"There is really only one mistake in chess - underestimating your opponent"-- TARTAKOVER
I found this session hard to prepare, and might try again! I have tried to find mistakes that are typical of a certain level of player - that is, mistakes of a characteristic kind, that better players no longer (or only rarely) make.
The hope is that these are the sorts of error most easily avoided. This document is subject to two caveats:
"In a book called Chesslets, by Dr. J. Schumer, all the games are annotated by quotations from various writers.-- CHERNEV, Wonders and curiosities of chess
Here is one of the games, with comments by Shakespeare:"
(27) Atkins - Saunders [E90]
- Study of your own games
- How good is your annotating?
- Automatic Game Annotations
- Shakespeare annotates
|Article 9288 in rec.games.chess.misc:|
Subject: Re: Best Quick Study??
From: email@example.com (Kenneth Sloan)
Submitted by DrDave on Sat, 10/10/2009 - 21:31
Algebraic and descriptive notations[There is a more detailed explanation of notation and more of the symbols available.]
Here is the board, labelled using both systems of notation (text-only browsers: see below for pre-formatted version!)
Submitted by DrDave on Wed, 23/09/2009 - 22:13
Ish has been kind enough to give me his copy of Igor Khmelnizky's Chess Exam and Training Guide.
You remember me banging on a couple of years ago about knowing your
chess profile, having an idea of what your strengths and weaknesses
are? Well, this book does what I was telling you to do: it gives
you a rating for a set of diverse features. So, if your study of
your own games gives you no clues, or you'd like a second opinion, I
think you can't do better than this book.
Submitted by DrDave on Sun, 20/09/2009 - 23:00
"Sight is what you see with your eyes,
Vision is what you see with your mind." http://lessons.chessvision.
There is a gap between what is under your nose and what you actually
notice. It's the gap between what is obvious once your opponent lands
a punch and what you did failed to see beforehand...