Author: Marc van Hal
Date: 17:05:36 02/04/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 04, 2002 at 19:26:34, Marc van Hal wrote: >On February 04, 2002 at 13:41:20, Otello Gnaramori wrote: > >>On February 04, 2002 at 13:24:47, Marc van Hal wrote: >> >>> >>>It is always good to have tactical and positional knowledge >>>The drawback of the solving of tactical problems alone . >>>Is that you do not own the positional knowledge and your are trying to put the >>>pieces in the way they where in your diagram >>>Wich most of the time doesn't work in practice >>>They call that diagramplayers. >>> >> >>Marc, >>I think that the diagramplaying is coming from a positional forcing of your play >>(just what the author of article want to avoid), not a drawback of tactical >>training. >> >>w.b.r. >>Otello > > >How many players included GM's even very strong GM's can be blaimed for the fact >that they where thinkng if you play that I play that missing all other moves. >Just because they had a certain combination in their mind. >missing a defensive move from the oponent? > >But.. >I agree that this is comming from positional forcing of play >But if you don't know better you keep on playing in this way. >And you never improve. > >But if you get more positional knowledge you become wiser >Like many Gm's in their early days also where using there pawns instead of there >pieces not giving the oponent bigger chanches to find a counter attack >to get the same archievement. > > >But besides the tips I already gave here is an one >Many players sometimes calculate wrong just because in their mind they made >double moves for instance a rook is standing on a1 a knight on d5 a bischop on >b5 and a pawn on e3 > >Know the calculation comes Rook a1-a7 Knight e7 Pawn e4 Bischop takes c6 Rook >a7-a5 Bischop b5-e2 >It is good to train at this >For instance write it down and later on play what you thought. >if you improve at this your tactical abilety increases. >Regards Marc forgot to mention that bought 2 books at once Vucovichs book sacrefices But the nice part is without positional knowledge you will see much positions in these books you can not solve. (The book where most of the epd diagrams come from) You could see this in comparison with the improved version of Spielmans book over sacrefices !For the record that mate in 30 from a week ago came from my hand. From an actual game position I had with Rebel Back then Rebel did not find it. only after I played the move Rebel found it very quickly. Well when I came to this position I did not found mate in 30 but the abilety that the move wich did make mate in 30 should be able to give mate!) and Nimowitsch Mein systeem. Ofcourse not everything must be seen as solid principles. First of all some terms have changed And trying to play positionaly alone can be dangerous because your oponent can out calculate you on tactical grounds. Actualy most players do read the book then play acording Nimzowitsch principles and then lay it besides them (Which means a real positional player does not calculated but plays too positions.) Never the less they still have benifits from what they have learned from reading the book. (The fact is that not all games can be won on tactical grounds.) And if they are honest the became exactly what their goal was Tactical players with more positional knowledge. Just naming an Idol of manny players Alexander Alekhine. Was an excelent players in both tactical and positional Though he also used psychology in his games. Regards Marc
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.