Diary of a Patzer

Valmont · 27-01-2015 11:09pm

Well it was my lucky night: I played a friendly under normal time controls against a 1832 and won! Granted, he blundered and resigned outright but a win is a win. Unfortunately this won't be reflected in my official rating but I suppose the hard work is paying off. Come to think of it he resigned rather quickly but maybe he missed something? It looks like I was winning a piece in all variations but I haven't looked since the game.

I'm stumped with Yusupov's chapter on the value of the pieces but I'll grind through it this weekend.

namenotavailablE · 28-01-2015 1:13am

Congratulations on the win but I'm wondering if your opponent could have tried Qd6 in the final position- if exf5, then Qxd5 might be holdable? Similarly, if Qxd6, Nxd6 also might be holdable?

Valmont · 28-01-2015 11:05am

I think you're right. I thought the queen was lost after Nc5 in this variation but I can see now he just takes the pawn on f5 and is only in a slightly worse position - my opponent must have had a bad day at work!

Lucena · 28-01-2015 12:01pm

Valmont wrote: »

Well it was my lucky night: I played a friendly under normal time controls against a 1832 and won! Granted, he blundered and resigned outright but a win is a win. Unfortunately this won't be reflected in my official rating but I suppose the hard work is paying off. Come to think of it he resigned rather quickly but maybe he missed something? It looks like I was winning a piece in all variations but I haven't looked since the game.

I'm stumped with Yusupov's chapter on the value of the pieces but I'll grind through it this weekend.

I struggled with that chapter as well, and failed the test IIRC, so I wouldn't worry too much about finding it tough. I'm planning on redoing the tests on those chapters I failed before meeting the final boss at the end of the book (the overall test on all of the book).

Valmont · 01-02-2015 4:54pm

I won the grading prize at our club's blitz tournament on Thursday (3/5), a copy of Batsford's The Chess Player's Bedside Book. It has some short essays on chess and articles about curious positions such as one by Eduard Gufeld where he reached a winning position with white while all six of his pieces were en pris! Also, I've lost my estimated rating and am now officially 1412 (95 in ECF).

mikhail · 03-02-2015 1:07pm

Valmont wrote: »

I won the grading prize at our club's blitz tournament on Thursday (3/5), a copy of Batsford's The Chess Player's Bedside Book. It has some short essays on chess and articles about curious positions such as one by Eduard Gufeld where he reached a winning position with white while all six of his pieces were en pris! Also, I've lost my estimated rating and am now officially 1412 (95 in ECF).

Well done.

By my reckoning, 1412 is about ECF 102 (and 95 ECF is 1360 Elo). Is there a more sophisticated conversion than ((Elo-600)/8)?

cdeb · 03-02-2015 3:39pm

The conversion is now (Elo-700)/7.5, by which 1412 converts to 95.

Valmont · 05-02-2015 1:08am

I outranked my opponent tonight by 200 ELO points but I think I built up a nice attack regardless. Ultimately he played far too passively and failed to take the initiative when I gifted it to him. This would have been a different game had he played e4 and not castled long. We are top of the third division now!

Still struggling along with Yusupov but I've been spending some time with My 60 Memorable Games which is very enjoyable. I've not read it for some months but I feel a bit more fluent with the chess language now and it's not so tiring to play through the annotations (not that I understand them).

In this position, Fischer (playing black, 1959 Zurich, against Walther) was about to resign but was curious to see how his opponent would finish him. What was white's winning move?

Re8! Then, as Fischer says, white strolls his King to e4 and black is in zugzwang. Black played Ra8 and Fischer fought back to a draw.

Mustafa Chess · 05-02-2015 11:58pm

Nice game

Valmont · 06-02-2015 1:36am

I played a 1602 tonight and lost. I don't feel too bad as I was just generally outplayed. It's given me some perspective on how much I need to improve though - especially at endgames.

namenotavailablE · 06-02-2015 1:33pm

Personally, I think you might have been a little over pessimistic about the outcome of castling on move 12. I don't think those white king-side pawns are as scary as you might have been feeling! For example, if 12..0-0;13. g5(?) Nh5;14. Nge2 g6 and the king-side pawns are going nowhere and might even be a little vulnerable in time. You have somewhat weakened your own king's protection but it's not immediately apparent how your opponent can exploit this.
At some point in this position, you could even contemplate the idea of playing ..f6 to prise open the f-file and play for pressure on the f-file (maybe doubling rooks).

Valmont · 07-02-2015 9:29pm

Thanks, I think you're right, I suppose I didn't want my knight on h5 either but it was just waiting to take on f4. I've noticed the biggest issue I have against players rated about 100 or 200 ELO points ahead of me is tactics. So I spent all morning on chesstempo today and increased my rating from 1500 to 1575! I found it's very important to double check the solution before playing it. Unfortunately the time it takes me to solve the puzzles rated around the 1500+ mark is too long for an actual game where I may only have two or three minutes on average.

cdeb · 08-02-2015 12:14pm

The thing is that now when you see something in a game, you'll recognise a pattern and be given a clue that there's a tactic on the board (which will save you time). If it works - and wins the game - you can afford to spend more time working it out.

Valmont · 09-02-2015 12:12am

I found a divine game played by Capablanca in a 1920 simultaneous exhibition. I really like Capablanca's games; I think the next time I buy a chess book it will be Capablanca's Best Chess Endings by Irving Chernev, who was a huge Capablanca fan.

Valmont · 11-02-2015 7:01pm

I finally finished the test from chapter six of Build Up Your Chess: The Fundamentals by Yusupov. Surprisingly I squeaked by with a pass with ten points. Due to my slow progress with this book I'm going to now complete a chapter a week which I think is doable if I quit playing so much stupid online blitz games.

I find the Yusupov book extremely exasperating, frustrating, difficult, but overall very instructive. I don't think it's a coincidence that my rating has increased by fifteen to twenty points since I started reading it either; I can tell that I'm better at calculating deeper than I used to and certain tactical motifs have definitely sunk in. Psychologically, one of the best markers of actual learning is how much of a struggle you have with the material so my tears of frustration are worthwhile.

It's quite funny that in this chapter Yusupov used as an example some games lost by John Nunn, a competitor of sorts for the title of best chess teacher. I've avoided books by Nunn only because he thinks Logical Chess: Move by Move is a bad book to learn from but my experience as an absolute beginner with this book tells me he is definitely wrong.

Here is what I thought was a particularly tough puzzle considering it was rated with only one star of difficulty (out of three). The theme is the value of the pieces and we learned that in the middlegame a piece is more valuable than three pawns because it can used in an attack.

1. e4 with a view to bring the knight in at e5.

EDIT: Black should have a rook at d8!

Lucena · 11-02-2015 9:38pm

Valmont wrote: »

I finally finished the test from chapter six of Build Up Your Chess: The Fundamentals by Yusupov. Surprisingly I squeaked by with a pass with ten points. Due to my slow progress with this book I'm going to now complete a chapter a week which I think is doable if I quit playing so much stupid online blitz games.

I find the Yusupov book extremely exasperating, frustrating, difficult, but overall very instructive. I don't think it's a coincidence that my rating has increased by fifteen to twenty points since I started reading it either; I can tell that I'm better at calculating deeper than I used to and certain tactical motifs have definitely sunk in. Psychologically, one of the best markers of actual learning is how much of a struggle you have with the material so my tears of frustration are worthwhile.

It's quite funny that in this chapter Yusupov used as an example some games lost by John Nunn, a competitor of sorts for the title of best chess teacher. I've avoided books by Nunn only because he thinks Logical Chess: Move by Move is a bad book to learn from but my experience as an absolute beginner with this book tells me he is definitely wrong.

Here is what I thought was a particularly tough puzzle considering it was rated with only one star of difficulty (out of three). The theme is the value of the pieces and we learned that in the middlegame a piece is more valuable than three pawns because it can used in an attack.

1. e4 with a view to bring the knight in at e5.

It always feels good passing a chapter. In spite of the negativity of my last post on my diary, I feel that, thanks to Yusupov, not only am I calculating better and deeper, but I'm also looking at more candidate moves. It possibly means that until I get used to sorting through the candidate moves more efficiently, I may even be playing worse than before. I've seen something similar as an English teacher; you teach the students a new tense, and for a while they'll overuse it compared to the one they already new. Then they'll mix up the two, then eventually they'll get them sorted.

Regarding the puzzle, it's Black to play while 3 pawns and an exchange down? It seems like Black needs another piece.

As regards Nunn, I wouldn't avoid his stuff just because he dissed Logical Chess. He's considered an excellent writer (I've never seen his stuff though), but possibly not for complete beginners.

Valmont · 12-02-2015 11:30am

Oops black should have a rook at d8!

namenotavailablE · 13-02-2015 12:30pm

Oops black should have a rook at d8!

Prior to the update re the missing rook, I was really struggling to see how Black could in any sense be 'better'.
Playing pawn to e4 looked logical in any event as it allowed for the knight to gain activity and possibly end up on d3 in due course.

Valmont · 13-02-2015 6:08pm

I've completed this week's chapter which was on the topic of discovered attacks. I scored a 'good' on the final test and lost points only because I was going a bit too quickly and found good-but-not-the-best moves. I found this to be an interesting puzzle which I in fact got wrong despite finding a good move: 1.Nxc7...Kxc7 2. Ba5+ winning the queen. Even if black doesn't take the knight he has to move his king because after say 1...Rf8 2. Ne6+ wins too. Although looking at it now I see that at best this only wins the exchange versus the actual solution of

1.Ba5! threatening mate (which is what I missed) and winning the queen.

I had a quick glance at the infamous chapter 8: centralising the pieces and decided to wait until tomorrow before I give it a go. I'm not going to spend to long on it as hanging around on chapters I'm finding difficult is what is slowing my progress down so much.

mikhail · 13-02-2015 6:29pm

Valmont wrote: »

I found this to be an interesting puzzle which I in fact got wrong despite finding a good move: 1.Nxc7...Kxc7 2. Ba5+ winning the queen. ...

1.Nxc7 Qxg2#

Valmont · 13-02-2015 7:45pm

mikhail wrote: »

1.Nxc7 Qxg2#

Damn it! Well at least it wasn't a league game. Can you tell I'm a purist who doesn't rely on engines?

namenotavailablE · 13-02-2015 9:43pm

After Ba5, Black can try grovel with Bxd5 Qxf2 Bxg2+ [if Rxg2, then probably Qe1 Re2+ cxd5 Rxe1+ Rxe1 and it's a big deficit in material] might be enough to keep Black momentarily in the game. For example:

Qxg2 Rxg2 Kxg2 de fe Rxe5 Bxh7 and the material points difference is 3 points in White's favour- definitely a big advantage to white but battle still must be fought.

Kg1(?) Bh3+ Kh1 Bxf5 and the unopposed light squared Bishop combined with the restricted freedom of the White king is quite dangerous for White.

hinault · 16-02-2015 3:23am

Valmont wrote: »

I played in a congress when I was rated -1000 and while I lost every game it was great fun and I learned exactly where I needed to improve.

There's nothing wrong with that.

So long as you're learning from your mistakes, and trying to apply what you learn, this is what's important.

Like all pursuits in life, application is the name of the game!

Valmont · 17-02-2015 5:27pm

On new year's eve I reached a chesstempo low of 1460 but after some serious work I've just hit 1603. I've also been playing through some more of My 60 Memorable Games and it's making me want to learn the basics of the Sicilian defence - it seems to guarantee excitement.

Mustafa Chess · 17-02-2015 11:30pm

Fischer really knew how to handle the Sicilian

Lucena · 18-02-2015 10:03am

I switched from the French to the Sicilian to try something new, it's definitely more exciting than the French Exchange! I was afraid I'd get creamed because of all the opening traps that the Sicilian is reputed for, but to be honest, it isn't as bad as people make out. I also surprisingly won the first four or five games I played with the Sicilian!

At our level, I don't think switching openings is a huge handicap, as long as one doesn't switch too often. Give the Sicilian a whirl, you might like it!

Valmont · 20-02-2015 11:20am

My opponent last night was rated 1735 so I wasn't too optimistic considering the 300 point rating difference. However, he's been having a bad year, and I managed to get a draw. I completely outplayed him in the opening and could have finished the game on move 19 but I missed the tactic. He equalised but then blundered in the endgame and we agreed a draw due to time. This is my best game ever, without a doubt; it's good knowing the hard work is starting to pay off. I credit my relative strength in the QGD to Chernev's Logical Chess: Move by Move. I spent the last few days playing over his annotations to some of Rubinstein's games (specifically, this masterpiece) so the opening was very fresh in my head.

Valmont · 25-02-2015 7:09pm

I finally finished the infamous chapter 8 of Artur Yusupov's Build Up Your Chess 1: The Fundamentals. Most of the games sampled in the lecture and quiz were played by Bobby Fischer and Akiba Rubenstien so you can imagine how hard the puzzles were considering the aim was not to win any material but to improve the position or gain control of the centre of the board. I needed twelve points to pass but I only got nine which was nine better than I expected so I think I must've learned something.

I think the final puzzle (Fischer vs Geller, 1967, black to move) illustrates the point of the chapter. I incorrectly chose Bd5 when

Be4

was the answer. You can follow the game here but compare the puzzle position with the winning position - note how Geller has completed taken over the centre of the board, with all of Fischer's pieces sitting on the wings.

I'm slightly behind this week but I'm just about to complete the quiz on the next chapter, mate in two. I scoffed at this chapter: 'pah anyone can spot a mate in two in no time!' Try these tricky compositions if you feel as I did! White to move in both; first by J. Abbott from 1902 and the second by Y. Afek in 1978.

Ciaran · 25-02-2015 7:40pm

In case anyone had the same brain-fade as me on the second one, the black pawn is going down the board!

namenotavailablE · 26-02-2015 11:36pm

Qh8 for puzzle 1?

namenotavailablE · 27-02-2015 12:34pm

Rd3 for puzzle 2?

Valmont · 03-03-2015 4:21pm

I won't bother putting up last week's game as I blundered a knight on move six in the sort of tactic I would spot in .02 seconds on chesstempo. For the first time ever, dare I say it, I was too confident. I thought I knew the opening well, understood my strategic aim, and simply played far too quickly. Anyway, I'm playing again tonight in a league game so I have to be careful. Our team is currently top of the division with the halfway mark of the season reached three weeks ago.

I finished chapter nine of Build up Your Chess 1: The Fundamentals by Artur Jusupov and while I orginally thought this was going to be easy because it was just a whole pile of mate in two puzzles, some of them took me a really long time. (White to move, playing up the board). I've started chapter ten on more complicated examples of the end-game idea of the opposition. I just want a chance now to beat someone over the board in a king and pawn endgame using some of the techniques I've picked up from Yusupov.

Lucena · 03-03-2015 4:36pm

Maybe you should put it up anyway. Generally losing a piece in the opening is down to having insufficiently understanding the opening. It might be a recurrent theme in the opening.

Generally speaking, I would avoid playing too quickly in the opening for the following reasons:

1. You give your opponent too much information. Play your moves too quickly and your opponent will know that you know the opening very well, he may become suspicious and play a side-line. Ok, maybe you're prepared for the side-lines, or maybe not, but that's another issue. Also your opponent will know when you're out of your theoretical knowledge, as you start taking time to think on your moves.

2. To avoid blunders.

namenotavailablE · 03-03-2015 6:15pm

Rd7?

Mate in 2 puzzles can be plenty tricky but you'd think that a mate in 1 where there's only one solution should be manageable.....try this one for size

For avoidance of doubt, the a1 square is the lower left corner of the board illustrated.

Valmont · 04-03-2015 3:41pm

I played a junior of an equal rank last night and while he was better after the opening, his confidence was misplaced and he blundered two pieces in one tactic giving me the win. I have to say this was a very satisfying victory as he was playing rather arrogantly up until his mistake. Not a great game on my behalf though, but our team are now the clear leaders of division 3!

Valmont · 06-03-2015 1:22am

I was out-rated tonight by quite a stretch as my opponent was 1880 but I think I gave it a good shot. Lessons learned: be more patient and as always, I am not a young Mikhail Tal. Definitely one of my more informative games, I think it highlighted a lot of mistakes I regularly make, specifically the need to attack at all costs even it means sacrificing material. I've thrown away a lot of equal positions that simply required a small retreat that didn't in fact cede the initiative. Strangely enough a huge spider fell onto my queen's rook's pawn toward the end and just clung to it; we had to stop the clock so I could capture my own pawn with a pint glass and toss it out the front door. And they say the Colle attack is boring.

cdeb · 06-03-2015 9:55am

Valmont wrote: »

Strangely enough a huge spider fell onto my queen's rook's pawn toward the end and just clung to it; we had to stop the clock so I could capture my own pawn with a pint glass and toss it out the front door. And they say the Colle attack is boring.

Not something I've ever seen or heard of before!

namenotavailablE · 06-03-2015 12:43pm

Valmont wrote: »

I was out-rated tonight by quite a stretch as my opponent was 1880 but I think I gave it a good shot. Lessons learned: be more patient and as always, I am not a young Mikhail Tal. Definitely one of my more informative games, I think it highlighted a lot of mistakes I regularly make, specifically the need to attack at all costs even it means sacrificing material. I've thrown away a lot of equal positions that simply required a small retreat that didn't in fact cede the initiative...

I have to admit that I think your 15th move was rather unfortunate- as you note, you might be somewhat prone to "attack, attack, attack" which caused you to retain all your pieces in position for the e6 sacrifice rather than "play in a dull manner". Personally, I'd have definitely said you had a real advantage after 15. Qxf3 -> two bishops, extra pawn and a solid pawn structure with latent potential, safe looking king, no really easy breaks for black. It may not be winning but it looks like it would be almost risk free for white to play on and make Black sweat

On move 12 and with the e6 sacrifice in mind, 12. Neg5 looks kind of intriguing (although the idea might be unsound/ amount to nothing). For example, if Black plays 12..h6, then 13. Nxe6 seems scary to be on the receiving end: 13..fe 14. Qxe6+ and if Rf7 to defend the bishop [since Kh8 Qxe7 Bxf3 (Re8 is not winning the e1 rook as the f3 knight defends it) Qxd8 {recaptures Queen} and gf ] then Bg6 is excellent for White. However, Black probably wouldn't play 12..h6 and opt instead for a bunch of exchanges starting with 12..Bxf3.

Lucena · 06-03-2015 12:44pm

@cdeb. I thought everyone had their chess spider story. Here's mine.

I was playing an opponent who had the black pieces when I noticed a tiny spider on h8. So I said to him "there's a spider on h8" so that he'd pick up the rook and blow the spider away.

So he picks up the rook, sticks his thumb down on the poor spider, squishes it into the board and then wipes his thumb on his trousers before putting back the rook.

If I'd known he was going to kill it, I would've said nothing.

cdeb · 06-03-2015 12:45pm

Did you call touch move on the h8 rook?

Valmont · 06-03-2015 1:59pm

namenotavailabl wrote: »

I have to admit that I think your 15th move was rather unfortunate- as you note, you might be somewhat prone to "attack, attack, attack" which caused you to retain all your pieces in position for the e6 sacrifice rather than "play in a dull manner". Personally, I'd have definitely said you had a real advantage after 15. Qxf3 -> two bishops, extra pawn and a solid pawn structure with latent potential, safe looking king, no really easy breaks for black. It may not be winning but it looks like it would be almost risk free for white to play on and make Black sweat

If I played 15. Qxf3 then he would play 15...Rxc4 and I would be down a piece - unless I missed something?

Ciaran · 06-03-2015 2:23pm

Lucena wrote: »

@cdeb. I thought everyone had their chess spider story. Here's mine.

I was playing an opponent who had the black pieces when I noticed a tiny spider on h8. So I said to him "there's a spider on h8" so that he'd pick up the rook and blow the spider away.

So he picks up the rook, sticks his thumb down on the poor spider, squishes it into the board and then wipes his thumb on his trousers before putting back the rook.

If I'd known he was going to kill it, I would've said nothing.

Were you reluctant to take that rook in the game?

cdeb · 06-03-2015 2:42pm

namenotavailabl wrote: »

Mate in 2 puzzles can be plenty tricky but you'd think that a mate in 1 where there's only one solution should be manageable.....try this one for size For avoidance of doubt, the a1 square is the lower left corner of the board illustrated.

That's super!

I thought I was being really smart with

1. PxB=N+

and went and checked the answer down below...and was wrong.

A really head-wrecking puzzle.

namenotavailablE · 07-03-2015 4:58pm

Valmont wrote: »

If I played 15. Qxf3 then he would play 15...Rxc4 and I would be down a piece - unless I missed something?

D'oh, d'oh and d'oh thrice over...excuse me while I find a rock to crawl under....yes, you're absolutely correct. I totally missed that

Valmont · 08-03-2015 2:51am

So my struggle with Build Up Your Chess 1: The Fundamentals by Artur Jusupov has reached another climax this week with chapter ten: 'the opposition'. This chapter is building on chapter four: 'simple pawn endings' which I scored 'good' a few weeks ago. Unfortunately, the message from chapter four seems to have not sunk in too deeply and I was completely adrift with the puzzles at the end of chapter ten (and most of the lesson, too).

I was tempted to rush through and fail like I did with the infamous chapter eight in order to stick to my chapter a week promise but I think my trouble with king and pawn endings points to a huge weakness that needs to be addressed. Even deceptively straightforward (white to play up the board) king and pawn end games have a dizzying number of initial moves that really tax my ability to calculate. My tactics training on chesstempo rarely if ever covers these positions and the I've never had a king and pawn end game since I started playing chess so naturally I don't have a clue what I'm looking for or how to go about it (even if I grasp the basic idea of the opposition).

As luck would have it, I was in the library today and found that they have an impressive selection of chess books, one of which is titled Secrets of Pawn Endings by Karsten Muller and Frank Lamprecht. The first few chapters look to cover the basics that Jusupov does but in much more detail; the authors assume you know nothing, as I do, which is very helpful. Whereas Jusupov's test had to cover a range of difficulties and problem-types in a short test, chapter one of this book had 14 relatively easy puzzles that I nevertheless found very taxing on my calculating abilities. I think I'll cover a few more of these introductory chapters and then tackle chapter ten in Jusupov's book; I want to give it my best shot when I do so I think this is a good idea.

And now that my patzer rambling is over, here are some of the classic simple problems for you to test your ending skills:

This one I did not get right. Black to play down the board.

I took a long long time with this one but I found all of the relevant variations. Play once as black to move and then as white.

I've seen variations of this one before (white to play) but it sums up the topic for me. As soon as I recognised the theme of this arrangement I knew where my King had to go and as a result I didn't have to spend nearly as long as I have been calculating all of black's possible responses to each move.

Lucena · 08-03-2015 10:44am

Valmont wrote: »

I played a junior of an equal rank last night and while he was better after the opening, his confidence was misplaced and he blundered two pieces in one tactic giving me the win. I have to say this was a very satisfying victory as he was playing rather arrogantly up until his mistake. Not a great game on my behalf though, but our team are now the clear leaders of division 3!

After Black's sixth move, your thought process should be "My opponent has an unprotected piece, is there a tactic"? Then take a couple of minutes to look for a tactc. Ok, there won't always be one, but sometimes even when there isn't, you can possibly benefit, as the opponent may have to lose a tempo moving the piece back, defending it or whatever.

You seem to think 14 ...d4 is a good move for Black, but without computer checking, it seems quite poor to me for a couple of reasons:
- Opening up the centre with the king uncastled isn't generally a good idea
- He's ignoring his development

I personally would have taken, if Black takes with the knight, challenge the knight with Be3. If Black exchanges on b3, I no longer have the bishop-pair, but my development is good, I can quickly move my two rooks to the d- and e-files.

I think the question of not castling early enough has already come up on this thread, and basically this game was lost because of that. With the king in the centre and the heavy pieces lined up, tactics abound and the uncastled king is gonna have a bad time.

Valmont · 11-03-2015 5:14pm

I played an improving teenager rated 1330 last night and we probably set the record for the most ? in one game. My material advantage proved conclusive in the end but my opponent refused to resign and I ended up with checkmate with less than one minute on the clock. I would say a game to forget but I think I should study some of the dubious opening decisions I made along with the decisions that frittered away a position that looked rich in tactical possibilities.

While I have been losing in the internal club championship against much higher rated players, I have eight wins, one draw, and a loss, against similarly rated players in the league which is not too bad considering this time last year I was on a six month losing streak.

Valmont · 13-03-2015 11:48am

I played a 1600 last night in a disappointing game where I fell into my old habit of simply shooting myself in the foot when playing against a patient opponent. I have a lot of work to do to lift myself up to 1500. Does anyone have any advice for managing time more effectively? I am consistently getting into real trouble on the clocks.

Mustafa Chess · 13-03-2015 6:30pm

This thread is far more interesting than some of the others now. Fischer's book is always worth trying to understand.

Valmont · 13-03-2015 6:48pm

Even when I don't understand some of the moves, the annotations are just the right amount to give you an insight into his thinking and to keep the game flowing if you are casually reading. If you want to delve a bit deeper you can play 'guess the move' which is what I usually do with one of the games over the time I might spend in an actual game.

Diary of a Patzer

Comments