Thanks all for these inspiring insights, I really enjoy reading through this thread.
@Loganrithm
I know this is off topic, so if necessary we create a new topic. You said:
"... I've noticed is he places a lot of care into each and every move. Every opening decision, every trade in the middlegame ..."
I am a little skeptical of the level of detail that a stronger player than me notices in a position. In my mind this is a book author thing that tries to explain the good or bad moves with explanations that were not even in the players mind when they were playing.
I mean, I would like to know honestly: you really think things like, "oh, I'm going to play my queen in c4 because here it is centered!" Or anything like that. When I watch Nakamura's lives and he shares his considerations with his famous arrows, I see a much more concrete chess revolving around real and non-abstract possibilities. I'm a former reader of Jeremy Silman's How To Reasses Your Chess, and I still have questions today about what to really think during a game of chess, whether to make all the considerations I learned in the books, or whether I should be more objective and play what is going on in the here and now, an attack, an interesting idea of attack, a defense, etc. instead of considering abstract factors like space, development, king's safety, etc.
Put another way, I'm not sure how deep I should go. I don't know how serious my opponents are about their moves. Are they really thinking things about 'centralization'? Do they really think about 'bishop pair'?
I know this is off topic, so if necessary we create a new topic. You said:
"... I've noticed is he places a lot of care into each and every move. Every opening decision, every trade in the middlegame ..."
I am a little skeptical of the level of detail that a stronger player than me notices in a position. In my mind this is a book author thing that tries to explain the good or bad moves with explanations that were not even in the players mind when they were playing.
I mean, I would like to know honestly: you really think things like, "oh, I'm going to play my queen in c4 because here it is centered!" Or anything like that. When I watch Nakamura's lives and he shares his considerations with his famous arrows, I see a much more concrete chess revolving around real and non-abstract possibilities. I'm a former reader of Jeremy Silman's How To Reasses Your Chess, and I still have questions today about what to really think during a game of chess, whether to make all the considerations I learned in the books, or whether I should be more objective and play what is going on in the here and now, an attack, an interesting idea of attack, a defense, etc. instead of considering abstract factors like space, development, king's safety, etc.
Put another way, I'm not sure how deep I should go. I don't know how serious my opponents are about their moves. Are they really thinking things about 'centralization'? Do they really think about 'bishop pair'?
..............
..........
I know the exact feeling. The solution might be just play more unrated games against players just below your level and limit yourself the number of "rated, serious games against stronger opponents" in a day. This way you have a lot less stress and you focus on the fun side of chess...
#10 if your friends or clubmates are beginners play them blindfolded (thats what i do) or spot them material or both. That way the game is always fun and educational for the other person, plus exercises your own skills. If thats not enough you could try fischer random blindfolded, but i'm not sure how fun that would be.... but fischer random (chess 960) is always good in general. I find many begginers are turned off by skilled players opening knowledge/theory (of which i have very little) so 960 is a good alternative. Maybe it will give you more enjoyable otb play?
I wonder nobody suggested yet to take a break. Sometimes you need 1-2 week(month?) pause to be hungry again for chess. Go to a dance club, travel, try to learn something new. Music, language, sport. Anything you like.
OP: Good thread. I feel the same way too. I know the tense feeling and kinda get nostalgic for the past when the opponents were less tougher and I could relax a bit more :-). The game's still fun although a bit more challenging.
#9 thumbs up
I've not had the same feeling with Chess yet because I'm still very much a beginner. In other games, though, I have had the same sort of shift from it becoming less of a game and more of a tense battle where I need to have 100% concentration 100% of the time. I think it's something that will happen with just about any competitive game, though. You either die a scrub or live long enough to die of a stress induced heart attack.
Chess is kind of nice compared to the other games I play in that the game and its rules don't ever really change (where as online video games constantly change for addition of new features and subsequent re-balancing of the game) so you're probably in more of a position to take a break and not come back completely confused. You'll be rusty, but you'll still be coming back to the same game.
Chess is kind of nice compared to the other games I play in that the game and its rules don't ever really change (where as online video games constantly change for addition of new features and subsequent re-balancing of the game) so you're probably in more of a position to take a break and not come back completely confused. You'll be rusty, but you'll still be coming back to the same game.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.