Temposchlucker

 After a few months of fiddling around with the center, exchanges, piece activity, restriction, pivot points and invasion, I come to the preliminary conclusion that it will be possible to incorporate these positional ideas into my framework. Meaning, that it make sense to continue with the subjects I was already studying (like endgames) without the risk that I will grind to a hold once I finish them. So I will work the next two years on: further extension of the positional framework (system 2) tactics (system 1). This is the glue between positional ideas endgames (system 2 and system 1) I think that it is a realistic expectation that this will bring me from 1700 to 2000 in about two to four years. If I manage to do so, I consider my case of adult improvement proven beyond doubt. I can't predict what will happen after that for two reasons: I don't know which unexpected discoveries I will make the next years. Be it good or bad. Furthermore, I will get older, and I don't know ...

The following quote seems to be attributed to Einstein.  "You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother." After reshuffling all positional ideas during a few months, it seems that I have found finally an acceptable order: make a pawn plan make a piece plan make an exchange plan To me, the beginning is always the most difficult. The coming time I will elaborate on these plans.

  After studying all kinds of courses about the middlegame, slowly a certain scenario starts to emerge. You must make your own pieces ready behind your pawns This means that your pieces look at the backside of your pawns Then you push one or more pawns The pawns leave pivot points behind in their wake Your minor pieces jump on the pivot point From there they threaten sitting ducks Your opponent starts to defend these ducks In doing so, these pieces start to lose coördination By pressing on different ducks, your opponents' pieces start to move all over the shop Tactical possibilities start to emerge There are a lot of parameters that you need to judge: When are your pieces "ready" Is your opponent more ready than you are? How much will your opponent benefit? Which pieces op your opponent will be restricted? Where are the ducks? How is the color balance? Do you need to trade to adjust the color balance? If it all fizzles out into an endgame, how are your chances? Black to m...

 Study of the middlegame is not easy. A lot of authors try to offer you a quick fix.  Learn this opening with black and you will beat 95% of your opponents with it Obey these 3/5/7 rules and you beat everyone below 2000 with it Don't move your pawns in the middlegame To take is a mistake CCT Don't blunder and wait until your opponent does so Attack, attack, attack! Do not attack! Don't worry about your pawn structure, mate ends the game I wasted years memorizing chess openings, until I learned this People waste years losing at chess, until they learn this SIMPLE STRATEGY Play like Tal/Karpov/Capablanca/Magnus Carlsen Give Me 19 Minutes and I'll Teach You How to Beat Everyone at Chess My life changed when I learned this All these teasers are aiming at to sell you something. This blog is a testimony to TANSTAAFL. At the end of the day you will have to think for yourself! The good thing is that nowadays it is easy to find important and interesting positions with loads of c...

 Since 2.5 years I'm reinventing my chess. The first 23 years, while I was inventing how adult learning works,  there was no time for that. I'm essentially building a framework that guides my thoughts. That framework is based on a few standard scenarios and the accompanying absorbed patterns. Before I can absorb the patterns, I must first invent the scenarios. That is pretty time consuming, and it takes a lot of trial and error in my games.  If you play according an idea which in itself is correct, that doesn't mean that you win the game. Say, your idea is to get the bishop pair, and you get it, then that is a complete success. If you don't know how to use the bishop pair, you will still lose the game though. Hence you must be prepared to lose a lot. Most of the time even more than you are used to when you played without these ideas. But that is the price for progress. So you better embrace losing. Which I do. It is not simple when I raised expectations with my big mout...

Sofar, the framework I developed consists of: PoPLoAFun 2 sitting ducks (weak pawn, king) invasion square (3rd duck) attack on two fronts I have a pretty good idea where I'm weak (endgame, assault) and how to address it. It will take about two years to get to the level I imagine to be good enough in these areas. I know what to do and how to do it. At the same time, I look at the future in order to get an idea what I should improve next. I don't want to work for two years on my endgames and then to find out that I'm stuck again. That a crucial piece of the puzzle is still missing. So I'm working my way through all positional ideas in order to deem whether they will fit easy in my framework or not. Only positional ideas that I'm able to fit in my framework I consider to be mastered. Otherwise it are just loose ideas with no connection to the rest of my game. The past eleven days I worked on the center. Because a lot of positional elements play a role in the center, it...

 In 2008 I was already pondering about battlements . Finally these ideas get imbedded in a bigger framework. There are all sorts of positional middlegame books out there. Like HTRYC for instance. The problem with these books is that they leave you with a lot of loose dots without connecting them. You cannot make a checklist of all these points. That is not workable. This means that I can only work with what I can relate to a framework that provides context. This way it becomes more easy to evaluate the points. And to value them when there are two conflicting interests. I only understand what I can relate to my framework. The framework provides the context. Recently, my framework got two big extensions: Invasion. Before an assault or a winning endgame sits the invasion. Attack on two fronts can mean two invasions Currently I'm studying space via the Chessable course The Positional Chess Patterns Manual. Space without context leads easily to misinterpretation. The course helps m...