“There is really only one mistake in chess – underestimating your opponent” — TARTAKOWER
I found this session hard to prepare, and might try again! I have tried to find mistakes that are typical of a certain level of player – that is, mistakes of a characteristic kind, that better players no longer (or only rarely) make.
The hope is that these are the sorts of error most easily avoided. This document is subject to two caveats:
- All chessplayers make mistakes all the time. Moreover, you cannot extract a win from a position by effort alone, or the application of only your genius, your opponent must make a mistake.
- There are some mistakes that everybody makes. These probably include misjudging (or simply failing to spot) combinations and other opportunities, attacking without justification, inadequate technique, and thinking only for yourself.
So, mistakes are inevitable, but to be worked on – for example, try to eliminate one-move mistakes, then two-movers, and so on. I’m sure becoming more efficient or more consistent would for most of us result in a rise in grade without any great new insights being gained.
I originally started out trying to find examples of good ideas unique to each level (e.g. to find a good move by a Major player that a Minor player couldn’t have found) but this was much harder. Instead, I have given in the County player section, examples that we might all aspire to, and also offer a ‘good’ game for each lower level (“the player at their best”) which shows decent play using ideas which we may be able to see at all levels.
Books with annotated amateur games
Chess Master vs. Chess Amateur, Euwe and Meiden
The Amateur’s Mind, Jeremy Silman
The Improving Annotator, Dan Heisman
Thinkers’ Chess, Stephan Gerzadowicz (Correspondence games)
Magazines: Rabbits Review, Chess Circuit, Popular Chess
Minor BCF 80-100 (1240-1400 ELO)
The games of Minor players are often marred by tactical oversights, and the games are often decided that way. Is there any point in commenting further? Yes, because of two very important reasons:
- firstly, Alexander’s observation that blunders only occur in losing positions (not always, but more than a grain of truth), and
- secondly, that there are other things about their games which could be improved by greater understanding, even while blunders may appear.
In the opening, development is often started well and general rules are followed (e.g. move each piece once) but is at times too straightforward and is not always complete. After this the game may appear episodic, with not all the pieces being used to effect. In the endgame there may be some caution about using the King and theory is often not properly understood, but can win and advance pawns properly.
{D} Minor BCF 80-100 (1240-1400 ELO)
The games of Minor players are often marred by tactical oversights, and the games are often decided that way. Is there any point in commenting further? Yes, because of two very important reasons:
- firstly, Alexander’s observation that blunders only occur in losing positions (not always, but more than a grain of truth), and
- secondly, that there are other things about their games which could be improved by greater understanding, even while blunders may appear.
In the opening, development is often started well and general rules are followed (e.g. move each piece once) but is at times too straightforward and is not always complete. After this the game may appear episodic, with not all the pieces being used to effect. In the endgame there may be some caution about using the King and theory is often not properly understood, but can win and advance pawns properly.
The Minor player at their best:
The Minor Player at work in the Opening
The Minor Player at work in the Middle Game
The Minor Player at work in the Endgame
Good reading for Minor players:
An Opening Repertoire for the Attacking Player – Keene/Levy
Chess Openings for Juniors and Attacking the King – John Walker
Logical Chess – Irving Chernev
Chess Endings: Essential Knowledge – Averbach
Winning Endgames – Tony Kosten
Winning Chess – Chernev/Reinfeld
{C} Intermediate BCF 100-120 (1400-1560 ELO)
Intermediate players are usually pretty efficient – solid, get their pieces out properly, play sensibly against odd moves and have mastered the King’s-side hack. There is a tendency to adopt fortress-like defensive blockades in the middle-game, and may overlook unobvious moves, or tactics in quiet positions. They know basic book wins in the endgame but may only defend rather than seeking counterplay.
The Intermediate player at their best:
The Intermediate Player at work in the Opening
The Intermediate Player at work in the Middle Game
The Intermediate Player at work in the Endgame
Good reading for Intermediate players:
Repertoire books e.g. Winning with…
Think/Play like a Grandmaster – Kotov
Rate Your Endgame – Mednis/Crouch
Test Your Chess IQ (Book 1) – Livshitz
The Middle Game (I/II) – Euwe and Kramer
Simple Chess – Michael Stean
{B} Major BCF 120-150 (1560-1800 ELO)
Major players usually have a well-worked-out opening repertoire and can set their opponents problems in each phase of the game. Even 200-grade players cannot dismiss the better Major contenders as easy prey.
There are standard plans and “clockwork” attacks which the Major player understands and plays well. Where a solid formation is adopted there is usually also a view to some flexibility and keeping the pieces at least potentially active. They will seek counterplay and know how to limit the play of their opponents. They usually notice all the relevant features of the position even if they choose the wrong move/plan.
The Major player at their best:
The Major Player at work in the Opening
The Major Player at work in the Middle Game
The Major Player at work in the Endgame
Good reading for Major players:
Specialist monographs e.g. The Complete…
Practical Chess Endings – Keres
Batsford Chess Endings – Speelman et al.
Secrets of Grandmaster Play – Nunn/Griffiths
Reading as for intermediate players too.
{A} County BCF 150-180 (1800-2040 ELO)
The County player is an alert player of openings – they will often know some of the theory outside their own repertoire, and play their own lines with some depth – in fact, they play any sort of position pretty well.
They are beginning to master the art of analysis, being able to sustain assessment of a main line with variations throughout a tactical game, and in complex positions can isolate a theme and crystallise it. They defend much better than weaker players and swindle well.
In the endgame they do know a bit of theory, and can calculate well enough to improvise a strategy for unknown positions. How often I have embarked optimistically on a slightly worse endgame against county-strength players, only to be ground down without mercy. I often feel there are three games to be played at this level before you can secure the whole or half- point: once in the opening, middle and endgame.
Obviously there are still things that separate the lower from the higher (approaching 200) boards of county teams: things like judging positions on their merits rather than by analogy, and the coordination of their pieces. And of course, all the common threads (depth of analysis, thinking for the opponent, knowledge of theory) can all be expected to be stronger in the better player.