups. From this you learn how to think strategically and this allows you to plan your moves accordingly...making the task of finding the variations easier to implement. Just my two cents.
|
| |
Date: 07 Jan 2005 06:48:17
From: Martin Euredjian
Subject: Re: Calculation, how?
|
Thanks all for the input. Lots of good ideas. I am going to try and go through all of the tutorials and analyzed games in Chessmaster with my son first. There's a ton of material there. He just finished all of the basics lessons and quizzes an is starting to work on the intermediate section (first moves). Maybe I'll get a book or two (puzzles sound interesting) to complement. Anything you'd recommend for a six year-old? In general, I've watched him go from knowing nothing, to developing nicely at the opening without getting too distracted with most unsupported threats. Now I have to get him thinking about what to do after all your major pieces are developed. He is starting to understand about thinking beyond the next move and slowly realizing that taking that juicy pawn or exposed queen doesn't always win a game. It's actually quite neat to see the game through his eyes. -tin
|
| |
Date: 06 Jan 2005 15:49:32
From: Toni Lassila
Subject: Re: Calculation, how?
|
On 5 Jan 2005 19:09:04 -0600, [email protected] wrote: These are all good suggestions, but might I add another method I've used sometimes: Pick a master-level player whose games have lots of tactics and combinations. I've used Nezmethdinov, Nunn, Alekhine, shall and others. Then I go through the game move by move, trying to guess what the next move will be and calculate the variations in my head. Then I see what the next move was and if I didn't guess it, I try to figure out where I went wrong and recalculate all the variations. I also try to spot and identify all tactical themes (pins, forks, discovered attacks etc.) that lead to the tactics and combinations in the game. Everything is written down. Once I've completed the game I fire up the engine and verify my analysis to see where I missed something. -- King's Gambit - http://kingsgambit.blogspot.com Chess problems, tactics, analysis and more.
|
| | |
Date: 06 Jan 2005 12:02:03
From:
Subject: Re: Calculation, how?
|
On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 15:49:32 +0200, Toni Lassila <[email protected] > wrote: >On 5 Jan 2005 19:09:04 -0600, [email protected] wrote: > >These are all good suggestions, but might I add another method I've >used sometimes: > >Pick a master-level player whose games have lots of tactics and >combinations. I've used Nezmethdinov, Nunn, Alekhine, shall and >others. Then I go through the game move by move, trying to guess what >the next move will be and calculate the variations in my head. Then I >see what the next move was and if I didn't guess it, I try to figure >out where I went wrong and recalculate all the variations. I also try >to spot and identify all tactical themes (pins, forks, discovered >attacks etc.) that lead to the tactics and combinations in the game. >Everything is written down. Once I've completed the game I fire up the >engine and verify my analysis to see where I missed something. This approach is okay. The problem though is when you do this method...is that you may not know if your move is truly incorrect if yoiu didn't guess the master's actual move. After all, chess is a nearly unlimited game with multiple possible moves and game continuations. You mentioned Nezmethdinov, a terrific player to study tactical themes from! He was truely a great tactical genius. Now, using him as an example, I take his games...then pick a position from any of his games...and then play against the computer using that particular position. The results are very interesting. This method, at least to me, lets me see very rich tactical possibilities and it allows me to test my theories on lines I won't normally get against opponents OTB. There's a new book out by Batsford "The Princess of Chess" which analyzes the games of Judit Polgar. Another good choice to study tactics from. But I still think chess puzzles are the best way of improving tactics and chess thinking altogether. Final thought...endgame analysis...using Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual is a real treasure find. This book beats all else on endgame analysis and is a wonderful companion to use because endgame thinking also improves tactical vision as well.
|
|
Date: 04 Jan 2005 01:28:25
From: LSD
Subject: Re: Calculation, how?
|
"tin Euredjian" <[email protected] > wrote in message news:zT%[email protected]... > Looking for a tutorial/book/web link that deals with tips, techniques and in > general learning how to calculate moves and strategies. In studying master > games, the one thing that always stands out is the depth to which they can > analyze positions sometimes. I'm wondering what techniques can be used to > learn and hone skills in this regard. > > For example, in a king vs. pawn race to promotion, if the king is within the > smallest rectangular area defined by the pawn and the board edges the king can > win the race. There is no need to mentally calculate all possible moves > step-by-step. I'm sure that there are many other tricks out there just like > this one. I guess I'll have to cozy up next to the 'shaved pictures' below, and 'BDSM picture' above LOL. That's okay thought because I have an answer to contribute, and I am interested in what others have to say on this topic. There plenty of endgames that resolve with similar certainty as the King outside the rectangle which you described (e.g., King and Rook vs. King, King and Queen vs. King, etc. Then there are more complex endgames like Philidor's position and the Lucena position, which IMO take it to a different level of understanding and complexity. The better your command of the endgame, the easier it is to conclude the middlegame with a position that you can win with certainty. As for calculating more generally, well I don't think there's any way around the fact that it takes practise, practise, practise. Study tactical positions, practise in real games. That's all I can offer. I am at a stage where I can calculate okay, and but I waste time REcalculating moves: "Hmmm, was this a good move or wasn't it?" I can't remember what horrible fate my calculations foresaw, and so I end up wasting time repeating calculations, but not making forward progress in determining the best move. So my advice to you, while you are still learning how to calculate: make sure that you conclude each calculation with a quick mental note about what your calculation says about that particular candidate move. Rank each move you calculate in your mind, so when you are done considering all the candidate moves, you will have an idea of what the best on is to play...hopefully, and assuming you didn't miscalculate. ;-) That's my two cents. What does anyone else have to say? LSD
|
| |
Date: 03 Jan 2005 23:01:45
From: Ron
Subject: Re: Calculation, how?
|
In article <[email protected] >, "LSD" <[email protected] > wrote: > As for calculating more generally, well I don't think there's any way around > the > fact that it takes practise, practise, practise. Study tactical positions, > practise in real games. That's all I can offer. Solitaire chess and analyzing complex positions on paper (and then comparing your work to published analysis) is probably the best practice. You will get better! Push yourself to see how far ahead you can see. Of course, sometimes you do this and you miss an easy response on move two (see the thread "White to move and win" for an example of this committed by yours truly) which busts your entire analysis, but the more you do it, the less you'll make that (or any other) kind or error. -Ron
|
| | |
Date: 04 Jan 2005 13:31:24
From: Henri Arsenault
Subject: Re: Calculation, how?
|
In article <[email protected] >, Ron <[email protected] > wrote: >Solitaire chess and analyzing complex positions on paper (and then >comparing your work to published analysis) is probably the best >practice. You will get better! Push yourself to see how far ahead you >can see. > Absolutely! Tests have shown that grandmasters do not evaluate all possiblee moves, but they quickly narrow the search to a few candidate moves (using pattern recognition), then they analyze those candidates thoroughly. IMHO the best training program to do this is Convekta<s CT-Art 3.0. Start with the easiest levels, and see how many positions you can solve without missing anything. Writing down your analysis is recommended by Kotov in "Think Like a Grandmaster", you will be amazed at how much you miss. What I like about the above program is that it allows me to see exactly where my inadequacies are (superficial thinking, playing too fast, "hope chess", cutting off analysis prematurely when a promising move is found, not taking into account the opponent<s possible replies, difficulty of visualizing, and defects of pattern recognition). I haven t played any long games since I bought the program, whose inflated ratings think I am a master, but if it did not improve my play, it certainly improved my knowledge. And although the rating may be inflated, it DOES keep increasing with time, so I seem to be getting better. And I have nothing to do with Convekta or CT-Art 3.0, but I can<t recommend it too highly. I try to spend a bit of time with it every day. Henri
|
|