chess puzzles

Chess Puzzles

Grant and you will find!
Strange name, real matters
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
indiana-jay ♡ 58 ( +1 | -1 )
Public Game
Someone is asking for chess book with well anotated games. Some else advice to follow top players' games.

Sometimes I think it will be interesting if 2 players (or group of players) agree to have a game and then some spectators may write down their analysis or comments on a dedicated thread(s) for the game. The spectators may also be grouped to backup each sides of the board. This way, many (including the players themselves) will benefit from that. Just an idea...

(If only I had enough time for such things :)
clemens ♡ 51 ( +1 | -1 )
This is an excellent idea, and I would immediately support it! The only problem is that I think the rules forbid playing such a game on a normal GK board, besides we don't have unrated games, which would be nice for such a thing.

But then, it's really not a problem: we can simply play the game in a forum thread, and everyone can set it up on a board or in a database program.

So, let's nominate two strong players willing to do such a thing, and then start this undoubtedly exceedingly instructive game!
indiana-jay ♡ 75 ( +1 | -1 )

I didn't know if it is forbidden (So that is why no one is doing it). I don't know how much beginners will be interested, but seeing so many players want to learn, I think there are more than enough.

Mike just told me that atrifix is a great annotator (thank's Mike). Hopefully he can also contribute...

For anyone who doesn't have chess program, you can download (save) the chessboard, and arrange the pieces on excel spreadsheet. You can arrange the cell size and shade necessary squares with gray. You can then copy and paste the board to many sheets. This way you can manage each of your games off-line (and you can freely move the pieces for experiment)
gambitnut ♡ 53 ( +1 | -1 )
I remember one experiment on IYT ... ... where a game was played on the Chess Analysis Message Board. One player started a game and then any player could post a move for either side. I liked it but because the messages aren't threaded in the same way they are here and the board was called the Chess Analysis Board, some people thought it took too much space from real aalysis. Since those things aren't a problem on this board, it might have more success here. Anyone want to try it?
gambitnut ♡ 13 ( +1 | -1 )
I also like your idea if it is legal I would be happy to join in that game. If you can't get any higher rated players to agree to it I would even be willing to be one of the players.
indiana-jay ♡ 94 ( +1 | -1 )

So now we got one candidate! Thank's to gambitnut!

Personally, I think the players don't have to be class A players like cyrano or brunetti. Gambitnut skill level is more than enough (as long as he plays seriously ;) It's now the annotators' willingness to join the game that we are looking for, because without it, top notch analyst like me will jump and dominate the analysis, hehehe. Well, I heard that atrifix and nottop are a few of the good ones.

And may be the forum may decide what kind of opening they are wishing to learn...?
gambitnut ♡ 54 ( +1 | -1 )
If you're looking to learn an opening ... ... I'm not much of an opening expert. I have my favorite openings, some of them you might consider strange but they work for me. I don't know if the average player would want to learn my openings but they would find them pretty interesting and it would give the analysts something to talk about! I could play another opening if you want but I wouldn't know the opening or the ideas behind it all that well. I would have to hope that I could find some information about it in one of my books.
white_disc ♡ 12 ( +1 | -1 )
I support the idea of a learning game !!

indiana-jay ♡ 118 ( +1 | -1 )

Gambitnut, you are right that with your "strange" opening, there will be something to talk about. I think the key is in the analyst, not in the player itself. And the important thing about opening is the opening (principles) itself, not whether it is Ruy Lopez or English opening.

I saw many novices were getting unnecessarily too serious about openings. And I saw even some intermediate players didn't really understand the idea behind openings they used. Openings are a bit like fashion amongst chess players! Today 1.e4 tomorrow 1.Nf3. I hope there are analysts (annotators) who really understand this needs, and will describe or transfer their knowledge to others. Personally, I think a most usefull analysis is not about giving the alternative moves (or a long chain of moves) but what can be described in logical words (of course with a help of moves).

Have you ever imagined a situation where 2 players have games and honestly tell each other what in their heads? Will that improve the level of their games? I think yes.
mormel12 ♡ 21 ( +1 | -1 )
we've had such an experiment already in a smaller form.
(the thread was dutch)
unluckely one of the players got computerproblems and the game timed out:(
It's an very interesting idea and if you go through with it i'll follow it with interest.
clemens ♡ 49 ( +1 | -1 )
I say just let the players choose any opening they like, that is to say, have them play a "normal" game without any interference before the game as far as openings are concerned.

So, we still need a second player and possibly an analyst! However, I think it could also be interesting for everyone to say what they "see" in the position, this way we could get an overview of how well people of different skill levels are able to assess the position. It would also be a lively discussion this way.
atrifix ♡ 38 ( +1 | -1 )
I'll do whatever I can, although I'm not sure what exactly is going on. Can the players view the analysis? If so, it stands to reason that they would probably follow good analysis, and if not, it doesn't seem much different from any post-mortem analysis. Maybe I'm just confused.

I would have liked to view the Praatschaak threads, but unfortunately I don't speak Dutch :)
gambitnut ♡ 100 ( +1 | -1 )
Clemens I like your idea of all players being able to write what they see in the position and what they think is going on and what will happen next. The only problem I can see is that we would have to give the weaker players a chance to respond first so they don't become biased by what the analysts have to say about the game. I think all players should also feel welcome to ask questions of the analysts. I will be happy to answer any questions people might have after the game and I'm sure my opponent would be willing to do the same.

I have a proposal regarding this idea and the openings. To be totally fair, I think we should play a two game match with each person having white in one of the games. I agree that we should be able to play any opening we want. If you really want to learn an opening and my opponent is agreeable, I will be willing to play a second two game match with the openings chosen for us.
peppe_l ♡ 41 ( +1 | -1 )
Just my two cents "And maybe the forum may decide what kind of opening they are wishing to learn...?"

I have nothing against Sicilian Dragon & Najdorf but isnt it better if people who want to learn something else have a chance too? :-)

Otherwise its a brilliant idea, and yes Mike was correct, Atrifix is a great annotator so it will certainly be a good thing if he will be one of the players.

Hopefully it will happen :-)

gambitnut ♡ 168 ( +1 | -1 )
I've been thinking about it some more I realized that one of the main ideas of this experiment is to be able to talk to good players while they are playing so you can see how they think and what their ideas are. Atrifix mentioned a problem with this but I think I've come up with a way around it. If we do play two games, I think we should dedicate six threads to those two games. They could be called something like:

Analysis of Gambitnut - Opponent
Chat with Gambitnut about Gambitnut - Opponent
Chat with Opponent about Gambitnut - Opponent
Analysis of Opponent - Gambitnut
Chat with Gambitnut about Opponent - Gambitnut
Chat with Opponent about Opponent - Gambitnut

We would also have two rules. The two players could only read the two thread dedicated to chatting with them. In the threads chatting with the players, other players can only chat about the moves already made or moves/plans not taken which are no longer available. The two players can state their plans but the other players are not allowed to suggest alternatives.

I think you have some good people on your list of analysts and one of them, Atrifix, has already agreed to do it. Hopefully at least one or two more good players will agree to head the analysis team.

As to my opponent, I think the game would be more exciting if they were fairly close to my rating. Say, within 150 points. Also, since I will be playing several games with them anyway, I think it would be more fun if it were someone I've never played before.

I eagerly await input from Indiana-Jay and others!
indiana-jay ♡ 73 ( +1 | -1 )

I think that it is a great idea gambitnut had proposed. I’m just wondering if there is enough participants following this thread? Or may be we need to just start the game anyway? I think with gambitnut's idea, there will be many players asking questions to both players. (But do you think each player will follow the rule to not access certain threads?)

We already have the rules, one player, and analyst for the game. Anybody willing to play against gambitnut ?
raimon ♡ 65 ( +1 | -1 )
Nothing ventured nothing gained your motive of helping lower rated players and beginners will probably help this succeed.
I for one will follow this with interest.
If you want me to put my 2 cents worth in from time to time I would be happy to - although when I get busy I can be a bit unreliable.
My knowledge of openings is limited to a fairly narrow repertoire that I have developed over the years to suit my temperament and style - but I can offer opinions on matters of positional judgement and endgames if that is required.
It won't hurt to give this a go - you never know there may be quite a bit of interest from beginners etc. once they get to know about it.
dracula2003 ♡ 83 ( +1 | -1 )
Saint Petersburg vs Paris Perhaps it would interest you.

Saint-Petersburg vs. Paris
Distance chess match Saint-Petersburg vs. Paris May 28th 2003, at the day of celebration of the 300 years anniversary of Saint-Petersburg, will take place the first in the history match in distance chess between Saint-Petersburg team and French club "NAO chess club".

St-Petersburg team 1. Aleksander Khalifman 2. Peter Svidler 3. Victor Korchnoi 4. Konstantin Sakaev. Commentators in the St-Petersburg's studio - Anatoly Karpov and Boris Spassky. "NAO chess club" team 1. Vladimir Kramink 2. Teimour Radjabov 3. Laurent Fressinet 4. Sergey Karjakin. Commentator in Paris's studio - Joel Lautier. Chief arbiter - Geurt Gijssen.

Full internet coverage:

clemens ♡ 43 ( +1 | -1 )
gambitnut The idea you proposed is excellent; I think we can trust in your and your opponent's discipline not to visit the analysis threads, though I guess it could be tough to know that the solution to a difficult position is just a mouseclick away ;)

I have to agree with raimon, I think it will become more popular as it goes on, and maybe this is even the start of an entire series of this kind of game!
tomarken ♡ 50 ( +1 | -1 )
great idea i for one would be very interested in a match like the one proposed here. i am fairly new to chess, and am still in the learning stages of the game. i would love to follow a game between two higher rated players and read some intelligent analysis - i would even volunteer to provide a novice's perception of the games as they are in progress. i think this is a great idea and i'm sure it would draw a lot of people in, beginners and experts alike. i hope it becomes reality in the near future. :)
gambitnut ♡ 24 ( +1 | -1 )
Don't worry Indiana-Jay and Clemens ... ... I will be able to control myself and keep from reading the threads I'm not supposed to. I'm sure my opponent will be happy to agree as well. Speaking of my opponent, we are still looking for a good player to play me. Com'on people, any volunteers?