|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 53 OF 112 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jun-04-06
 | | ray keene: www.hardingesimpole.co.uk
|
|
Jun-04-06
 | | Eric Schiller: <Paintbucket> There are lots of openings that fit your needs. I suggest you look at the Rubinstein Attack (Colle with b3 rather than c3). I have a recent book on this, and you can see excerpts on www.ericschiller.com. If gambits are your thing, my massive book Gambit Chess Openings covers 900 of them, and I'm sure you can find some obscure but playable ones. The list and excerpts from the book are available online. Another area with a lot to be discovered is the Pterodactyl (...g6, ...Bg7, ...c5 and ...c5), while Andrew Martin's recent book on the Hippopotamus also has some fascinating lines. So just look around, and try a few of those openings on and see how they fit. |
|
| Jun-04-06 | | lasher09: hi eric! i'm quiet interested in Sicilian Najdorf. but with regards to Najdorf's 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 e5 7. Nb3 Be6 8. f3 Be7 variation... i'm having some difficulty on utilizing the dark-square bishop to it's fullest. because when i play this opening this bishop is often left in its defensive state until maybe in the endgame and i can't trade it that easily. is this the usual case for this variation? i just feel that i'm having lesser control of the dark squares. i'm probably missing some things but i think the break d5 still doesn't help that much. i'd really appreciate any help... =) |
|
Jun-04-06
| | Eric Schiller: <lasher> I think much depends on how good a player you are. That line is not suitable for players under 2000, because the positional plans are subtle. That's why superstrong players like it. They know it takes great skill to player either side. Different Sicilians are suitable for different players, though I think the Dragon and the Kan or Paulsen can be handled by anyone. Najdorf and Scheveningen are for advanced players, because many positional strategies have to be learned and carried out precisely. |
|
| Jun-04-06 | | lasher09: yeah i thought it's quiet a difficult opening. i have been admiring Karpov and his style and i've seen him use that variation of Najdorf a lot of times... i'm still young and probably rated at 1200 - 1300... I like to attack attack and attack. i feel quiet comfortable with tactics. i don't hesitate to trade major pieces to keep an attack although I don't succeed all the time. =) i thought of studying positional players first before I study agressive and attacking play. I think that doing so would make a balance. would you agree? and do you think Karpov would be good to study for positional analysis for beginners like me? because there are just some times he's too deep especially against Kasparov. and I can't wait for him to play against Fischer! I heard he's ok for a match. I hope it's not Fischer Random Chess though. I'd like to see how Fischer will break him! I've also been studying your book on Fischer and man he's not human! |
|
Jun-05-06
| | Eric Schiller: <lasher> If you were my student the first thing I'd do is change the repertoire to more suitable lines while starting the long education on the strategy and positional handling of the more advanced openings. At your level, you should play openings which more or less guarantee that you'll be able to connect your rooks early in the game, with a strong presence in the center. You have a wide choice, but it is easier to play openings where you have a piece of the center and all of your forces are available. |
|
| Jun-05-06 | | lasher09: hi eric! what do you think about playing against a computer? will it increase strength as a player? right now i'm using Arena with engine Aristrarch. i set the search depth at 2 and slowly increase it when i feel comfortable. now i'm at depth 4. are there any disadvantages? |
|
Jun-05-06
| | Eric Schiller: <lasher> I recommend not playing against programs unless they can be set to play human-like errors. If you play too much with computers, you wind up overestimating the defensive ability of your opponent and won't take risks. It makes for sterile and boring play. It is much better to play blitz against strong human players. Leave the computer to analyze games and positions. Of course if you really enjoy constantly being smashed flat by computer play, you might move to San Fransisco. We are used to very weird people :-) |
|
| Jun-06-06 | | lasher09: hehe... thanks man! really appreciate your help.
btw your books are the best so far. chess in prose is exactly what beginners like me need, and it's not boring. |
|
| Jun-07-06 | | Cowwithgun: Hi Eric. As a Pirc player I love the Pterodactyls. Are there any resources out there for that opening? Thanks. |
|
Jun-07-06
| | Eric Schiller: <cow> Part 1 of my series of articles on the Pterodactyl is a www.chesscountry.com. I'll have more articles and eventually an eBook on the subject. For now, I think the most detailed coverage is in the second edition of my Unorthdox Chess Openings. |
|
| Jun-08-06 | | Cowwithgun: Great! Thanks. |
|
| Jun-08-06 | | russep: Mr.Eric Schiller - as a player around 1600 in rating and looking to inprove what would you recomend? |
|
Jun-08-06
| | Eric Schiller: <russep> It is hard to diagnose a player about 1600 without more information. There isn't a generic "1600" player. Some have problems in openings, others have strategic or tactical shortcomings (but all need work on endgames). Why do you lose games? That's the key to making progress in the 1600-2000 level: identifying the problems. One common problem in that range is taking up openings which are too advanced. I often find that at the 1600 level, opening repertoirs should be simplified so that it is easier to concentrate on other aspects of the game. If you are making tactical errors frequently, get CT-ART 3.0 from Convetka (you can get it at www.chesscountry.com) and get to work! But your best first step is to contact a qualified coach and get a "check up" so that your problems are diagnosed properly. You can remedy the problems in a lot of ways, but first you have to identify them. |
|
| Jun-08-06 | | russep: ok thanks |
|
| Jun-08-06 | | russep: Well I think that sometimes I overlook certain moves and then with tactics I miss the correct move order. What do you consider to be advanced openings for a 1600 player? |
|
| Jun-08-06 | | Rocafella: Eric, hi, what do you think of the book, 'Killer Chess Tactics'? Thanks in advance! |
|
Jun-08-06
| | Eric Schiller: <Rocafela> Well, since I'm one of the three authors of the book, I'm a bit prejudiced. But I have had a lot of good feedback on it and it is a popular book. There are many ways to study tacticw, and I doubt that there is any one greatly superior to all the rest. Our approach uses the games of the World Champions as our basic material. These are games and positions that we think every chessplayer should be familiar. Anyone interested in what we are talking about should look at http://www.ericschiller.com/pdf/Kil... which is a substantial excerpt of the book. |
|
| Jun-08-06 | | jackmandoo: Hi Eric! I'm one of the more advanced players on this site, my specialty is the back rank mate. I think in chess its good to have a specialty and I was wondering what yours was? Basiclly for me if I have a rook out and your back rank is open I'm going to check your king if I can. Because you never know that check could be mate! Now I know you GM's can tell if its checkmate or not but most of us here are still learning. Anyway I'd like to know what your specialty is and you cant take mine! LOL. Sorry I'm a jokester too. |
|
Jun-08-06
 | | Benzol: <jackmandoo> <Sorry I'm a jokester too.> Yes, you certainly are.
:) |
|
| Jun-08-06 | | apawnandafool: i guess <jackmandoo> loves mating in the back rank? |
|
| Jun-08-06 | | jackmandoo: I've been known to sac a bishop on the back rank yes. |
|
| Jun-09-06 | | Rocafella: <Eric Schiller> Thanks, I have the book and was wondering about your views on it, thanks for the reassurance. It's really helped my game, I can spot tactical blows much quicker now, and I'm not all the way through yet :) |
|
| Jun-09-06 | | lasher09: hi eric. for the benefit of all us here in this site, what do you classify as openings suitable for young players or below 2000 and which ones are for stronger players. just give us the general idea. |
|
| Jun-09-06 | | lasher09: based on what you told me, openings for below-2000-players are those that would have most peices out in less time and for above-2000 includes those with subtle positional plans (such as what?). is this right? are you referring to a more active opening for the former and a solid positional one for the latter? |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 53 OF 112 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
