# So I want to get better at Chess **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [October 15, 2019, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795 "2019-10-15T14:49:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 9:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/21 "2019-10-16T09:30:32Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I wish that I’d had you guys around back when I was in middle and high school. Back then, the “accepted wisdom” (at least, among the folks I had contact with) was that memorizing the opening books was necessary, which I didn’t have the patience for. And since that’s what I thought opening theory consisted of, I never got very good at openings, and so even though I’m decent in midgames and great in endgames, I never got the chance to put those skills to good use, because by the time the midgame came around, I was sunk. > > If I’d instead spent time studying the _why_ of the openings, I’d have been a lot better off. I’m sorry you got stuck with that dreadful advice. Understanding openings is jolly useful - ‘memorisation’ time can be put to far better use. ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 9:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/22 "2019-10-16T09:37:10Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > What **glee** and **borschevsky** said. Learn the basics of endgames, just enough to keep from pissing away a game you’ve won. But at your level (even mine, as far up as I got which was low 1700s), games are largely won and lost in the middle game. And besides, combinations (pins, forks, discovered attacks, etc.) are _fun_, like they said. > > As far as openings go, my approach would be: > > 1. Decide, for when you play white, if you’re a 1.d4 or a 1.e4 player. That cuts in half what you have to learn. > > 2. Learn one defense against each of 1.d4 and 1.e4. I advocate something non-symmetric in each case: White gets the first move, but Black gets to choose the battlefield, is how I see it. 1.d4 d5 and 1. e4 e5 pisses that away for Black. Flip through the openings just enough to pick one that seems to fit your personality. I used the Grunfeld against 1.d4 and the Pirc against 1.e4, because those fit _my_ personality. Fiddle around with the possibilities just enough to see what fits yours. > > Again, choosing just one defense each against d4 and e4 cuts way down on how much you have to learn about openings, and gives you a path to the middle game that works for you. That’s enough to ask of the opening. It’s important to find how good you are before deciding what opening(s) to play. For beginners, just keep it simple. Don’t try to learn specific openings. Even at international level, it can be a boon to avoid your opponent’s preparation. Against 1. e4, I’ve tried the French and Caro-Kann openings (going into great depth for both.) One of my team-mates remarked that I would have done better to simply play: 1.e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5. No complicated variations! ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Dead\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Cat)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 10:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/23 "2019-10-16T10:06:21Z")
> [@glee](#): > > Also number one priority is to watch what your opponent is up to e.g. 1.e4 e5 2. Bc4 Bc5 3. Qh5 … now Nc6 develops a piece and controls the centre. Sadly it loses to Qxf7 mate! > Position As a relative novice myself, can I just check - I assume 3…Qe7, while forced, is fine for black, as in due course they can play …Nf6 and/or …g6 to kick the white queen away, and potentially take the lead in development? In other words, 3. Qh5 (as one would expect from general principles) is not a sound choice for white here? > [@glee](#): > > One of my team-mates remarked that I would have done better to simply play: > 1.e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5. > No complicated variations! I know you jest, but again just to check my understanding - whatever black plays after 3. Nc3, they are giving white a potentially dangerous lead in development, so will have to play very accurately to equalise the position (and may never do so at master level), correct? ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/24 "2019-10-16T10:38:27Z")
> [@Dead\_Cat](#): > > As a relative novice myself, can I just check - I assume 3…Qe7, while forced, is fine for black, as in due course they can play …Nf6 and/or …g6 to kick the white queen away, and potentially take the lead in development? In other words, 3. Qh5 (as one would expect from general principles) is not a sound choice for white here? Yes, 3…Qe7 is fine and (as you say) 4…Nf6 is coming. Although 3. Qh5 is not the best, it’s certainly not ‘unsound’ (and not a blunder!) In any case White can afford to make an inaccurate move or two - all that happens is that the game becomes level. > [@Dead\_Cat](#): > > I know you jest, but again just to check my understanding - whatever black plays after 3. Nc3, they are giving white a potentially dangerous lead in development, so will have to play very accurately to equalise the position (and may never do so at master level), correct? I’m not joking! Firstly I spent hundreds of hours learning the two openings I mentioned above; keeping up with new developments; analysing each game I played with them; studying all my opponent’s choices against my openings. Not much fun - but very useful. Bearing in mind I was an amateur player, it would have been helpful to use the time in other ways. Now after 3. Nc3 White gains time. But only one move. (I reckon a 3 move advantage is worth about a pawn…) Also I have simplified the central position and there are no forcing variations to watch out for. If I could go back in time, I would seriously play 1…d5. ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Dead\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Cat)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 11:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/25 "2019-10-16T11:10:48Z")
Fair enough, and thanks for the extra insight. What do you play after 3. Nc3? Qd8 gives white a 2-move advantage in development, Qc6 takes the best square for the queen’s knight, Qe6+ blocks the king’s pawn. So 3…Qd6 seems best to me, giving the best chance of proceeding with normal development from there. Though after 4. Nb5, I may need to play 4…Qc6 anyway. Would you agree? Don’t worry, I won’t continue further with this digression, otherwise we’ll end up playing a whole game before we know it! Of course, now I’ve typed all that, I realise I could just look it up. Some chess sites are blocked for me at work, but Wikipedia has what looks like a solid treatment of this opening: [Scandinavian Defense - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavian_Defense) Although I missed Qa5 as a possibility, I’m still happy with my choice. I just don’t like the idea of leaving the Queen relatively exposed on the fifth rank so early in the game. ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 11:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/26 "2019-10-16T11:58:53Z")
At one point in college I had a roommate who was quite good at chess (ranked about 200th in the US, IIRC). My chess improved by listening to his commentary on games (to be fair, there was plenty of room for improvement). Nowadays you could do that via YouTube - I like [agadmator’s channel](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCL5YbN5WLFD8dLIegT5QAbA). One piece of my roommate’s advice that stuck with me: “All players pay attention to their own possibilities; weaker players do not pay enough attention to their opponent’s. You need to have a good sense of what your opponent is trying to achieve in the next several moves.” ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/27 "2019-10-16T12:25:25Z")
> [@Dead\_Cat](#): > > Fair enough, and thanks for the extra insight. What do you play after 3. Nc3? Qd8 gives white a 2-move advantage in development, Qc6 takes the best square for the queen’s knight, Qe6+ blocks the king’s pawn. So 3…Qd6 seems best to me, giving the best chance of proceeding with normal development from there. Though after 4. Nb5, I may need to play 4…Qc6 anyway. Would you agree? Don’t worry, I won’t continue further with this digression, otherwise we’ll end up playing a whole game before we know it! After 1.e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3; Qd8, Qd6 and Qa5 are all fine. Not 3…Qc6??? 4. Bb5 1-0 (This shows how important to study tactics like the pin!) 3…Qe6+ (a poor move) leaves the Queen in an exposed position (and blocks both the Bc8 and pe7.) > [@Dead\_Cat](#): > > Although I missed Qa5 as a possibility, I’m still happy with my choice. I just don’t like the idea of leaving the Queen relatively exposed on the fifth rank so early in the game. In chess there are things to worry about a lot - but the Q on a5 is not one of them. The Q is hard to get at (White could play d4 and Bd2, threatening a discovered attack tactic, but you can see it coming.) With experience, you learn what is safe and what is not… ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 12:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/28 "2019-10-16T12:26:58Z")
> [@Xema](#): > > One piece of my roommate’s advice that stuck with me: “All players pay attention to their own possibilities; weaker players do not pay enough attention to their opponent’s. You need to have a good sense of what your opponent is trying to achieve in the next several moves.” See post 17! ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Dead\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Cat)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/29 "2019-10-16T14:04:14Z")
> [@glee](#): > > After 1.e4 d5 2. exd5 Qxd5 3. Nc3; Qd8, Qd6 and Qa5 are all fine. > > Not 3…Qc6??? 4. Bb5 1-0 (This shows how important to study tactics like the pin!) Thanks. In my defence, I wrote most of this without looking at the board (and it shows how poor my blindfold chess is, unsurprisingly for a player of my standard). I do like to think I would have spotted this at the board, though! > [@](#): > > In chess there are things to worry about a lot - but the Q on a5 is not one of them. > The Q is hard to get at (White could play d4 and Bd2, threatening a discovered attack tactic, but you can see it coming.) > With experience, you learn what is safe and what is not… Quite so, and of course it wouldn’t be the most common line at master level were this not true. Thanks again for the insight. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/30 "2019-10-16T14:35:49Z")
> [@Xema](#): > > Nowadays you could do that via YouTube - I like [agadmator’s channel](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCL5YbN5WLFD8dLIegT5QAbA)." The guy that sparked my renewed interest! Ok, tactics, what are the best resources available to focus on them? Are puzzles worthwhile for teaching them or are they considered novelties? ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/31 "2019-10-16T14:39:45Z")
I haven’t heard back from Sitnam about my offer of a training game, so if anyone else would like to put their name forward… I could wait a day or two for the OP, otherwise then start a game against another challenger. As I mentioned, there would be a game thread (thanks to [www.apronus.com](http://www.apronus.com), with a diagram after each move) - just for the moves. A second thread would be for questions, analysis and kibitzer chat. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGauss](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/karlgauss/32/3713_2.png) [@KarlGauss](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGauss)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/32 "2019-10-16T14:44:59Z")
> [@Sitnam](#): > > The guy [agadmator] that sparked my renewed interest! Me too. (And, thanks, **glee** ). ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/33 "2019-10-16T14:46:58Z")
> [@](#): > > Quoth **glee** : > > Former world champion Anatoly Karpov said "chess is everything— art, science, and sport” . > > At the human level (with us chaps making mistakes, getting flustered under time pressure and getting emotional), of course he’s right. > > However (sadly) computers have shown that playing good chess is pure science. > Armed with chess tablebases, computers can now play many endings perfectly. That’s not the conclusion I would draw. Sure, a tablebase will result in perfect play, but they only exist for board configurations with a total of six or fewer pieces on them (it _might_ be as much as seven by now, but it won’t reach 10 in my lifetime). And while there are a few surprises in the tablebases, it’s only a few: For positions that simple, the vast majority of the time, a competent endgame player will reach the same conclusion as the tablebase (it might take more moves, but you’ll still end the game with the same player winning). And that’s only even if you reach a board position that simple at all: Most games end before that point. The truly significant advances in computer chess have, if anything, turned the game _more_ into art. A great human player can generally explain his moves, and why he made them. For the chess computers of even a few years ago, the programmers can explain in extensive detail exactly why the computer made the moves it did. But the current best chess computers are even more human than the humans: nobody, not even the programmers, can explain why they made the moves they did, because the computers were never programmed how to play chess, they were programmed to _learn_ how to play chess, which they did, from scratch by playing against copies of themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Dead\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Cat)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/34 "2019-10-16T15:02:05Z")
> [@glee](#): > > I haven’t heard back from Sitnam about my offer of a training game, so if anyone else would like to put their name forward… > > I could wait a day or two for the OP, otherwise then start a game against another challenger. > > As I mentioned, there would be a game thread (thanks to [www.apronus.com](http://www.apronus.com), with a diagram after each move) - just for the moves. > A second thread would be for questions, analysis and kibitzer chat. I have a bit of free time over the next few days, so if Sitnam is happy to sit this one out, I’d like to take you up on that if I may please? Ideally starting tomorrow, if possible. ---
**Author:** ![Jasmine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jasmine/32/2964_2.png) [@Jasmine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jasmine)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/35 "2019-10-16T15:18:24Z")
I think you should get what I feel is the best chess program there is: [**Fritz 16**](https://shop.chessbase.com/en/products/fritz_16_english) Yes, at full strength, Fritz beats grandmasters with regularity. However, they have made a special effort to make Fritz much more user friendly to the host of lesser players out there looking to improve their games. > [@](#): > > Fritz has been considered unbeatable. Who would want to play against him? In the case of Fritz 16, however, playing against an engine is now once again the very definition of fun! A host of features, including “Assisted Analysis”, which gives you discreet visual hints as you move, and emoticons, which show Fritz’s mood, are there to help you. Even with little knowledge of chess, you can enjoy many an exciting game, and more importantly, victory, against Fritz. If things don’t work out, Fritz 16 shows you the combinations you might have missed directly after the game with the handy “Tactical Analysis” function, or you can dive right into “Easy Play” calculation training to hone your skills. Fritz doesn’t come up short when it comes to playing strength either: the new multiprocessor engine was developed by star programmer Vas Rajlich (“Rybka”) and is up there with the global elite. Also, you have to decide what kind of player you are. Do you thrive on open, aggressive positions? Then E-4 is for you, but keep in mind that you will run into the Sicilian Defense quite often, so you will have to verse yourself a good 15 moves deep in numerous different variations of it if you plan on standing a chance. On the other hand, if you like quiet positional games that develop more slowly, D-4 or even C-4 might be better for you. When playing Black against E-4, you might try the French Defense. It is much less used then the Sicilian and, consequently, most opponents are far less booked up on it. Against D-4, my personal favorite has always been the Nimzo-Indian Defense. It’s old and not much used anymore, but it is an aggressive reply to that quieter opening. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/36 "2019-10-16T18:23:37Z")
> [@glee](#): > > I haven’t heard back from Sitnam about my offer of a training game, so if anyone else would like to put their name forward… I appreciate the offer, but I’d like to study a bit more first. ---
**Author:** ![Mike\_Mabes](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mike_mabes/32/1782_2.png) [@Mike\_Mabes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mike_Mabes)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2019, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/37 "2019-10-16T21:48:07Z")
> [@Sitnam](#): > > I’m either an advanced beginner or at an introductory intermediate level. I just finished Bobby Fisher Teaches Chess without too much trouble and am enjoying the chess puzzles on [Chess.com](http://Chess.com) and can usually handle the 600-800 rating puzzles. > > Where should I go from here? Focus on openings? Closings? Continue doing pattern recognition puzzles? > > I figured I’d ask here and look into free resources before plunking down cash for more books or online subscriptions. > > Thanks for any help. I was going to suggest Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess! Got that when I was about 12. Is it still in print? Anyone, great advice above. Carry on ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2019, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/38 "2019-10-17T17:40:40Z")
> [@Dead\_Cat](#): > > I have a bit of free time over the next few days, so if Sitnam is happy to sit this one out, I’d like to take you up on that if I may please? Ideally starting tomorrow, if possible. I’d be happy to play you, but these games usually take about a month. On the other hand there’s no rush to make moves - so you decide if the game is on! ---
**Author:** ![glee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b5a626/32.png) [@glee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glee)\ **Post date:** [October 17, 2019, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/39 "2019-10-17T17:57:32Z")
> [@Jasmine](#): > > I think you should get what I feel is the best chess program there is: [**Fritz 16**](https://shop.chessbase.com/en/products/fritz_16_english) > > Yes, at full strength, Fritz beats grandmasters with regularity. However, they have made a special effort to make Fritz much more user friendly to the host of lesser players out there looking to improve their games. A computer program is useful for practice as it is always available. If Fritz is user-friendly to beginers / improvers, that’s a bonus. N.B. There are several free programs. > [@Jasmine](#): > > Also, you have to decide what kind of player you are. Do you thrive on open, aggressive positions? Then E-4 is for you, but keep in mind that you will run into the Sicilian Defense quite often, so you will have to verse yourself a good 15 moves deep in numerous different variations of it if you plan on standing a chance. I’m sorry, but this is completely wrong. Start with endings, learn some tactics and play simple moves in the openings. **Do not** ‘verse yourself a good 15 moves deep in numerous different variations’. :smack: 1. There are at least 11 variations of the Sicilian (Najdorf, Classical, Dragon, Accelerated Dragon, Scheveningen, Kalashnikov, Taimanov, Kan, 4 Knights and Pin.) The number of moves you would have to learn by heart to play each of these through to move 15 makes my mind boggle. 2. What do you do if on (say) move 8 of one of these variations your opponent plays a new move. You’ve learnt by heart and don’t understand the ideas behind the opening. 3. The amount of time you’ve invested on this rote learning will be largely wasted (e.g. when nobody ever plays a particular variation), when instead you could be learning stuff that will help you throughout your time in chess. ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Dead\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Cat)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2019, 8:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795/40 "2019-10-18T08:11:08Z")
> [@glee](#): > > I’d be happy to play you, but these games usually take about a month. > On the other hand there’s no rush to make moves - so you decide if the game is on! Thanks. Actually, now I think about it, I’ve just started a game of Diplomacy, so to avoid over-committing myself I’d better finish that first. I’ll come back to you in due course if that’s OK? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-i-want-to-get-better-at-chess/841795.md?page=3)