Chess owns me.

July 22, 2006 9:26 AM

Help me enjoy playing chess.

I've read probably about 10 different chess books and played maybe 20-30 games in my life. (All against various chessmaster engines on the easiest settings.)

The games always go roughly the same... pawn, pawn, knight, knight... pawn ... uhh ... okay, bishop, that seems safe ... let's try moving the knight over here ... hmm ... wow the computer has a really nice pawn setup ... I'll try to skewer the computer's knight, let's try ... oh no! ... wtf ... he's eating all my pieces ... okay now I'm way behind in material ... oh god ... uhhhh ... I'll move this pawn, that seems safe ... omg he's double-forked me again!! ... [concede]

I don't need to win every game, I just want to be able to look at the chess board and tell what's going on and where things are headed... enough info to actually come up with a plan of what to do. I think then maybe it would be enjoyable and not so frustrating.

I know millions and millions of people play chess, so I feel like a huge idiot, like I am just not "getting it." Do I just need to practice more? Does it get easier? Help me feel like I can stand a chance against the 13-year-olds on Yahoo! chess.

Thanks in advance.

posted by blahtsk to sports, hobbies, & recreation (22 comments total)

It sounds like you're caught in between ameteur and professional/enthusiast skill levels. If you want to play against 13-year-olds on Yahoo, don't worry so much about learning all the advanced theory from the chess books -- you'll probably only need to think three moves in advance anyway. If you want to play against chessmaster-level opponents, then yeah, you'll need to practice a lot more for it to get easier.

Like anything, it will get easier if you commit yourself to it. At this stage I recommend learning by trial and error and using the logic already in your head. Then move on to the books.

Disclaimer: while I did beat the math teacher/founder of the chess club while I was in middle school, I've barely played since. Grain of salt and all that -- it could be that your brain is just wired differently from mine.
posted by danb at 9:31 AM on July 22, 2006

The one time that I made a little (and only a little) progress at my chess playing, I stopped paying attention to any particular piece or any particular turn. I gave up on the pretention that I had any clue of overarching strategy.

Instead, I started treating each board position as a more-or-less independent problem—what will happen in the next 2-3 turns? What's the consequence of five or six possible move—how will my opponent react, and where will that leave me?

Going that way, my turn-by-turn play improved somewhat. I began to see short-term tactics more clearly—I could play a few moves ahead when things were going well, and I wasn't as shocked when my captures backfired on me. I began to lose more competently.

I don't think I've ever beaten my brother at chess—he was a serious hobbyist for a while, and I've never had a strong head for strategy games—but I can consistently beat untrained players and five-year-olds, so I know I've learned something.
posted by cortex at 9:33 AM on July 22, 2006

The ratio of games played to books read needs to get a lot bigger.

Find human players -- is there a chess club in town?

Against the computer, set up a physical chess board to mirror the game. Study it from different angles (including your opponent's.) Look at the possibilities for and threats to each piece.

And you can't learn new things without making mistakes -- stop worrying about losing a lot of games before you win some. Give yourself total permission to screw up. Pay attention and learn from the mistakes.
posted by Zed_Lopez at 9:38 AM on July 22, 2006

Instead of playing 'normal' chess, try playing Fischer Random Chess. You'll have to learn the setup rules and minor new rules for castling, but the whole point of FRC is to eliminate memorized opening lines that people (and computers) use for the first 15-20 moves. In normal chess, in order to compete with anybody knowledgable, you too will need to know all these opening lines and counters to them and counters to counters and so on. If you fail to make the 'correct' move early on, you'll probably be crushed by someone of equal skill who knows the line better.

Also, slow down. You're probably getting anxious about what move to make and not thoroughly considering what you're doing and what your opponent might be doing. Getting forked is part of playing, but if it happens all the time, you're probably getting caught up in your own attack instead of considering that you need to defend against your opponent as well.
posted by beerbajay at 9:41 AM on July 22, 2006 [1 favorite has favorites]

I'm with Zed Lopez. I learned more from human opponents. I was briefly a member of a chess club and played my best chess there. Definitely try to play against humans for awhile and see how you do.

Also, make sure you are having fun or at least finding it satisfactory. Not being good at/ or enjoying chess doesn't mean anything. A lot of people make the mistake of equating chess skills with being smart. Lots of smart people hate chess. Lots of dumb people play a great game.
posted by rex dart, eskimo spy at 9:45 AM on July 22, 2006

Twenty to thirty games? That's it? Increase you games to books ratio.
posted by caddis at 9:49 AM on July 22, 2006

Chess-tactics.com is a nice straightforward readable guide to chess tactics. I gleaned just a few solid principles from it that now let me beat all the friends who used to beat me.
posted by Eater at 10:03 AM on July 22, 2006

As a kid, I could never win againts a computer, even at the easy level. Same for my brother or my dad. Then one day we decided to gang up on the computer. We sat next to one other and debated each moves, playing as a team, and won.

It was very satisfying.
posted by gmarceau at 10:26 AM on July 22, 2006 [1 favorite has favorites]

As others have said, play more games. Humans are a lot more fun than computers. Don't make plans that depend on opponents overlooking your intentions, or your own vulnerability. Instead, try to make every move improve your position slightly, whether by increasing your options, or setting up a discovered attack, or pinning a piece, etc. A good habit is, after you've decided on a move, to scan the entire board, and examine every possible move available to your opponent, to see if you've overlooked something before physically touching your piece.
posted by Manjusri at 10:55 AM on July 22, 2006

I differ from the above responses a bit. It's true that, as with most things, doing the thing itself is the number one way to improve. However, there is a lot to learn from chess books.

There is a lot of basic theory in chess which you may be missing. Attack and control the center of the board. Building pawn formations. How pinning and pressure really work. Economy of action/tempo. If you don't get some knowledge of how these things work, you might play a lot of games without improving much. The few chess books I've ever read explained this sort of thing very poorly or not at all, but there are so many books out there that there must be some that explain the fundamental aspects of the game well. Not the rules, not memorized openings or endgames, but theory of the game.
posted by jellicle at 11:15 AM on July 22, 2006

You should check out a site like letsplaychess.com Human opponents and a huge library of theory,openings, and general chess play. I was on there a year and a half or so ago and really liked it. I just don't really have the time to play as often anymore.
posted by Captain_Science at 11:41 AM on July 22, 2006

I agree with jellicle, and then some. Your play-by-play description of how your games typically go does not read like it was written by someone who has read even one chess book. You must be choosing really bad books, or not retaining anything from the good ones.

On the other hand, you've played so seldom that the whole situation doesn't make sense. What if someone posted that they'd been tutored in tennis by ten Wimbledon champions, and played a total of twelve games? Would you not think that absolutely bizarre?

Chess Fundamentals by Capablanca and My System by Nimsowitsch are two important classics.

And to address something else you said:

The games always go roughly the same... pawn, pawn, knight, knight... pawn ... uhh ... okay, bishop, that seems safe...

You should not be thinking like this. The beginning does indeed tend to go "roughly the same," but it's for that reason that you need to get a grip on what's actually going on during that crucial part of the game. Opening with the queen's pawn is not the same as opening with the king's pawn. Each choice has its advantages and disadvantages. The fact that there are books written about all the nuances involved doesn't mean that you have to be an expert. The basics really are not rocket science. You should not, only three moves into the game, EVER be thinking "okay, bishop, that seems safe." There are very few situations that you are likely to be in that early, and you should be familiar enough with them all that you have an idea of what you are trying to avoid and what you are trying to accomplish, as well as what your opponent is trying to accomplish.
posted by bingo at 12:15 PM on July 22, 2006

It seems like you're not focused enough on your opponent's threats and only concerned about creating your own threats. What you could do, after each of your opponent's move, is think about what exactly is your opponent threatening to do with their move, and how you can thwart their goal.
posted by gyc at 2:05 PM on July 22, 2006

I agree with Zed Lopez about having a physical board to duplicate moves on the screen. For me, it really helps to see the game as a physical battle. There's something about sitting behind an army with the enemy coming toward me that helps define the defenses to be set up and the attacks to strategize.
posted by oneirodynia at 4:55 PM on July 22, 2006

oneirodynia writes "I agree with Zed Lopez "

I read that as Ruy Lopez I was all excited that we had a chess master on Metafilter; until I remembered he's dead
posted by Mitheral at 5:18 PM on July 22, 2006

You might also try Go. Chess never clicked with me, but Go is tremendously beautiful. It's harder to find real people to play with, though.
posted by heresiarch at 5:22 PM on July 22, 2006

The fastest way to improve is to increase your game count.

Some chess books are very good, but many are dull and boring.

I liked "Bobby Fischer teaches chess" when i read it in high school many years ago. (We played at lunch for three or four months so that would be 120+ games and we were still just getting started) The best thing about the book is that it teaches you some basic tactical moves and drills you on them through exercises....
posted by storybored at 7:36 PM on July 22, 2006

Practice play middle and end games.

To do this, you set up the board as it will appear after several piece exchanges. In a finite time, this lets you see and practice strategy and tactics for far more middle and end game situations, than you will see in the same amount of time playing from the beginning. Very important for not "running out of gas" after you get through the first 8 or 10 moves of a traditional "scripted" opening. And you can only win if your middle and end games are strong.

A new player learning the game won't really learn much playing less than 50 to 100 games a month; there's a certian amount of rote memorization that goes with learning the game that seemingly, for most people, requires repetition. So you need to be playing a lot more. Playing against live human players is about 10X as instructive as playing against the machine. You can watch a human opponents eyes and face closely, and frequently get hints as to his thought process. Seeing how your opponent thinks is key to thinking better yourself.

If you're not already using a point system to evaluate piece trades and offers, begin doing so.
Pawn = 1 pt.
Bishop = 3 pts.
Knight = 3 pts.
Rook = 5 pts.
Queen = 9 pts.
Of course, you have to also weight a decision to make an exchange with strategic and tactical information.

Concentrate for a while on setting up forks. Players who learn to fork well early play their knights and bishops effectively.
posted by paulsc at 8:30 PM on July 22, 2006

The way to get better at chess is to spend a lot of time getting beaten by better players, face to face, in lightning or blitz games. Internet chess doesn't really cut it.

Get in the habit of taking your chessboard down to your local pub, buying a beer, setting it up and waiting for an opponent. When you find somebody who beats you as easily as the computer does, ask them for a few pointers. Practise, practise, practise.

Also, get a chess clock and limit both sides to 10 minutes each. Once you start winning games, cut the time back to five minutes a side.

When you're old, you'll be fearsome.
posted by flabdablet at 3:42 AM on July 23, 2006

Do chess puzzles! The "white to move and win" kind. These will help you look at a chess position and analyze it.

Walk through some sample games, like the evergreen game. Go through it move by move and try to think why some move was made. This step is best if you have a book with some good 'commentary'. When it says something like "not 5. b3 because blah blah blah", play out the blah blah blah and ask why that's worse.

Blitz chess can be fun to try to give you a more intuitive feel of what works and what doesn't. Plus it will increase your game count. Which as everyone else says is what you really need to do. You need less inspiration and more perspiration.

Finally, consider the possibility that chess is overrated as a game, and enjoys the cachet that it does because it is perceived—wrongly—as a measure of intellectual superiority. Go get zillions of games and find something you enjoy more.
posted by fleacircus at 4:20 AM on July 23, 2006

It sounds like you're playing without a plan. If that's true, then playing more games will just make you frustrated, because you'll lose most of them.

Get Jeremy Silman's How to Reassess Your Chess. That will teach you the elements of position play. When you understand that, the board will "tell" you the right overall plan. When your opponent moves, you deal with any immediate threats or opportunities. If there are none, you advance your plan.

This will make your whole game more coherent; you'll spend less time wondering what you should be doing. And you'll understand more when you study the games of stronger players, which is the best way to improve.
posted by futility closet at 5:40 AM on July 23, 2006

The best thing to do is to play more people and ask for help on strategy, but I also second fleacircus's advice to do some chess puzzles. When "The Search for Bobby Fischer" came out in theaters, I went through a wild chess phase. I learned the most from this little book (I live in the US but this is the only place I could find it online). Unfortunately, it's been so long since I've looked at the book that I can't remember exactly what's inside, but it was intended for kids and had clear explanations and color pages that held my attention fairly well. It had a good number of grandmaster scenarios that really opened my eyes to the game's possibilities.
posted by phatkitten at 9:35 AM on July 23, 2006