Looks like chess.com now have Guess the ELO feature on their game reviews.
I can also be as low as 1300 when tired.
I’ve broken through 98%. Am I Mensa? 
This is the game that does it. As smooth as this is, I’d rather have fun and exciting tactics battle. Lately, this is the only way I can win, though.
That’s more typical of how I play nowadays.
1 Like
That’s pretty awesome!
Yeah, at some point a 95% in a battle where you made some clutch moves to pull it out is better than a 98% without drama where you sort of walked over your opponent. In the 95%, you came through at a critical time–but it’s still fun to get that big score!
Ooh, another miniature game from Short & Sweet: Accelerated Dragon | Chessable. Kamil Plichta knows some aggressive stuff!
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 g6 5.Nc3 Bg7 6.Be3 Nf6 7.f3 O-O 8.Qd2 d5!
The point! Black doesn’t use 2 moves to strike in the center.
9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.O-O-O Qc7 11.exd5 Nxd5 12.Nxd5 cxd5 13.Qxd5 Bf5
White is lost here. But this line is particularly neat.
14.Qc5 Qb7 15.Qb5 (see diagram) Rac8 16.Qxb7 Rxc2+ 17.Kb1 Rxb2+ 18.Ka1 Rb1#
Kamil Plichta points out …Rfc8 is an “Oh man, I give up chess, well for the next week or so” kind of blunder. 16. Rd8! saves the day, though my desktop engine evaluated it as “only” +2.5, at least to start.
1 Like
Hi chess folks, do you
- learn openings by heart?
- play “problems” (tactics puzzles)?
- create a database or all games you played?
- analyze grandmasters’ matches?
My answer to all questions is “No” (not yet). I just train concentration and my ability to “read” the board. Those two things are my weakest points. My strongest points: (For a beginner) I’m quite good at opening and endgame. I have learned something from a TV course created by Helmut Pfleger (a long time ago.)
3 Likes
Combining 2 and 3 yields the best result for me. That will take care of #1. Grandmasters styles are too different as compared to my style to be effective.
So, create puzzles from your games, and learn enough not to repeat your mistakes (and missed opportunities).
I used to do this, printing puzzles from my games, on business card blanks. Nowadays, I use computers.
3 Likes
I agree with Harry … learning tactics puzzles helps a lot with recognizing patterns, and you realize the detailed whys later.
Modern grandmasters’ games may give this problem: you see what they’re doing, and you think you have to be that sophisticated. So maybe you don’t look for as big edges as you should. That happened to me, and once I learned that yes, indeed, people rated like me make big mistakes (like me) I had a lot more confidence.
I learn openings until I’m bored. There can be some good ideas there. But it ties into (3)–if you play online the database may be made for you! Eventually you’ll be unhappy with an opening’s results, or you’ll get stung by an odd sideline, and you can get a chess engine to tell you the basics of why. This seems to work at any level–well, maybe up until titled player.
There are a lot of really good resources for learning for free on the internet. You may’ve seen the big ones on YouTube, but I always like to push Nelson Lopez’s Chess Vibes channel. Many of the GMs and IMs out there have tons of information, but Nelson Lopez walked in our shoes a little while longer before reaching NM (national master)–and that matters!
If you do study openings, make them fun ones. Don’t settle reflexively for small advantages, but take them if they’re there. Computer study will show you how to fix your biggest inaccuracies.
3 Likes
My only chess golden years were 2013-2017 (then I got married 
so worth it). I did at least some of all four of those. Hundreds of hours on the then Tactics Trainer. Read some print books, some ebooks, played thousands of bullet, blitz and 2-3 day daily. Not really the rapid category… too much time on the computer in a stretch for just one game. Looked over my better blitz games on a chess engine (not built into the site at the time). Watched live master games.
These days about the only chess I ever touch is playing friends or family of mine that are just getting into chess, and I start out by spotting them a queen, rook, and a knight and let them work their way to less and less handicap material.
I miss being deep into it though. I guess if I hadn’t gotten into programming(/still had a huge unfinished IF work to complete) I might actually still play sometimes.
3 Likes
You can’t learn opening by heart unless it’s mainstream. There’s always a stumble on crazy openings, such as this:
Can’t really study for such thing. I’m happy to eke out 5 great moves and a brilliant! Just have to sacrifice the Queen!!!
1 Like
Wow, that looks quite crazy! Thanks for sharing.
I’ve read that some grandmaster suggests to concentrate on 1. d4 [edit: as a beginner].
2 Likes
The London System is pretty big, for just getting pieces out. d4, Nf3, Bf4, e3, (c4/Nc3 is possible), c3, Nbd2, castles and it’s hard to get in too much trouble.
Above a certain level, people hate it, or playing against it. Perhaps my proudest (?) moment was when I beat someone pretty strong with it, then they gave a chat request.
The chat request was a thumbs-down emoji. Massive respect for my opponent! I won the game, but they won at life!
It took me a while to learn openings and their names and so forth. Chess requires a different sort of learning from school. I really do think the best way to learn is to say “I’m getting sick of getting burned by this. I want to do something about it.” As opposed to: “I guess people play the Nimzo-Indian a lot, so I should learn it.”
This is a great idea for playing with a big talent disparity! Other possibilities would be, for instance, showing people how to win with K&R vs K, or K&Q vs K, or even K&7P vs K&6P or K&B/N&8P vs K&8P. People at a lower level feel they have a chance to win or try something neat.
As an aside, I also always wondered about stuff like rook vs 6 pawns (on starting squares) or queen vs 8 pawns. Engines chop things up pretty quickly now but these sorts of variants are fun. I admit I never really got into Fischer Random, though.
2 Likes
I don’t understand that one. Seems more like a bad loser. Chess is not football (Americans: soccer) where playing pretty is an important aspect.
1 Like
I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek there. In terms of trash talk, what they did was pretty tame. I mean, personal insults can and should be flagged, especially if they get bigoted, and I’m glad online platforms let you flag stuff like that easily.
But when I played the opening, I thought, “geez, what on earth possessed me to play the London?” So how things played out, I got a good laugh.
I’ve heard people say the opposite–though I think a combination of playing pretty and getting results is very important! If I try to grind out too many wins in a row, I get bored and exhausted. If I try to be too flashy, I miss more practical chances. Finding a balance is tough!
3 Likes
I guess I’m too new to chess for this. Because I don’t get bored by that. And I like the way chess trains my concentration and mental discipline. If I play “not grinding” I always loose because of severe mistakes.
2 Likes
Have you look into ChessUp board? That seems like a good option for teaching beginners.
2 Likes
Mostly it’s just people hitting me up on Chess.com and playing games with starting odds; I make some comments over chat but it’s not like I’m actively teaching anyone… I think we tried to buy some kind of electronic chess learner like that for my nephew, but not sure he ever used it!
2 Likes
Oh man. After all my comments about the London System … Ding Liren played it this morning and won a really nice game to tie the world championship match at 3-3. It’s been really exciting to follow. White’s won the last 3 games. The mating net at the end is particularly neat.
2 Likes
A question to you all: What’s your favorite computer opponent? (Be it a website, a phone app, a desktop program, a chess computer.)
Edit add: Mine is Shredder Chess on my Android phone. But sometimes I also use Pychess on my desktop PC and chess.com
Battle Chess and Chessmaster, both of 1990s vintage. I don’t like newer programs. Even their blunders feels unnatural.
That’s a huge problem with bots/computers! The programmers now try to gauge them so they make certain mistakes, but they–well, one targeted to play like a 1600 can play like a 1200 half the time and 2000 the other half. They swerve violently mid-game and make mistakes humans just won’t! For instance, they’ll just trade into dead-lost pawn endgames from an equal position.
That said, training with them to learn openings can be quite interesting. (As long as they cooperate!) I play the chess.com bots to try new stuff out. The free ones are very good. When I had a membership, it was fun to play Jonas, the 1700 who likes the Grob. But one good things about bots that play semi-random openings is that you can quickly test openings that might be thrown at you.
Nelson (1300) is probably fun for beginners to learn to beat but more experienced players can punish his queen moves. Isabel (1600) can get outrageous attacks some times. Wally (1800) is a tough attacker when he doesn’t settle for an endgame, and Li (2000) plays exciting chess too.
For me playing bots isn’t about winning as much as exploring positions and seeing where I mgiht’ve missed tactics or had a hole in my opening repertoire. Well, in theory. Sometimes I just like to beat on lower bots.
BTW, here’s a youtube link I like to show – many may’ve seen it. IM Levy Rozman takes on some chess.com bots and shows their strengths and weaknesses.
2 Likes
I beat Nelson. Easy when you target the Queen; difficult otherwise. Still don’t play like humans, though.
[Event “Vs. Computer”]
[Site “Chess.com”]
[Date “2023-04-17”]
[White “rangstorm”]
[Black “Nelson”]
[Result “1-0”]
[TimeControl “-”]
[Termination “rangstorm won by checkmate”]
- e4 e6 2. d4 Qh4 3. Nc3 b6 4. Nf3 Qg4 5. h3 Qg6 6. Be3 Bb4 7. Qd2 a6 8. O-O-O
Ra7 9. g4 Ne7 10. a3 Ba5 11. b4 O-O 12. bxa5 Ra8 13. axb6 cxb6 14. Bd3 Nec6 15.
e5 f5 16. Nh4 Qe8 17. gxf5 Qd8 18. f6 g6 19. Rhg1 Kf7 20. Nxg6 Rg8 21. Bh6 hxg6 - Bg7 Rxg7 23. fxg7 Ne7 24. Qf4+ Kg8 25. Bxg6 Nxg6 26. Rxg6 Bb7 27. Rdg1 Nc6
- Rf6 Nxe5 29. dxe5 Bg2 30. Rxg2 Qe7 31. Rf8+ Rxf8 32. gxf8=Q+ Kh7 33. Qg8# 1-0