|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
Jan-12-09
 |
| blacksburg: <The key word here is "find". When you predict the moves and found out you were wrong, what do you do?> well that's the hard part, right? figuring out why you couldn't see what they saw? it's hard to say exactly what you "do" to accomplish this, you just try to learn. but when i see an idea or move that i had failed to guess, and feel that it wasn't just a blunder, but that instead i didn't see some concept in the position, i scribble lots of notes next to the move in the book. my books have a ridiculous amount of random scribbles in them. <This is your own resolve. I do have a suggestion: why not play blitz in the usual way that you play (not by playing by inspiration)?> i tend to use blitz games as a learning experience, i don't really worry about my rating as much as some people do. sometimes i try to go into really tactical lines, because i feel that tactics are still a weak part of my game, and crazy blitz games work that part of my brain, like solving puzzles, i guess. every chess player, even positionally minded players, needs to know how to attack, and needs to see tactics. |
 |
Jan-12-09
 |
| whiskeyrebel: blacksburg, I applaud your approaching blitz games as a learning experience. |
|
| Jan-12-09 |
| gus inn: <blackburg< good points.And some of it has to do with the type of opening.E.g. sometimes it is a fruitfull idea to choose wild openings to stay alert from move 1.E.g. Larsen used sometimes to do that.Kings indian vs. Brostein is one example.
One of the basic/classic schisms is if one should strenghten ones strong areas or try to look deeper into the weaker ones ? I am shure there is not an infinate answer to this.But I do recall it certainly made my own play stronger when I forced myself to go over some Talgames and some games with Ruy Lopez , which was not "My" opening and never would be.But I learned a lot which I later realized could be used in other openings.A more profound understanig of the pawns and pieces.
The key here was/is IMO to do it proberly and take the time and energy it requires.And not cheat and bluffing myself.Which is quite easy in chess. So if it takes 1-2 hours to understand a move , then use the time aquired.It will all come back again. All the best - gus inn. |
|
| Jan-12-09 |
| fich: <it's hard to say exactly what you "do" to accomplish this, you just try to learn. but when i see an idea or move that i had failed to guess, and feel that it wasn't just a blunder, but that instead i didn't see some concept in the position> I agree with this. When I's playing through with GM games before when I started serious chess, I would digest the ideas behind each move. Blitz really "sharpens" once's reflexes. But I have my own view: blitz helps you analyzing patterns. Do you agree? |
|
Jan-12-09
|
| blacksburg: <So if it takes 1-2 hours to understand a move , then use the time aquired.It will all come back again.> i often try to force myself to spend a great deal of time analyzing games. it's easy to fly through 5 or 6 games, but if you really want to learn, you can easily spend several hours on one game, or even one move, in some positions. <The key here was/is IMO to do it proberly and take the time and energy it requires.And not cheat and bluffing myself.Which is quite easy in chess.> this is a very deep statement.
<But I do recall it certainly made my own play stronger when I forced myself to go over some Talgames and some games with Ruy Lopez , which was not "My" opening and never would be.> an improving chess player should try to be open to new ideas. dogmatism is especially dangerous to a young mind. exposing oneself to a wide variety a playing styles and openings cannot help but to improve the depth of one's play. even if you're trying to play like smyslov, you can learn a great deal from nezh. you can't play positionally if you can't extinguish enemy tactics. and you can't extinguish the tactics unless you see them coming. <But I have my own view: blitz helps you analyzing patterns. Do you agree?> certainly. pattern recognition is best developed by seeing the patterns as many times as possible. i've often heard people say that blitz chess is harmful to your overall chess growth, but i disagree. it may not develop your deep analysis skills, but it helps pattern recognition and clock management, which is also part of the game. you just have to be able to shake off blitz habits when you go into a long game. |
|
Jan-14-09
 |
| fred lennox: going over his games the impression i have is Nezh dislike glib moves as much as Botvinnik. An obvious, ready made move did not exist for Nezh, it seems. This has the drawback of getting into time trouble, a habit with him. Also of over involvement, sometimes the final decision is less favorable than the more obvious one. Overall, it was a strength. His games and Reshevsky's are excellent in going over to learn to be wary of ready made moves and increasing one's tactical vision. |
|
Jan-23-09
 |
| freeman8201: This guy (Nez) has better results with Black than he does with the White pieces |
|
Jan-27-09
|
| blacksburg: <going over his games the impression i have is Nezh dislike glib moves as much as Botvinnik.> incidentally, Nezh was a notoriously strong blitz player, there is a story about Nezh beating Tal like a drum in blitz games, while Botvinnik apparently only ever played one blitz game in his life, on a train. |
|
| Feb-04-09 |
| Jafar219: Where is Nezhmetdinov`s picture?
|
|
Feb-05-09
|
| fred lennox: naturally Nezh had a different frame of mind when playing blitz. Someone said knights are, as a rule, more effective than bishops in blitz. Im not sure if i don't agree with him. One needs to see only one color with a bishop and it's subtle, sophisticated quality is less likely to bloom in swift play. So, off hand this makes sense. Other shifts of emphasis exists that wouldn't interest the orderly, calculated Botvinnik. The knight is more impulsive and diverse and Nezh handled them, i feel, with as much imagination and instinct as any. So it seems natural that he was a great blitz player |
|
| Feb-07-09 |
| spasskey69: Does anyone know how Nezhmetdinov developed his repertoire. Bobby, for instance, basically adopted Boleslavky's.
The reason I ask is, I am studying the Scotch Game with my teacher and, as Nezhmetdinov is one of my idols, I looked up whether or not her had ever played that opening. Nope. |
|
Feb-07-09
 |
| drkodos: Do you have the book on Nez: Nezhmetdinov'e Best Games of Chess? His own book, his own words. Most worthwhile. |
|
| Feb-28-09 |
| rchczrms: I wonder if this great chessplayer have really what it takes to be a champion. I guess he wasn't given much of a chance to compete outside the USSR. His games are a gem. If you find Tal's games full of fireworks, Nezh's games on the other hand are full of bombs! |
|
| Jul-01-09 |
| spikester2848: Nezhmetdinov deserves more attention than this. They need to post a picture of him up too. This guy was pure genius! |
|
| Jul-08-09 |
| visayanbraindoctor: A 5-time Russian Champion, the brilliant Nezhmetdinov was never awarded a GM title? Another cog in the wheel of mounting evidence that the GM title has been devalued in the recent decades. IMO Nez would be a stronger GM than many of present-day GMs. |
|
| Jul-08-09 |
| MaxxLange: <visayanbraindoctor> well, it also may speak to the power that the USSR chess machine had to keep down people who they felt were unacceptable. I don't see how else they could justify not giving the GM title to him after that many USSR championship wins; it must have been political |
|
| Jul-08-09 |
| MaxxLange: surely winning the USSR championship iss a GM norm result, after all, by FIDE standards, or any reasonable standard. You can't win it except by defeating a whole bunch of top GMs, and not losing to a lot of really sharp second-tier players |
|
Jul-08-09
 |
| acirce: Um, it wasn't the USSR that awarded GM titles, it was FIDE. And he didn't win the USSR championship. He wasn't that strong. |
|
Jul-08-09
 |
| Benzol: <acirce> <He wasn't that strong.> Well he did manage to defeat Tal, Spassky, Boleslavsky, Bronstein, Flohr, Geller, Kholmov and Polugaevsky amongst others but I suppose you could say he wasn't that strong. :) |
|
Jul-08-09
|
| acirce: Yes obviously he was strong, I don't know why you would think I think otherwise, but he apparently wasn't strong enough to win the USSR Championship. He never even came close. That's what I said. |
|
Jul-08-09
|
| blacksburg: if being strong enough to win a 60's era soviet championship is a prerequisite to be a GM, well, i suspect we'd have far fewer GM's these days. |
|
Jul-09-09
|
| Benzol: <acirce> I misinterpreted your meaning. It looked like you were saying he wasn't a strong player at all. But yes you're right that he didn't win the USSR Ch. According to <Phony Benoni>'s splendid collection the best he did was place 7th equal in 1954. See
Game Collection: USSR Championship Player Index (L-O) :) |
|
| Jul-09-09 |
| visayanbraindoctor: <blacksburg: if being strong enough to win a 60's era soviet championship is a prerequisite to be a GM, well, i suspect we'd have far fewer GM's these days.> Nice point. Nez was definitely of GM caliber, yet he could not get the GM title during his time. <MaxxLange> Nez had problems with the SU government authorities? I think we also have to consider that the SU provided funds for chess, either directly or indirectly (by providing money for tournament prizes). It's possible that if Nez was born outside the SU, he would not have been able to become a professional chess player. From what I know, it was not that bad for a chess player in the SU. In my part of the world, a chess player could not hope for a regular financial state support in order to make a living in chess. |
|
Jul-09-09
|
| acirce: <Benzol> Thanks for the link, splendid indeed! Well done <Phony Benoni> :-) |
|
| Jul-21-09 |
| tranquil simplicity: I have a deep feeling that Nezhmetdinov was hid under a bushel by the Russians because he was tartar! Things like this happen all the time in this world. Sometimes I feel like becoming a misanthropist when i see such injustices. |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 6 OF 6 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
