STUDY
PRACTICAL CHESS ADVICE
from About.com Chess Chat with Michael Rohde
rohde: Players have to learn the
difference between the Giuoco Piano and the Two Knights,
that is the first thing to learn about the openings
rohde: because if you play the Two
Knights Defence, White can play Ng5 and you may end
up in a Fried Liver
rohde: So kids
learn the Giuoco Piano and to get their pieces developed
rohde: After that you move on to learning other openings
rohde: I
think its necesary to also learn the Ruy Lopez, and about how the opening is
a battle for control (for Black) of the e5 square
chessADM: okay,
Pinback is next
Pinback: What's a good way to learn a complete opening repetoire (at least the
first few moves), preferably one slightly offbeat
but not too unsound. I'm a 1600 player.
Pinback: e.g. should i get the
games of some GM and emulate his or her repetoire?
rohde: There are a few books that give complete
opening
repertoires. Many books are written in repertoire
styles, still it can be very narrow
rohde: for example, my book "Play the Sveshnikov" is written as a repertoire
book for Black
rohde: of course
the Sveshnikov is not a complete repertoire rohde: probably the easiest way
to get a complete repertoire is to contact GM Kaidanov
as i think he advertises that he will supply a compete
repertiore
Pinback: . hmm, easiest maybe
not cheapest :-)
rohde: Any strong player can
supply you with a flowchart of openings or moves
which would constitue a repertoire
rohde: For exmple, 1 e4 as
White, Ruy Lopez against Double KP, open against
Sicilian, exchange against French, Sicilian
Najdorf
as Black against e4 and Kings Indian
as Black against d4
rohde: there is the repertoire
rohde: lots of people at around
1600 strength are strong enough and determined enough
to just copy a famous players repertoire
rohde: people copy Fischer's
1 e4, Sicilian, and Kings Indian rohde: deFirmian
has copies Fischer's repertoire,
for example
chessADM: Next up is Jeff chessADM: Go ahead Jeff
Jeff: How well would you say solving tactics and mate problems improve one's
play?
rohde: ok tactics are super
important in general
rohde: in fact the saying
that chess is 99% tactics really is true
rohde: most learning players make way too much about "this is the plan" or "i
dont like this because of doubled pawns" when they really should be thinking, " if
he does this, then what am i going to do
rohde: mate problems are an
exercise in tactics
rohde: that is why they are
good
rohde: the idea is to figure
out the problem and understand why the solution is
the solution
rohde: the positional themes,
like "control the center", develop your pieces,
dont get a backward pawn, are easy to learn and not a problem
rohde: so i think mate problems
are very good
rohde: GM dlugy's teacher,
Zaltzman, many years ago, had him do hundreds of
problems every day
chessADM: (Remember everyone
- to ask a question just type "?" and I'll see it
and add you to the speakers list)
rohde: some of you may be familiar
with chesswise.com, where i work with GM-elect Maurice
Ashley - he has lots of audio there you can listen
to about the importance
of tactics
chessADM: One email question
we received had to do with opening preparation. What
should players
do to avoid being overly dependent upon opening
prep?
rohde: ok, this question was
from an expert strength
player
chessADM: that's right
rohde: the thing about theory
is that it can be used against you as easily as you
can use it
rohde: there is no point in
knowing 20 moves of a line if the theory on it is "officialy" 24
moves deep - you just wont know the next three moves rohde: but there are plenty
of openings that can branch seamlessly into not-so-theoretical
positions
rohde: in the kings' indian, Black
will always get some counterplay - it is the nature
of the position, so i dont think you have to know
every move
rohde: once combinations
start happening, if you are in theory, it can be
dangerous rohde: GM Timman once said
that it is insane to be on either side of the dragon
in the Yugoslav atack, and therefore
he just wont be there anymore
rohde: when i stopped
studying so much theory, i used the bogo-indian
as there
are not so many forcing lines
rohde: if you play a lot,
you can develop lines and postions where you are
comfortable
chessADM: Thanks Michael!
The next question is from Sid...
Sid1149: Openings work only
if the other player also co-operates with us to
follow those moves. If he breaks off
early, what is the use of openings to a novice?
If his
opponent
is not ready to comply with the opening,
what should he do? rohde: openings are compilations
of good moves. when a player makes a move you dont
know, it is either a recognized
move that you dont know or it is probably
not such a good move Sid1149: what should i do
in that case? rohde: i typically would
spend a lot of
time in positions
where my opponent has
made a move that is not the
book move to prove to myself just why that move
might be inferior
rohde: of course, if you
are playing complex openings that you do not know
very well, you wont be sure whether it is your
lack of theoretical knowledge or your
opponents
rohde: so for maximum resluts,
you have to have some time-tested openings where
you think you know some
of the lay of the land so you will be able to get
a better position when your opponent deviates
rohde: But it is true of
course that the opening memorization thing is
troubling
to evertbody
rohde: plenty of GMs are
sick of the openings warfare
Sid1149: thanx. chessADM: WindomEarle has
a question...
rohde: ok WindomEarle: i have seen
improvement in my game from systematic study of
tactics, by solving mate problems,
as you mentioned, but how can i systematically
learn to calculate quiet moves? that's what really
gives me trouble. chessADM:
(Just a reminder, if you want to ask GM Rohde a
question, just type "?".
I'll see it and add you to the speakers list.)
rohde: Aside from calculation,
there is evaluation. Lev Alburt's system is to
assign numeric values (like a computer) to a position,
like for example, a position
might be "60-40" in favor of White
rohde: then a good move will
keep the position 60-40 rohde: so when he is calculating
quiet moves, if at the end of the calculation he
cannot reach a 60-40 evaluation, then either he
is thinking about the wrong
moves, or the position
was not 60-40 to start with
rohde: so you have
to combine calculation with evaluation and compare
the evalutation
after the possible moves rohde: this is why computers
are becoming stronger - the quicker comparison of
the evalutations
rohde: the most important
thing is to examine the various candidate moves
so you dont miss the best moves
chessADM: And how do you
find those? rohde: even with all this,
tactics is still much more important than "positional
chess"
rohde: everything starts
with your opponents last move
rohde: why did he do it, is he threatening anything
rohde: if he is, how do you
repond to threat, or do you have any counterthreats
that might make send
rohde: once you know why
he made his last move (even if you have concluded
that it was pointless) then you can develop a
list of candidate moves
rohde: this mechanical
process is very helpful, probably one of the
most important thinking tools
rohde: a question was
submitted about camps and teachers
chessADM: Sure, let's go with
that one...
chessADM: Is it possible to
make master without a teacher, or if you don't go
to a chess camp? rohde: chess is a pretty
self-directed thing
rohde: teachers can greatly
shorten the process of becoming stronger
rohde: however, tournament
experience, and analysing chess with your friends
is probably
more important
rohde: the best thing is to
have people around
who are at least as good as you
to play against
or to show your games to
rohde: i did not have
a teacher
rohde: there are lots of teachers around these days of course, but it was not
always like
that
rohde: i wouldnt really
think about chess camp as a real
critical thing
rohde: so
teaching is a good thing ...
not a
deal-breaker rohde: lots of teachers on
icc
rohde: very good rates available
from them too - the competition is fierce amontg
teachers
it seems
chessADM: Folks are being shy
at the moment, so lets have another email question...
chessADM: "I find that I get depressed when my chess is going badly. Do you ever
have doubt in yourself?"
rohde: we discussed this a
little before the chat officially opened
rohde: yes i sometimes used to feel really bad after losing a chess game
rohde: that was when i was
strictly a professional player
rohde: some people can really feel messed up about
it
rohde: But you have to have
a little bit of that rohde: you have to have nervous
energy to play
your best
rohde: i knew that i was a
strong player, so i did not really "doubt" myself
rohde: to play against competition
which is rationally as strong as you are, you still
have to somehow "believe" that you are stronger than them
rohde: karpov has said this
- that if you stop believing, what is the point?
rohde: you need that to get
that extra strength to calculate all those damn tactics
rohde: next question ..
chessADM: The next question
is from
Paul
Paul: In one of your ChessWise lectures you said you became a GM mostly on
tactics
and you were weak in the endgame. Is that really
true? I thought endgame knowledge is critical.
rohde: i was and am relatively
weak in the endgame for a GM, this is defintely true
rohde: most of the times i
defeated other GMs it was not due to endgame prowess
Paul: so tactics first
rohde: of course, i am stronger
in the endgame than most non-GMs, because strength
in chess applies to most phases of the game
rohde:
but i never systematically studied endgames
and this has cost me
rohde: I am more unsure of
the evaluation of many endgame positions than a GM
of my strength should be
Paul: time to hit
the books ...
rohde: many people say that studying the endgame
is critical .. that it gives
you a better appreciation of the powers of
the pieces
rohde: i am just not sure -
it is just one of those
areas that historically i
have not dealt with in the optimum way
Paul: You
were known for your tactics but your
writing has
focuses on openings
mostly
rohde: Ron Henley is an example
of a GM who really stressed endgame study as
a means to improve
rohde: most
games of the month that i have done have had positions
where some, in my opinion, very interesting middlegame
battles have taken place
rohde: sometimes in those columns
i would emphasize openings as i think the readership
really likes to be told the fine points, transpositions
or other weird stuff that can happen in the openings
rohde: as it happens my two
books have been on openings, (Evans Gambit and Sveshnikov)
but those were just conveninet book subjects and
i am trying to amass my middlegame material
rohde: but comparing to what
i said before, I also find the openings and early
middlegames to be my
main strength, aside from any understaning of
chess throey
chessADM: Okay, one last email
question, then I'll throw the room open to everyone...
chessADM: This is a biggie
-- what one chess book would you recommend that all
chess players read above all others?
rohde: ok
on chess books - probably one of the greatest
of all
time is The Art
of Attack in Chess by V. Vukovic
rohde: i read that
when i was a teenager
rohde: one of my teenage books was by Dr.
Tarrasch - and then i also read stuff
from his "archrival", Nimzovich
rohde: so i have read a lot
of the classics
chessADM: Did it have a big impact on your play?
rohde: yes Art of Attack impacted,
but i was an "attacking player" anyway
rohde: A classic
game was me vs. Yasser Seirawn, from the US Junior,
analyzed in detail in "Improve Your Chess" by Vladimir Zak, spassky's trainer
rohde: because it was the "tactician" vs the "positional player"
rohde: i sacrificed
a bunch of pawns, and my attack eventually became
too strong
rohde: of course, there were
other games, where he munched the material and i
lost
chessADM: Thank
you very much Michael, for this very enlightening
session.
rohde: in 1988 US Championship,
i made some very unsound sacrifices against
him
and won anyway ..
rohde: no problem any time
chessADM: If it's okay with
Michael, I'll turn off the room moderation, which
will let everyone speak...
rohde: ok
chessADM: But before I do that
I want to thank him again (without interupting
this time!)
chessADM: and to remind folks
to take a look at chesswise.com...
chessADM: and infochess.com,
which is a super site for scholastic players rohde:
thanks for your kind words dave
chessADM: okay everybody, go
for it
LateKnight: Is it true that with 20,000 hours of
individual study, an adeptness
for the game and some serious tournament
play that anyone could become a GrandMaster?
FischTal: What
kind of training regimen would you recommend for
an 1800 player
to progress beyond 2000. How much time should be
spent per week. What percentage
of time should be spent on tactics, middlegame,
endgame study, opening repertoire
etc.
Lars: What is the ideal way
to study theory?
hpkd: what would you suggest
to improve tactics for a 1700 player? WebJB: I have a question. How
strong does a coach need to be to improve an 1700+
player? And are Internet lessons worth it or should
you have a trainer that you visit in person?
josephine: Is
it better to solve mate problems otb as opposed to
a flat book/also does speed/blitz chess
hurt your game? chessADM: Whoa there !
WindomEarle: LoL
chessADM: LOL!
LateKnight: :)
LateKnight: The cup spilleth
over
solochess: too many questions bottled up, struggling to get out!
rohde: basically, you can
find a lot of answers, from me and Maurice Ashley,
at chesswise.com ...
LateKnight: Is it true
that with 20,000 hours of individual study,
an adeptness
for the game and some serious tournament play
that anyone could become a GrandMaster?
rohde: email questions
to me at mikerohde@usa.net even if i dont get
back to
you, ill post questions at my own amateur
website infochess.com and something will happen
Paul: Mike are you playing
in the CCA/Chesswise International this year
rohde:
im going to be there one way or another i dont
know in what capacity
WindomEarle: (as GM Rodhe
quietly slips out the back and leaves us to our
pandemonium...) chesswise: Michael, come
on, you promised to play! ;-)
Lars: What is the ideal
way to study theory? rohde: to try to respond,
there are a lot of good deals on the internet
in chess
lessons, but chesswise is by far the most
systematic program
WebJB: At
what point should a player
concentrate on positional and strategical
aspects of the game and not as much tactical? Paul: I was Chesswise member
for 6 months, then
took 3 months off, then joined for year ... great audio and java
rohde: to study theory,
play through the Encyclopedia of Chess sections
in the lines you want to study, and then
look at informant games in those lines
josephine: playing
a chess computer and solving mate problems
are on a 1 dimensional plane, is it not
better to set up problems otb..also does
speed/blitz hurt your
game?
rohde: For strong
players, you get a database together, you
get a bunch of
informants
together, and you just hack your way through
everything until you think you know what
the opening is all about
rohde: if you can solve
problems from a book its better, too
tiring to keep setting up new positions
WindomEarle:
is
it
too
early,
at
the
1500
level,
to
try
blindfold
to
improve
visualization?
rohde: speed
is
good
practice
as
long
as
you
dont
get
discouraged
by
the
blunders
and
time
pressure
mistakes josephine: thanks!
rohde: i
dont
know
if
its
too
early,
i
dont
think
it
is
that
helpful
though
WindomEarle: really?
why
not?
rohde: visualization
can
be
done
looking
at
the board
also
rohde: just
force
yourself
to
mentally
move
the
pieces
that
you
need
to
WindomEarle: do
you
have
to
really
SEE
them,
or
sort
of
feel
the
force
they
would exert from the new square?
WindomEarle: if
you get what i mean... :)
rohde: you have to really
see it so you know what its doing there
WindomEarle: how
can i get better at that, then? :) rohde: a lot of the
mysteries of chess are in the books - the
bottom line is
read like crazy
rohde:
i dont know
solochess: how can amateurs make the best
use of a program like chessBase?
WindomEarle: ok...
thanks :)
Paul: which
database do you use
rohde: you
can look up games in certain lines,
that is the best use of chessbase
Lars:
How often should one train to become
a GM?
DJ:
Why Omega ..... doesn't it take away
from study
of regular ... perhaps even hamper
improvment?
rohde: you
have to have a general knowledge
of the different openings before
it becomes useful
rohde: i use chessbase,
good for writing ..
rohde:
omega .. a tactical and fun game, it
is a good variation
chessADM: I'm
curious about this too,
do variants hurt your game?
solochess: i got
some 2000 games in
it and am a bit overwhelmed...(re.
chessbase)
rohde: you have
to do a lot of stuff to become a gm,
but once your there you
dont lose it
Lars: What
kind of stuf for an example?
WindomEarle: is
there a downloadable set of your best
games on the net? :)
rohde: a lot of
variations are not really useful, but
again to play them
well
you have to calculate the lines, but
omega has good features, its the best
one ive seen
rohde: there
is some set of games, try pittsburgh
Chess Club chesswise: Mike's
games are on the Pitt archive website
chesswise: 220
WindomEarle: cool
rohde: lots of games in chessbase manageable,
separate out by opening ..
DJ: Do
you have an opinion of Bobby Fischer's
variation?
chessADM: Fischerrandom,
you mean?
rohde: Maurice Ashley
went on a quest to get the GM title
which he clearly deserved,
but he studied all the time to make
sure
DJ: yes fischer
random
rohde: i dont really know that fischerrandom
stuff
Lars: Thank
you an goodbye!
chessADM: You
mix up the back row
josephine: what
reason or reason's can a player consistently
beat
an opponent
at a chess club, but then lose
in a tournament to that inferior player?
chessADM: I
can't see it's that great a variant,
but maybe I'm missing
something
rohde: i have played in some international
tournaments where after the game i
would just study a stack of informants all night - you do that when you are trying
to become a gm
paulmurphy: whats the best time limit (time + increment) to improve?
rohde: i
dont know, if results are up and down,
probably strength differential not that
great
solochess: is correspondence
chess good practice for under 1700s?
rohde: icc
is good for a lot of practice, and
practice is good for learning openings,
so i prefer fast controls like 2 2
or 3 0, but probably 5 0 or 2 6
is better
rohde: i imageine
correspondence chess would be very
good; i have never
had
the
patience for that
paulmurphy: cant
you get more from ICC than just opening
practice?
rohde: if
you are very disciplined
chessADM: The
endgame-bots can help your game.
solochess: do
you think Advanced chess is the way
of the future? chessADM: Learn
the technique for lone queen v. lone
rook, that sort of thing.
rohde: i
know there are lots of libraries
and other games there, i just use
it
to play blitz, but it is a lot of fun
and i think clearly the leader .. rohde: i dont
know what Advanced chess is
Paul: is your polgar win your best game? Which other ones should we review
solochess: where GMs play with the aid of computers...like
Kasparov-Topalov
in
Leon
rohde: the
Z. Polgar game is the game i always
show - I won brillizzncy prize in 86,
87, 88 us championship against Kogan,
Whitehead, Seirawan, played a nice
game agiain t Miles 88,m lots of good
games 91 US Open which I won, lots of
games against people like Kudrin, D.Gurevich,
i dont know i really need to collect
all my good games in one place before
everybody forgets about them rohde: i am not
in favor of strange experiments like
that Kasparov - Topalov thing
Pablo:
Michael: Who´s your favorite for the FIDE KO Champ.
rohde: not sure it will happen, but i would like to see some Americans
rohde: among the usual crowd, i would like to see anand get up there again
rohde: problem
with pro chess is the exclusiveness
of that european circuit
paulmurphy: you
say play
speed on
ICC for
opening practice,
but it
seems to
me
most
strong players
dont use
standard openings
when playing
speed
solochess: I
really liked your commentary on the
US championship games. Very very useful
for someone of my strength...
rohde: there
is very little an American gm can do
to move into that circuit
josephine: Michael,
have you ever played GM Alexander Ivanov?
What's your opinion
of his play?
rohde: good point
paulmurphy -
a lot
of people
are just
fooling around on
icc
rohde:
still
its
good
practice
rohde:
thanks
solo
i
tried
to
really
cover
what
the
players
were
thinking
rohde: i
have
played
A.
Ivanov
many
times
-
about
6
months
ago
i
defeated
him
in
last
round
of
a
tournament
the
game
was
in
the
New
York
Times
it
ended
with
a
mate
in
5
rohde: He
is a strong GM of course, he used to
get in a lot of time trouble, but he
has mostly cured that
Pablo: Michael,
Who´s in your opinion the best American player today?
josephine: very
good Michael!
chesswise:
thanks Michael and David!
rohde: very hard question pablo - lots of guys are up there - Benjamin, Yermo,
Gulko, Seirawan, deFirmian, Christiansen
..
canadian: what
do you think about the Dvoretsky books?
rohde: havent read them, Dvoretsky has
a big reputation
Paul: Seirawan
did
well
against
adams
rohde:
Seirawan
did
the
euro
circuit
for
many
years Pablo:
Michael: Do you think that learning
through Videos (for ex: Foxy Openings,
Roman Forum, etc.) is better than books?
rohde:
can
be
easier
for
a
lot
of
people,
I
think
videos
are
a
good
way,
like
osmosis,
to
learn
chess
rohde:
there
is
no
substitute
for
hitting
the
books paulmurphy: arn't
videos's just a way to avoid thinking,
thus not a good learning tool?
rohde: no i think
they are ok, just not as good as books,
but still you
are getting something from them, probably
for many people it is a good way Pablo:
Michael: Do you have an opinion on the
Clarendon Court Defence?: 1.d4,c5;2.d5,f5.
rohde: not very
good, white will play e2-e4 someday
with a positional advantage
paulmurphy: where
do this name come from?
rohde: ok
everybody
thanks
for
participating
josephine: thanks
Michael
rohde:
im going to take off now
paulmurphy: thnaks
rohde: dont
forget to visit kidschess.com DJ: Thank you
|
