In search of a Chess Coach

[MarkPharaoh]

I was pleasently surprised when I fount out how many of you play Chess and are rather skilled at it.  Over the summer I plan on doing a lot of studying for next year's Schloastic/States/Nationals.  The coach of my Chess team can't really help me anymore (i'm better then him ) so I am in search of a coach either online or off.  I'm not looking for someone who can play a few games with me and tell me what to improve on, I need a serious coach that will help me train over the course of the summer.  And yes, I will pay you!! Just name a price.

Please let me know if you or anyone you know is interested, thanks.

[AIcOPed]

This may or may not help you, but here goes.

Do you study chess more than you study in school. ie, read every chass book you can get your hands on that talks about your opening you will see. For example I only play 1.e4 as white, so I only need to memorize one line when my opponent is white and playes 1.d4. Do not waste your head w/ more, unless you plan on changing openings.

Go to half price/used bookstores. I find chess books there all of the time for a dollar or two.Definitly get a "Modern Chess Openings" or equivilant.

Master the endgame. this is just through practice and repitition. the more you see it, the more familiar it becomes.

Do not play to much speed chess, if you want to be a great slow player, Especially the week before a tourney.I can not stress this point enough. I love blitz chess, and constantly play, but they are two different games.

I can not help you as a coach per se, but there should be some chess coach in your local area that can help.

Memorize every favorable line for your opening and hy it is favorable. I do not know how many times I have been playing a game, and my opponent "blunders" by making a move that is favorable for me, but I do not remember why, so i must waste my time during the game to figure out why. Waste your time before you get to the board.

Similar note. Always make your opponent think first. In other words, know your opening better than he/she does, and know all responses as black better than he does. For example, if I am black, and  the game starts as follows:
1.e4       d5
2.exd     Qxd
3.Nc3    

Most white players are expecting Qa5 or Qa8, and thus they have prepared for it. Most, however, will not have prepared for Qd6!, which is currently being studied as a fairly new move, and appears to be at least as good as Qa5. This gives you a major edge. There is only one english book written extensively about this opening to my knowlege.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1888690119/wwwlink-software-21/026-2886361-3386838

If you will never see this position that is fine. this was just an example. there are many other similar examples.

If you need to just get a draw, but would like to have a good chance to win, against a normal sicilian player, w/o getting into their lines, then play Smith-Morra's Gambit, which is very stoppable , and if they do you achieve equality early, but slightest mistake and they lose quickly.

1.e4       c5
2.Nf3      Nc6
3.d4       cxd
4.c3!?

I will be glad to talk more about any topic you wish any time. If you do not wish to use the boards my email is

AIcOPed@hotmail.com

[OPColby]

I wholeheartedly agree with the aformentioned above, however, I would choose a different opening than e4.  Everyone knows it.

You'll be finding yourself in more open Spanish positions than you'd like to see, usually with black having the advantage.

That's partially why I play the Reti.  The other reason is that the Reti, I feel, is strategically superior to e4.  I actually feel it's superior to everything, which explains why I play it.  Heh.

1. Nf3  ____  (usually d4)
2. c4

Look what it does for you:

Not only does it threaten their pawn on d4, (as they'd be a fool to do anything else,) but it allows your knight to take advantage of c3, and block in the perfect kingside castle.

And the Sicilian needs some insane study.  I don't like study that much.  I like working by principles and not lines.  Therefore, I hate the Sicilian.

Really, I hate playing black most of the time.

[MarkPharaoh]

Do you study chess more than you study in school

At the moment yes, but that's because my classes aren't the most challenging at the moment.  Next year I have a full barrage of AP classes and let's face it, School > Chess.

so I only need to memorize one line when my opponent is white and playes 1.d4.

How is this so?  You have to be prepared for 1...d5 or 1...Nf3 where many different Openings can occur from.  Please elaborate on your statement

Go to half price/used bookstores. I find chess books there all of the time for a dollar or two.Definitly get a "Modern Chess Openings" or equivilant.

That's a good idea, I know of one about 45 minutes away, i'll check it out next time I go down there which is three weeks for a Soccer tournament.

Similar note. Always make your opponent think first. In other words, know your opening better than he/she does, and know all responses as black better than he does.

I have yet to run into someone IRL who can go toe to toe with me in the Opening.  This scenario happens quite often with me: it would be around 8-10 moves in and my clock didn't even start yet (5 sec delay) where as my opponent is over five minutes into his.

1.e4 d5
2.exd Qxd
3.Nc3

No one ever plays that Opening here, it is deemed at "the Ghetto".

1.e4 c5
2.Nf3 Nc6
3.d4 cxd
4.c3!?

That kind of remind's me of the Danish, is it a very aggressive line for Black?  Also, do you have any games somewhere with this Opening being played?  I would like to take a look, thanks.

[MarkPharaoh]

Add on to my other post:

Where do you suggest I look locally for a Chess coach?  Most that I can think of aren't too good/have their own teams/players to worry about.  Do you know of anywhere online (ex. Chess Forums) where I can look for a coach?

[AIcOPed]

Maybe I was misunderstood about my only memorizing one line. If your opponent is white you only must memorize one line against each possible/probable first move, so for example if your opponent plays 1.d4 you only must memorize one response "perfectly". ie d5, knf6, g6, or whatever. You do not need to know them all. Eric Schiller writes great books on a variety of openings including reti, which is a good way to take your opponent to your home court.

The scandanavian has been given bad press, since few grandmasters play it, but its win rate is comparable to most black openings. The smith-morra gambit is listed in a good book called winning with the smith morra gambit and its "refutation" is in this book:(http://www.chessexpressstore.com/smitgamfinde.html)

The smith morra is very agressive for white, unless black navigates carefully into an equal position, then it gets rather dull, which is one of the main reasons it is not played much, as it suits no one imo.

I do not know how for you to find a chess coach, other than to suggest you continue using your resources, like take an add in the paper. go to local tournements and talk to the winners or highly ranked players. find blitz tounements and do the same, because most blitz players are virtually flawless in the openings.

that is all i can think of. I hope this clears a few things up.

[OPColby]

Three things:

1)  Knowing Lines is good, but when you get the point where your opponent makes a dastardly move which looks like it could be trouble for you, you NEED to know how to use principles and tactics in order to get yourself out of a situation that doesn't look favorable.

OR, how to capitalize on a blunder made by your opponent while still keeping your central strategy in tact.

That means that simply knowing lines won't do you any good.  You can memorize a line to a draw versus a GM if you're playing white, (as they make orthodox moves all the time), but you also have to know how to counter it when they do something that the line is not familiar with.

Some openings, like the Scotch, are crazy useful.  They have extremely high win percentages, but aren't used often.  Research the Scotch and English.  (English is used often in club play, but not at GM level.)

2)  Blitz tournaments are great.  Blitz players are (dare I say it) the truest of all chess players.  You have to make moves based nearly in all it's entirety on instinct.  It shows what chess skills you really have.  I feel when you have 10 minutes to make a move you can outweigh ALL the consequences of that move.  I prefer chess that relies upon pure instinct and theory.

3)  Play the Reti.  I will advocate that thing like I will advocate playing URB Landstill.  The thing is boarderline bizarre.  Who plays the Reti at a GM level?  No one, that's right.  But what kind of percentages does it rack up when it's actually played?  A crazy amount.  No one knows how to counter it via black.  With more study in the Reti, I'm positive I could play it at GM level.

The thing is the most versatile strategy I have ever come across.  Certainly tons more versatile than the King's Gambit.  (Although I like that one too.)  I hate rigid lines.  I like being able to take many paths to victory.  Usually the Reti plays out to be a typical kingside assault, but there are freakishly beautiful patterns and scenarios that present themselves when playing the Reti.

Also, the Reti in Blitz tournaments = TECH.  No one will beat you when you are playing white.  No one.

Nf3 d4
c4 CRAP.

That's what happens.

I'll also add in a semi P.S.

Semi P.S.  Black players everywhere need to study what to do about e4 and d4.  The King and Queen's Pawn Openings, no matter what they are, are the subject of mass study.  Even amateur players often know exactly what to do for 10+ moves when a white player plays e4.

My advice is to not play e4 or d4 for white (unless you have intensive study with the King's Gambit, which in my opinion is virtually unbeatable).  Theoretically, it is a very, very sound opening.

However:

Playing Chess is oddly enough ALOT like Magic in this facet:

If the 4-Tolarian Academy Deck were to come back, it would not win every tournament.  No, it would win very few.  Why?  Tons of massive sideboard hate in every deck.

If there were a top 8 where 7 people were running Academy Decks, and one guy was running a deck with 4 Red Elemental Blast, 4 Pyroblast, 4 Wasteland/1 Strip Mine MD...

Well.  We all know who would win that tourney.

In the same way, when all the black players know everything about e4 and d4, it's often like they're that red deck, just waiting to play an academy deck.  But if you play that red deck with O. Stompy, you win.  Which is often times what openings like the Reti are.

My advice to you is to become well endowed with knowledge about every kind of white opening, from the Reti to the King's Gambit and beyond, while concentrating a good chunk of time on e4 and d4 common openings like the Spanish, as everyone plays them.

Don't concentrate nearly any time on gambits for white (as black).  Most of them are easily foiled other than ones with all kinds of traps.  

Concentrate on 1, or perhaps 2 openings for white with which you will try to win nearly every single game.  Become familiar with a strategy and play it to it's death.  It's like making a good deck and just playing it, playing it, playing it more.

I do the Reti.  That's about all I know well.  I also like the King's Gambit because it wins so often.  Every GM knows how to combat the King's Gambit, however, while not every one is as knowledgable about the Reti.  (Although I'm sure they could school me by giving me some crazy unorthodox threat.)

Play 100% as white, and know all white strategies 75%.

You'll also want to get some strategies down moreso than others.  For instance, I know how to play the Grunsfeld well against the Queen's Pawn.  I know how to play the Closed Spanish well against the King's Pawn (Spanish.)

I try for those lines every time as black.

[wonkey_donkey]

I must admit that I agree with little that has been said here. This is mainly because of the seemed focus on learning openings. Don't learn openings directly - learn how to play middlegames, what kind of positions you prefer to play, and how to play them. If you know that much, then it is time to start learning lines. I recently switched to 1.e4, and have learnt the the Ruy Lopez, but hardly any open sicilian theory etc. The reason I feel I can get away with it is because the kinds of unbalanced positions that result from open sicilians and positions like it are exactly what I'm after. I generally prefer those sorts of positions, and know full well how to play them. However, the reason I learnt the Ruy Lopez is so that I can go down several moves of theory to get a slight plus, as the positions I reach are not to my tastes, generally. As a result, I don't want to err in the opening and find myself in an unfamiliar position that I don't know how to play.

Personally, I don't try and force my openings onto anyone, as I play what is best for me. Using OPColby's example, the Reti is a useful line, but hardly critical. I play less compromising chess, generally speaking, and enjoy it far more than I would were I to play lines such as 1.Nf3. With black, I can more easily condone playing just about anything, as most things will give black chances of equality or more. Even the non-critical lines (such as the modern) are fine, from my perspective, as it gives flexibility in your setup. However, this is something that I think black can afford to go with more than white can, as the extra tempo from being white is far less important if you are aiming for a fluid, flexible setup. This is just my opinion, however.

One of the few pieces of truly objective advice I can give you is to look carefully at all your losses. This will usually help you to identify mistakes when you make them. The other thing that I'll recommend is to play the board rather than the man. The person opposite you's style should not be a factor in what moves you make. A last piece of advice is something a Swedish GM taught me - "talk to your pieces," he said. By this, he means that you should look at where your pieces are and where they want to be. If you can spare the time in a position, then improve the position of your worst-placed piece. If you can't spare the time, then you're probably either already better or already losing.

Hope some of this helps,

Tom

[combo_dude]

I agree with your forcing the openings idea - while I may defend the Dragon with an almost religious fervour, I'm not about to suggest it to people. You a) need the time and inclination to learn a decent chunk of the theory; b) need something OK against the Anti-Sicilians; and c) you MUST be prepared to take risks. The reason that I can get pretty good results on either side of the Dragon is because, having played the Dragon for about half my life, I know the themes and strategies fairly well; as such, in the violent positions I know what I need to defend against and how best to get at the enemy king, whilst in the quieter positions (which, incidentally, I don't play as White...) I know what strategies are good for both sides. I would loathe an opening like the Reti; I respect it as an opening, but it's just not for me. I don't care if they know what they're doing or not; it's more important to me to know what I'M doing. Frankly, if your opening has so great an emphasis on surprise value, surely there must be something objectively better?

how to capitalize on a blunder made by your opponent while still keeping your central strategy intact

If it's a blunder, you shouldn't need typical trategic considerations to punish them. Generally, a blunder - positionally or materially - changes the whole nature of the position.

Research the Scotch

Believe me, I'm trying to...there hasn't been anything written about it for years. Bloody hard to get hold of a book on it. Which is annoying, as I'd rather like to take it up properly instead of improvising the main Scotch lines.
Again, this is a sharp line - there are quieter alternatives available, and in my opinion sharp lines require more understanding than quiet lines, as you not only need to know your plan of attack, but how best to deal with moves that lose a single tempo or don't fit in with their best plan.

As for 1. e4 and 1. d4, these do need a great deal of study to play properly.

[aside] Having said that, it's incredible what you can get away with. I haven't had a Najdorf for well over a year now, which is a line that I am confident theoretically; I also haven't had a Sveshnikov, one of the most popular lines recently, where I know bugger-all theory and have no means of learning any in the near future. [/aside]

But the reason that they are so popular is because the study is worth it. They are the two moves that will lead to a White advantage - that's the reason that they're so popular in the first place. It depends on your level of commitment to chess; if you're committed, then take up one of these, as they'll give you better win percentages. If you play something else, it'll reach the stage that eventually you won't have the surprise value that playing something more passive gets away with. And when you reach that stage, you'd best be playing someone crap. Or you won't win. If you're never winning, you're screwed. Not a good situation to be in.

[MarkPharaoh]

I know I have been talking a lot about the Opening, but I plan to spend just as much time, if not more on mid/end game.  I just need to decide what I want to learn for Openings.  I think i'm just going to go back to what I was studying before I started 1. d4, and thats the English as there is a lot less theory behind it and not as many different openings to learn.  I have a few books of my wish list on Amazon but if anyone can suggest a good tactics/mid-game/attacking in the mid-game I would appreciate it.

@AIcOPed:  ok, I understand now, thanks for ellaborating.

@wonkey_donkey: Thanks for the advice.  The problem about going over my losses is that I haven't been in tournament play is almost three months and I have improved a good amount since that time so going over the losses (only 2, and one I already know where my mistakes were as I went over it 1000 times since it was the first and only time I ever lost on the Dragon).  That quote was very interesting and i'll remember it the next time I am in a serious match, thanks.

@combo_dude: I don't care if it takes me 500+ hours to learn a good chunk of theory for the Sicilian, i'm learning and hopefully someday mastering that damn opening :).  I really enjoy playing it (favorite opening by far) and I will study this opening more and more.  Yes Anti-Sicilian's suck but it's a risk i'm willing to take.  And although there is a TON to learn on the Sicilian, i'm currently only a 1252 (P10) so it's not like i'll be playing pros often in real life that will know the Sicilian in great detail.

[AIcOPed]

Let me be clear. no one post is going to contain everything a player needs to know. Mark Pharoah made the claim in his initial post that he is better than his chess coach. this means to me that he knows how to checkmate w/ all types of pieces, can force a pawn to queen, if possible and so on.However, it does not mean that he can out open his opponent (although he did inform in a response that he can), so middle game it is. The only thing I can suggest is go to barnes and nobles (or an actual chess store) and find a detailed book on mid-game. I found pandolfini to be helpful when I was getting started. The problem is most middlegames are subjective as to the best response. it depends on where you want the flow of the game to go. I do not play the reti because it is not my style. no other reason. it is also the same reason I do play e4. I like open games.