I ran into something Rashid Ziatdinov has said about chess. It's pretty much what I've been thinking, when I've seen people analyse games far more convincingly than I ever could, yet they're rated hundreds of points lower than I, so I thought I'd post it here.
"Students sometimes lament that they cannot apply their knowledge during a game. They cannot apply their "knowledge" because they really don't have any knowledge! What they have instead are shortcuts to chess language, what I call "chess magic spelling" (like "open the position if you are more developed", "the two bishop advantage", "don't move the queen out too early", etc.). These shortcuts are useless generalities. Chess can only be expressed with concrete variations. This often-ignored concept is so crucial to mastering chess that it bears repeating with emphasis: chess can only be expressed with concrete variations!
Imagine a musician who had never heard music, only descriptions and theories of music; Imagine a dancer who had never physically performed a pleat or twirl, only read instructions on how to dance. How is a chess player who relies on ideas expressed in words and theories any less ridiculous? A musician makes music, a dancer dances, and a chess player calculates variations!"
Although Ziatdinov seems a bit, umm, 'passionate', even crazy, I do think he has a strong point here. Procedural knowledge instead of theoretical knowledge. And the only way to get there is to get your hands dirty, sweat blood, and slam down variations. It doesn't matter if you were born a Kasparov or a Fischer, hard work for a decade or two is the only way to get there. Talk is cheap, 'BAM! BAM! BAM!' is what counts. :)
Now I'm gonna go eat a raw, bloody steak, chug some beer, burb, and get back to slamming down endgame variations. BAM! BAM! BAM!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
naah...don't know. of course you can't improve (at least much) without ever playing chess. we all knew that already, i think Mr. X(forgot his name) is just trying to sound convincing and adding fancy words to explain something we all already knew.
yea, fancy words like "BAM! BAM! BAM!" :)
well, as I understand it, that seems to be his point. it's just very easy to start mystifying chess, to think it has some mystical depths which can be understood only by being a genius, when it's actually very concrete and practical.
wonderfully post, and always a treat to read your cogent and 'acerbic'--bertrand russell, another terse thinker, was often said to be acerbic :) --formulations.
i AM very, very curious about PCT and have read about it, but it seems like one more thing too many right now (CTS, Bullet 0/4, RHP, CT-Art3.0, Alburt Pocket Training, Averbakh Essential Chess Endings. any other findings by you on PCT much appreciated and your opinion greatl valued.
fyi, i play EVERY single day now, bullet, and it is the only way AFTER extensive and extended hard work.
fyi, i plan to be 1400 bullet soon, and i have yet to sample the band around me, but confident there is rating deflation there, and will find most 1350 bullet 1400 to 1550 blitz, and 1600+ standard. why? a time variation emphasized greatly by higher elo's, so applies downward pressure on ratings, and lower elo's play it far less.
dk
How do one obtain the procedural knowledge to use the bishoppair? Where does the BAM!, BAM!, BAM! start?
tacit knowledge, can't be expressed by words. :)
I'd imagine the way to acquire that knowledge would be to drill positions with double bishops? maybe there's such studies among his 250 GM-RAM positions? I noticed that BB mating made me look at bishops differently, and I suppose there are other just as, or even more beneficial positions to study?
Post a Comment