Chess for Beginners

Tag: calculation

  • Connecting the Dots in Chess

    I have made an observation while solving puzzles, that I feel will improve my tactical puzzle solving skills, and might have direct application during actual games.

    When solving a tactical puzzle of intermediate to advanced level I either:

    1. Have no clue how to go about solving it and get it wrong.

    2. Have multiple ideas that look promising, but after further analysis don’t win {usually end up playing one of the two and get the answer wrong}.

    3. Solve the puzzle correctly.

    This post is going to focus on solving the 2nd category above. I have found that you will get many more puzzles correct by combining ideas that arise by analyzing different candidate moves. Unfortunately, by not making a link between the two, or forgetting about your first idea when looking at the second, I mainly fail to connect the dots and only after reviewing the correct answer do I see that I had been on the right track and would have answered correctly  if I had combined my candidates.

    You might want to solve this puzzles on your own before reading the answers below taking into account your thought process while doing so and then see if you encountered the same issues as I did.

    Here’s the first position we will look at:


    White to move and win

    The first candidate that came to mind was 1.Bb6 attacking the Queen. I analyzed the response 1…Nxb6 2.axb6 Qxb6 which loses a pawn for White and the Black Queen lives on. So I abandoned this candidate and looked for a better move.

    I then found that Qh6 looked promising and I began to analyze 1.Bh5 with the idea of Bh8 and then getting my Queen to h6. But I soon found that 1.Bh5 was a slow since it allows 1…Kh7 and White is out of gas. What I missed, and where I think there is room for improvement, is if I would have combined both moves. Attacking the Black Queen with 1.Bb6 with the idea of freeing the diagonal for my Queen to get to h6 with mate was the winning combination and one I failed to see by not connecting the dots.

    Let’s look at another example, and one which occurred right after I had attempted to solve example #1 above.

    White to move and win

    In this position quickly saw that both the White rook and Queen were attacking the Black d8 rook, and that there might be a tactical opportunity if the Queen were deflected from its defense. The candidate that came to mind was 1. b4 but after further analysis I saw that the Queen could seek shelter by moving to 1…Qc7.  The other candidate that stood out was 1.Qf6+ but the King can easily get out of the way with 1…Kg8 and there aren’t enough White pieces in the vicinity to force the issue. The third candidate I analyzed was attacking the undefended bishop with 1.Qe7 but I found that the bishop can get out of harms way via 1…Bc8. If I would have combined the two ideas or even looked a few ply deeper  I would have found the answer 1.Qe7 attacking the bishop and preventing the Queen from seeking shelter at c7 after deflecting her with b4. 1…Bc8 2.b4! and Black resigned.

  • The Sixth Ply

    Before we get started let’s define what a ply is in chess:

     A ply is a half move and a move is equivalent to 2 ply or a turn by each player. For example,  1. e4 is one ply and 1…e5 would be the 2nd ply, together these two plys make one move.

    Getting close to the truth of a chess position requires the calculation of a minimum of 6 ply (3 moves). The higher your rating the higher the ply calculation requirement increases since your opponent will be delving more deeply into the position than you. If you calculate anything less than 3 ply you are playing hope chess, since you are not forseeing your opponent’s responses. 

    Below is an assessment of how calculation skill correlates to one’s chess rating:

    0-1000 1 ply

    1000-1200 2-3 ply

    1200-1400 4 ply

    1400-1600 6 ply

    1600-1800 8 ply

    1800-1900 10 ply

    1900-2000 12 ply

    Stopping your calculations too soon can prevent you from finding the winning move. Many times the winning move comes after a series of seemingly unfavorable moves, and stopping your calculation too soon will prevent you from finding the best move in the position. At the same time, not looking deeply enough into your opponent’s moves will cause you to miss defensive opportunities against your opponent’s threats. (more…)

  • Chess Board Visualization Exercise 2

    After repeating exercise 1 for the first 2-3 sessions you can then move on to exercise 2.

    Board Visualization Exercise #2

    Same concept as in exercise #1 but this time you do not look at the board.

    – note where the four knights normally develop
    – note where the four bishops normally develop
    – note the four squares for the fianchettoed bishops
    – note the squares where the King and rook are placed after castling

  • Chess Board Visualization Exercises

    Chess board visualization training is necessary in order to not miss tactics, see more combinations and to become a better overall chess player. Chess board visualization does not come naturally to all chess players. Chess visualization is something that must be trained, and should be part of a regular chess training regimen.

    Chess board visualization training will improve your ability to calculate long variations. Visualization training should take place 3-4 times per week in 5-10 minute sessions.

    Board Visualization Exercise #1

    Arrange the pieces on a board and look at the normal developing move for all the pieces. The White knights develop to c3 and f3, while the Black knights develop to c6 and f6. The light squared bishop develops to e2,d3,c4,b5, etc. Once you have studied the knights, bishops (regular and fianchetto positions) the castled King and rook and the four central squares (e4,d4,e5,d5) you remove all of the pieces and point and name out loud all of the normal developing squares for the pieces.

  • Calculating your Chess Rating and Knowledge

    Here’s a fun exercise to determine your estimated chess rating taking into account your existing chess skill and knowledge. While this is just for fun, it can prove helpful in determining how you should focus your chess training. If your knowledge rating is much higher than your skills rating, then you you need to focus your training towards skill building where if your skill rating is much higher than your knowledge rating, then you need to focus more on book learning. You should strive to have your knowledge and skill ratings at no more than 100 points apart.

    Here’s how this works.

    Formula: (Skill + Knowledge) / 2 = ELO

    You need to plug in two of the numbers, and the two best to plug in are ELO and Skill. Ideally, you would use your USCF rating, but if you don’t have one, you can use your ICC of FICS rating, just remember to subtract 150 from your ICC or FICS rating so that it approximates an official USCF rating.

    For your skills rating, I would use Igor Khmelnitsky’s Chess Exam and Training Guide to test your skills and get a rating approximation.

    Example:

    Skill rating: 1138 (based on Khelmenitsky’s book)
    USCF ELO: 1340
    Knowledge rating = K

    (S+K) / 2 = ELO

    (1138 + K) / 2 = 1340

    1138 / 2 + k/2 – 1340 = 0

    569 + K/2 – 1340 = 0

    k/2-781 = 0

    K=781 * 2

    K= 1562

    So my chess knowledge rating equals 1562, while my chess skill rating is approximately 1138 giving me an ELO of 1340. This means I have to focus on getting my skill rating to par with my knowledge rating in order to play at an estimated 1562 ELO rating.

    The goal should be get my skill rating within the same ballpark as my knowledge rating (+/- 100 elo points) before focusing on adding more chess knowledge.

    You should repeat this process every three months, but you will need to take the skill’s test again as well as play in a tournament in order to update your USCF rating and get an accurate reading.

    I would love to hear feedback on this, especially if you actually try it out.

    Related Chess Skill and Knowledge Articles

    [feather_share]

  • Faulty Thought Process: Wishful Thinking

    A frequent issue confronted by amateurs is wishful thinking when calculating combinations. This propensity to fabricate beneficial scenarios in our analysis is very typical throughout an amateur’s game, but it is most dangerous when calculating combinations.

    You see a pretty combination worthy of Tal, and you analyze it over and over, after you have finished your analysis you are sure that the move is a winner. You make the move and you lose a piece, or it initiates a series of exchanges that cause you to lose your initiative and perhaps the game. Unfortunately, you have failed to see the refutation or you simply missed a defending piece that you have conveniently kept out of your analysis. This very common oversight causes you to lose material and / or the game.

    If only you had realized that there was a defending piece all you usually need to do is to combine that information along with the combinational theme to make the winning move. In most cases by adding the bothersome piece to your analysis you can easily spot a sacrifice or deflection that will get the piece out of the way and lead to a winning combination.

    Getting rid of this faulty thought process will lead to more accurate analysis and an improved ability to calculate. Here are a few ways you can improve by eliminating this error in your thinking process:

    • Play long games with a standard time control greater than 30 minutes
    • Pick interesting middlegame positions and spend > 15 minutes analyzing
    • Try to visualize the position before making your move
    • Double and triple check your analysis