Winning Chess for Humans

Winning Chess for Computers, Super-humans and Mortals...

Charlie Keen emerged triumphant from doing battle in Torbay, equal first with 4½/5, and came home to show his last round game to Fritz... who thought he should have done better!  It's enough to make you despair... Do you really have to analyse as well as Fritz?  Or play as well as Capablanca and Alekhin?  I think the answer is 'None of the Above'... but if you can get a bit better at either tactics or manoeuvring, then that would help!


Occasionally, two unconnected bits of the world collide in the space between my ears, which can make me laugh.

I don't know if Nigel Short still refers to Judit Polgar as 'Lassie'.

Anyhow, I was doodling online while listening to a repeat of Cabin Pressure on the radio, when I came across this interesting statistic:

Club games

I have a prejudice that club games are as interesting and as valuable for study material as master games. I have been asking around for club players' games - not necessarily special ones, just games - with the thought that these 'ordinary' games may also be instructive. Some are presented below.
"Why don't you use more club games in the coaching sessions?"
-- This is a common comment. There are some good reasons why not:
  1. The reason for showing master games is often to illustrate a particular point of strategy so the games I use are often

What's wrong with club players? An MOT for us all

Overprotection and prophylaxis are all very well, Dave, but what about ordinary players, what do they need? I believe that we don't really know a lot about the chess thinking of ordinary players. There are some things that have been done on amateur games over the years (by de Groot, Euwe/Meiden, Webb, Heisman, Silman, Rubin/Emms and Davies) and there are a set of common beliefs about amateur play, but I think that amateurs are a lot more complex than is often suggested.

Amateurs are more diverse than is given credit for - they often


Subscribe to RSS - G