I Couldn't Find a FICS Opp to Play Slow Time Control
last night. So, I did the next best thing and fired up Chessmaster 8000. I wanted good prep for Saturday, so I chose to play against the Rand character which had a rating of nearly 2100. I played most of the game very well. I was winning at one point with a pawn advantage. Then, I must have gotten fatigued and gave back the pawn. The coup de gras was when I blundered a rook away after missing a pawn pin (you'd think I would have learned by now). Anyhow, I quit the game and didn't save the game score.
On the plus side, I see that I do have the potential to play at a higher level (although I'm not sure what an Expert per Chessmaster equates to in the real world). On the minus side, I see that I am likely to blunder at the end of the game when time is short on the clock and I have a winning advantage. Now, THAT is disturbing, and I really need to think about how to overcome it.
On the plus side, I see that I do have the potential to play at a higher level (although I'm not sure what an Expert per Chessmaster equates to in the real world). On the minus side, I see that I am likely to blunder at the end of the game when time is short on the clock and I have a winning advantage. Now, THAT is disturbing, and I really need to think about how to overcome it.
posted by CelticDeath at 8:31 AM
6 Comments:
Dan Heisman has an article on time management at his "novice nook." I suspect it is too basic for you, but maybe it would help reinforce what you already know. I really like Heisman, especially his focus on piece mobility/activity.
Also, what do people think of Chessmaster? I have Chessmaster 9000, and it sure can kick my ass! Some have said playing such games leads to overly agressive play, but can't you set chessmaster to play more conservatively?
I like Chessmaster, although I don't play against it as often as I used to do. I owned Chessmaster 2100, and I think an even earlier version of it, as well. The best thing about it is that you can be assured of playing against opposition that is slightly above your level (ideal for improvement) and the variety of playing styles represented. The negative side is that it does play like a computer.
I used to struggle for the longest time against its 1700+ rated personalities, but this near-win reinforces in my mind that I have improved. That, my friend, is confidence-builder.
You can adjust the personalities, and even create your own, to play with customized playing styles. I haven't done that, though. As far as leading to overly aggressive play, I find that I have to play really conservatively and solidly to hold my own! I didn't gain my pawn advantage until well into a double-rook endgame.
Maybe you adopt some kind of blundercheck routine that forces you do do it on EVERY move?
That's probably the best thing to do, Mousetrapper. That's what NM Dan Heisman recommends, too. He says that before you make a move, as a last step, you should take one last scan of the board to make sure you aren't committing a blunder. I think I do this when I have plenty of time on the clock, but when the time gets short I get nervous and sometimes forget.
CM10 is very good. The training material it contains is also vey comprehensive. And the waitzkin games are a real treat. Also, the computer opponents are more human-like than its fritz counterparts. Of course its annotation function is not very good. But thats my only quible with that program.
Thanks for linking to my blog. However, the link should be http://satishtalim.blogspot.com/
Post a Comment
<< Home