Road to Grandmaster

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 13, 2010 7:00 pm

ThomasThorpe wrote: Take for example a sicilian. I've seen this played before at minor level:
e4 c5
Nf3 d6
Nc3 Nc6
d3

Ok, it's not the best example, but it proves that openings just 4 moves in at minor level can go out of theory,.
I wouldn't regard that as out of theory. For example the game could continue 4 .. d6 5 g3 g6 6 Bg2 Bg7 7 0-0 0-0 which reaches a position akin to a reverse English. It's a tabiya position that can also arise from the players starting 1 Nf3 Nf6 2 g3 g6 3 Bg2 Bg7 4 0-0 0-0. I've had that exact position 18 times over 40 years and similar positions even more often. White has next to nothing objectively but I considered it a good line for trying to knock over weaker players.

I'd say at higher levels starting at around 1900/2000, players will usually know (or can reproduce by general reasoning) the main lines of most openings and that knowledge of an opening is knowing the off-beat and new lines as well (or just knowing where the bits go and how the tactics work in the middle game).

Ola Winfridsson
Posts: 324
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:26 pm

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by Ola Winfridsson » Wed Oct 13, 2010 7:23 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
ThomasThorpe wrote: Take for example a sicilian. I've seen this played before at minor level:
e4 c5
Nf3 d6
Nc3 Nc6
d3

Ok, it's not the best example, but it proves that openings just 4 moves in at minor level can go out of theory,.
I wouldn't regard that as out of theory. For example the game could continue 4 .. d6 5 g3 g6 6 Bg2 Bg7 7 0-0 0-0 which reaches a position akin to a reverse English. It's a tabiya position that can also arise from the players starting 1 Nf3 Nf6 2 g3 g6 3 Bg2 Bg7 4 0-0 0-0. I've had that exact position 18 times over 40 years and similar positions even more often. White has next to nothing objectively but I considered it a good line for trying to knock over weaker players.

I'd say at higher levels starting at around 1900/2000, players will usually know (or can reproduce by general reasoning) the main lines of most openings and that knowledge of an opening is knowing the off-beat and new lines as well (or just knowing where the bits go and how the tactics work in the middle game).
I think that at Thomas Thorpe's current level, this is out of theory! Transpositions or reverse colour structures are not that easy to pick up on, it's one of those things you tend to gain a better understanding of through experience and more extensive studies.

Also, I agree with TT's view of endgame study - there are many halves and full points to be saved (or thrown away for that matter) in the endgame. Specific opening theory is initially less important than studying well annotated grandmaster games. Having said that, I think IM John Watson's advice to change one's opening repertoire every few years is a good one because that way you gain a greater understanding of all sorts of openings and structures which helps to increase playing strength (while at the same time avoiding getting bored with your openings and/or treating subsequent middlegame structures superficially).

ThomasThorpe
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:30 pm

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by ThomasThorpe » Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:06 pm

Well, I'm still learning. i just considered d3 to be a very weak move, and on my database of GM games, 5 wins for black, 1 win for white. I suppose transpositions can occur in that position after g3, never really conisdered that. At my level, I'd have thought the player would play Be2 to develop slightly quicker. Then again these are just assumptions, and I'm sure as I learn more, I'll begin to learn the openings and deviations etc

Justin Hadi

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by Justin Hadi » Wed Oct 13, 2010 9:19 pm

This thread has probably already become the most useful by far on this forum. I would add something from the perspective of a ~2050 FIDE player, but it would just be tactics, pawn structure, openings and hustling!

John Foley
Posts: 369
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 9:58 am
Location: Kingston-upon-Thames
Contact:

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by John Foley » Wed Oct 13, 2010 10:30 pm

Warren Kingston wrote:PPE?
Philosophy, Politics and Economics.

As studied also by a certain Steve Giddins of the British Chess Magazine.

John Philpott

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by John Philpott » Wed Oct 13, 2010 11:23 pm

John Foley wrote:
Warren Kingston wrote:
PPE?


Philosophy, Politics and Economics.

As studied also by a certain Steve Giddins of the British Chess Magazine.
Not to mention a certain Chairman of the ECF Governance Committee.

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by Roger de Coverly » Wed Oct 13, 2010 11:48 pm

Ola Winfridsson wrote:I think that at Thomas Thorpe's current level, this is out of theory!
Perhaps it's one of these chicken and egg issues.

Is it a case of "you need to know these things to be a 160s player" or
"if you are a 160s player you know these things"?

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 3484
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by Geoff Chandler » Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:15 am

Hi Thomas.

"...Ok, so I did a great swindle."

Please show the whole game. I collect swindles and cheapo's
especially by under 2000 players.

The usual setting for these 'swindles' is when the winning player
plays what he thinks is the obvious winning move.
It's when the under 2000 player is at his most vulnerable,
jumping that last hurdle.

Colin Patterson
Posts: 329
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:27 am

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by Colin Patterson » Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:21 am

Some fascinating insights into the ways and means of becoming a GM.

Thinking stategically (and so putting tactics to one side for a moment), I'm sure I read somewhere that the Soviet School pushed the 'learn backwards from the endgame' philosophy - the idea being that you couldn't possibly know what middlegame plans to adopt unless you had an appropriate winning endgame in mind. Similarly, the middlegame patterns that provide fertile terrain for achieving an initiative or edge of some kind would, in turn, need to evolve from careful study of grandmaster games, and the opening systems and pawn structures that produce such advantageous positions.

I've also heard it said that you ought to choose a top player whose style best mirrors your own and shape your opening repertoire accordingly. Are people generally agreed that this is sound advice? Is it just a timesaving device for the busy person? Wouldn't someone with GM potential just develop their own style naturally and progressively, by playing lots of games, trying ideas and returning to those that are successful?

I'd like to hear your thoughts.

Arshad Ali
Posts: 704
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:27 pm

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by Arshad Ali » Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:59 am

Colin Patterson wrote:Thinking stategically (and so putting tactics to one side for a moment), I'm sure I read somewhere that the Soviet School pushed the 'learn backwards from the endgame' philosophy - the idea being that you couldn't possibly know what middlegame plans to adopt unless you had an appropriate winning endgame in mind.
I think Rubinstein pioneered this approach a century back. But players like Karpov, Kramnik, and Leko have also had this approach. And every strong player -- including the likes of Kasparov and Shirov -- has some idea of what kind of endgames will result from his various opening schemes. In terms of literature, off the top of head, there's Mednis's "From the Opening into the Endgame," Cox's "The Berlin Wall," Shereshevsky and Slutsky's 2-volume "Mastering the Endgame," and Nesis' "Exchanging to Win in the Endgame." The idea is to play the whole game as one endgame, except that in earlier stages complicating factors such as the initiative and tactics complicate the picture.

With regard to shaping an opening repertoire, I've found the multi-volume "Opening for White according to Anand" and "Opening for White according to Kramnik" by Khalifman to be useful.

Ola Winfridsson
Posts: 324
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 12:26 pm

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by Ola Winfridsson » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:02 am

ThomasThorpe wrote:Well, I'm still learning. i just considered d3 to be a very weak move, and on my database of GM games, 5 wins for black, 1 win for white. I suppose transpositions can occur in that position after g3, never really conisdered that. At my level, I'd have thought the player would play Be2 to develop slightly quicker. Then again these are just assumptions, and I'm sure as I learn more, I'll begin to learn the openings and deviations etc
What did White actually play? Did he go for a fianchetto or did he just "develop normally"?
Roger de Coverly wrote:Perhaps it's one of these chicken and egg issues.

Is it a case of "you need to know these things to be a 160s player" or
"if you are a 160s player you know these things"?
Yes! :lol: No, but on a serious note, I think that as you develop you pick up on these things.
Colin Patterson wrote:Thinking stategically (and so putting tactics to one side for a moment), I'm sure I read somewhere that the Soviet School pushed the 'learn backwards from the endgame' philosophy - the idea being that you couldn't possibly know what middlegame plans to adopt unless you had an appropriate winning endgame in mind.
Quite possibly, but what many of their trainers and coaches did do for sure though (at least according to Dvoretsky), was to emphasize the study of also the early masters, beginning with Steinitz and Rubinstein. There are a couple of benefits to this approach: those games were often a bit more one-sided (because fewer really strong players) which gives clearer, more "instructional" games, plus the fact that you give the pupils a more "natural" (for want of a better word) progress curve from "simpler-to-more complex" chess. At least that's the impression I have of many Eastern European players (not only players from the former Soviet Union), that they tend to have a more solid foundation of this type, and I have heard others say the same.

ThomasThorpe
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 7:30 pm

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by ThomasThorpe » Thu Oct 14, 2010 7:04 am

Geoff Chandler wrote:Hi Thomas.

"...Ok, so I did a great swindle."

Please show the whole game. I collect swindles and cheapo's
especially by under 2000 players.

The usual setting for these 'swindles' is when the winning player
plays what he thinks is the obvious winning move.
It's when the under 2000 player is at his most vulnerable,
jumping that last hurdle.
You asked for the swindle, and I'll give you the swindle.
1.e4g6
2.Nf3Bg7
3.Nc3c5
4.Be2Nc6
5.O-Oe6
6.d3Nge7
7.Be3b6
8.d4cxd4
9.Nxd4O-O
10.Nxc6dxc6
11.Bg5f6
12.Bh4Bb7
13.e5g5
14.exf6Bxf6
15.Bg3Nf5
16.Bg4Qxd1
17.Raxd1Rad8
18.Rfe1Rxd1
19.Rxd1Bc8
20.Bb8a6
21.Ba7b5
22.Bc5Re8
23.Re1Rd8
24.Ne4Bxb2
25.c3Rd3
26.Bb4a5
27.Bxa5Ba3
28.Nxg5Ng7
29.g3Rd6
30.Bc7Rd7
31.Nxe6Re7
32.Rd1Bxe6
33.Rd8+Kf7
34.Bd6Bxd6
35.Rxd6Bxg4
36.Rxc6Bf3

Roger de Coverly
Posts: 21291
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by Roger de Coverly » Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:08 pm

ThomasThorpe wrote:
You asked for the swindle, and I'll give you the swindle.
1.e4g6
2.Nf3Bg7
3.Nc3c5
4.Be2Nc6
5.O-Oe6
6.d3Nge7
7.Be3b6
White is using a fairly normal if unambitious build-up. Here Black could keep the game closed by playing 7.. Nd4 which is very standard idea in the Closed Sicilian. But allowing d4 isn't necessarily wrong.
ThomasThorpe wrote:31.Nxe6Re7
which is a neat trick for defending the e6 pawn indirectly.

User avatar
Gareth Harley-Yeo
Posts: 307
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:58 pm
Location: Wales
Contact:

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by Gareth Harley-Yeo » Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:40 pm

Arshad Ali wrote: Strong players consistently punish the weak players for deviating from theory. Weak players end up in garbage positions within the first 15 moves; the rest of the game is just mopping up by the stronger player using his technique, positional judgment, and calculation in a position that is already superior (if not won).
I couldn't agree more. I played a game last night against a 1900 player who only knew the first 8 moves of theory in a Marshall Gambit. After 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c6 4.e4 dxe4 5.Nxe4 Bb4+ 6.Bd2 Qxd4 7.Bxb4 Qxe4+ 8.Be2 my opponent looked up at me rather worried by the fact that I'd played my moves almost instantly. 15 minutes later he played 8...e5? which out of the 3000+ games I have on the Marshall, this seems to be a novelty. He resigned 12 moves later in a completely bust position and even apologised to me for his lack of understanding after the game!

Warren Kingston

Re: Road to Grandmaster

Post by Warren Kingston » Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:05 pm

Should, say, a sub 140 player stop learning opening theory then, until he gets to a certain level?

Post Reply