English Chess Forum

How do you prepare for a game where your going to play an opponent much better than you.

I have been asked to play a 1st team game as a stand in next week but I am a 2nd team player. Will most likely be facing a player of 1900+ and I am about 1300 myself. Is there anything to be done to prepare or should I just let things go and enjoy the step up. I don’t even know what colour I will be but I can ask that.

There’s no pressure on me but any help would be appreciated. Just thinking should I go for a tight sensible or game or should I try and upset the balance or position in some way? (exchange sac/ unusual moves etcc..)

Kevin O'Rourke wrote:How do you prepare for a game where your going to play an opponent much better than you.

I have been asked to play a 1st team game as a stand in next week but I am a 2nd team player. Will most likely be facing a player of 1900+ and I am about 1300 myself. Is there anything to be done to prepare or should I just let things go and enjoy the step up. I don’t even know what colour I will be but I can ask that.

There’s no pressure on me but any help would be appreciated. Just thinking should I go for a tight sensible or game or should I try and upset the balance or position in some way? (exchange sac/ unusual moves etcc..)

I end up outgraded more often than not by entering tournament sections that are above my level. The chances are he will have his games recorded so you should be able to find them on ChessBase (if you have it, some websites will have them as well if not) and you can see from those how he likes to play. In general I wouldn't deviate too much from how you normally play, but I find it more effective against stronger players to go for complications and play in an aggressive style. It gives them a chance to go wrong as much as it does you and not many players enjoy getting attacked.

Yes they may well work through them but you will give them a game and even if you lose you'll improve as a player for giving it a try.

I won’t know who am playing till I sit down. Have e mailed to see if my colour has been decided yet.

Kevin O'Rourke wrote:I won’t know who am playing till I sit down. Have e mailed to see if my colour has been decided yet.

In which case I would spend a bit more time on tactics/attacking ideas and just go for an aggressive game. When I play weaker players I am just after an easy advantage without too much trouble.

Kevin O'Rourke wrote: There’s no pressure on me but any help would be appreciated. Just thinking should I go for a tight sensible or game or should I try and upset the balance or position in some way? (exchange sac/ unusual moves etcc..)

You may well find that your opponent's moves are a lot easier to understand than those of a 1300 player. The problem you will face is that you may struggle to find decent replies.

The guys in the first team may well know your potential opponent(s) and have suggestions for how to play against them, so worth asking your new team mates for ideas.

Kevin O'Rourke wrote: I won’t know who am playing till I sit down.

Can you work out a short list from those who regularly play for that team?

Work out the conditions under which you play best. If preparation (hint: no-one really prepares for evening league chess apart from those at the very top end) leaves you tired and struggling to remember what you 'prepared', then that is not the best approach. Best to be in the right frame of mind and just try and play as well as you can. Don't sit there and get outplayed. Try and unbalance the position [while not just playing losing moves!] and (maybe) offer a draw at the right moment if that might work/is desirable. Above all, just enjoy the game and try and learn from it whether you win, lose or draw.

PS. Best preparation might be to ignore the contradictory advice you will get here...

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:(hint: no-one really prepares for evening league chess apart from those at the very top end)

Haha, whoops

Christopher Kreuzer wrote:Try and unbalance the position [while not just playing losing moves!] and (maybe) offer a draw at the right moment if that might work/is desirable.

Sorry but I don't agree with that. Unbalanced positions are often decided by mistakes and you are more likely to go wrong. Remember the pressure will be on your opponent to win, so he will have to take the risks if you just play sensible moves in a position with which you are familiar. And I used to hate being offered a draw by a weaker player in any sort of position with play - just made me want to win even more.

Christopher Kreuzer wrote: Above all, just enjoy the game and try and learn from it whether you win, lose or draw.

You won't get any better advice than this. Analysis after the game with your opponent will be very informative, if you have time.

If you can't predict your opponent at all - and its an incredibly rare league where you can on bottom board! - basically don't worry, try to turn up and enjoy.

Playing for aggressive tactics could well be the right way to play on an individual level, but I wouldn't recommend it for an otherwise close teams match. There's rather too much risk of losing an ugly, quick game. A good investment in a tournament, but that sort of thing can be utterly terrible for team morale in a match.
(I've seen this have quite a big effect a few times now.).

Just play normally I think. If you've got white then the ideal is something like keeping control in +/= mode. Can be very effective for teams matches but does take practice.

Guess the other thing is that I wouldn't automatically expect an especially strong opponent. The other team could easily be struggling slightly too

The longer the game goes on the more likely you are to be outplayed. You have to play aggressively and hope he makes a tactical error under pressure. If he's 1900 he's quite capable of doing that and he certainly won't like a lower graded opponent sticking it to him.

MJMcCready wrote:The longer the game goes on the more likely you are to be outplayed. You have to play aggressively and hope he makes a tactical error under pressure. If he's 1900 he's quite capable of doing that and he certainly won't like a lower graded opponent sticking it to him.

You also have to hope that he hasn't read the forum and now knows who he's playing

I'd broadly agree with the 'stick it to him' brigade. Seek piece activity and an attack, and don't worry too much about structural weaknesses or the loss of the odd pawn. Chances are, he would have outplayed you in an equal endgame anyway.

This approach may not work out too often but it's very enjoyable when it does ... and you would really kick yourself afterwards if you felt you played too timidly.

I'd also say that many of my victories against higher rated players have come from surprise counter-attacks, so if the opening goes badly and the blows start raining in, remember to keep looking wider than purely defensive candidate moves. Someone who is enjoying the spoils of the battle can very easily get the blood lust, become incautious, and overlook their opponent's counter chances.

I've stayed out of this one because I don't really understand the question. The weaker player starts with a huge advantage. Their opponent knows that the best they can achieve is a routine and boring win, while it's just as likely that they will find themselves playing awful moves that they would normally not contemplate, finishing with a wasted evening, a loss for their team and a damaged grade. Just play chess next week, your opponent is the one under pressure.

I think it is terrible advice to tell a 1300 player to go for tactical unbalanced positions against a 1900 , he would end up getting mauled ( some 1900s are 190-200ecf these days).


Better would be to focus really hard on not blundering- try and look at whatever moves he makes and try to nullify the play, keep the position as level as possible. I know I personally hate for lower graded opponents to keep resisting every effort I make to beat them.

Hope that playing in this way encourages them to be reckless.

I very much doubt there's much a player can do to stop themselves blundering in their next game, if they already have a habit of doing so: "focussing really hard", in practice, isn't going to make any difference and is just likely to make them worry too much. As Nick Faulks observes, the ideal approach is the opposite - let the opponent worry, they're the one who's got something to lose.

If I were to say anything about mental approach it would be

(a) to remember that just because somebody's graded hundreds of points ahead of you, they still make loads of mistakes. Strong grandmasters make loads of mistakes, and they know it ;
(b) try and avoid "ah well, it was never to be" syndrome. Make them fight for it to the end.