Technique

Who hasn't been infuriated when the commentator ends an analysis with "and the rest is a matter of technique"? Maybe for a GM these games are easy to finish, but frankly having a space advantage and better pawn structure is rarely a matter of easy victor for me. Good to see they have four lessons on "technique" in this month.

It would be helpful if they provided, if not an endgame lesson set, an endgame study plan (e.g., read this book etc). OTOH, they have enough in their lessons as it is

I completely agrees with you.

Looking at my statistics, i come to the conclusion that except in a few cases i do play the opening moves fine at least the 5 first moves, then i often deviate from the theory in moves 6-10, and it is generally where i loose against a well prepared opening master (but that depends, on some openings, *I* am the master, and manage to do good till move 15...).

But in general case, i play against players of the same level, and they do opening mistake (at least do not take advantage immediately of mine), and this lead to 2 situations.

1. i am able to get a decisive advantage after the opening, and I am generally able to convert it without too much difficulty.

2. the most common situation (else i would be 2300), i manage to get a balanced game, and the statistics says that in this case my performance is about 50%.

So i wondered why i was loosing half of the time ?
After analysing a lot of games with the computer, it appears to my great surprise, that my strategy was in fact rather good, and that i was loosing on blunders, tactical mistakes, too much confidence (not protecting the king), or complete blindness (do not see a threat, hang a piece, etc...), miscalculate a variation.

Of course sometimes, i am crushed by my opponent and do not understand why, but statistically i more often have a good position that i ruin, and not able to convert using "the so called play technique".

It was really surprising to me that in general i have a promising position, because i thought i was completely dummy on strategy, but following ICS lessons has helped and is paying.
But, till now, i do not know how to improve the other aspect, the "matter of technique" you speak about, i look forward to read these lessons !

yah I can with out a doubt see that phrase leaving you thinking what am I missing? unlike the opening of the game which theory changes all the time, end game has not. So with only a few pieces and pawns left on the board a set plan of play has been developed in most cases when played accurately will insure a win loss or draw depending on your position. Knowing this will help you recognize how to enter into and win or draw end game for yourself. All this means is that some technique has already been well established that decides the game.

things like opposition, lucena and philidor positions, bridging a past pawn, and rook and pawn end game play usually decide the out come. believe it or not there are actually pattern of play just like mate patterns. The old king and night vs king and rook. if played correctly this can be a draw game. That all, the hard part is memorizing the technique

I guess I could have given a good place to get this info duh! it can probably be found on the net somewhere. Probably one of the best endgame books around is silman's complete endgame course. another is a guide to rook endings. If you get through those too you should know just about everything you up to about 2200. beyond that read dvoretsky's endgame manual.

Thanks phoenix. Silmans book, the chapters I've read, have been very helpful.

I support all of the comments above.
I have benefited probably more from this course than many people as I have probably spent more time understanding the endgame than anything else in chess.
This may sound like a bit of a cliche but I have tended to take the approach of... If you can't play the game with 2 or 3 pieces and the potential combinations therein what chance have you with 16.
I definitely use this when teaching kids. What is the point in getting the knight in a nice outpost on d6 if you dont know how to mate with a Rook, queen a pawn or win the lucena position.

The idea of a structured study of endgames would be very nice. I think the Silman's Complete Endgame course will help me once I get through it, but a structured study plan recommended by a master level player would be certainly very helpful!

BorgQueen wrote:The idea of a structured study of endgames would be very nice. I think the Silman's Complete Endgame course will help me once I get through it, but a structured study plan recommended by a master level player would be certainly very helpful!

My plan was to spend this year with my primary focus on Mastering endgames, however it has taken a backseat to this course. The plan recommended to me by a GM consisted of mastering it, in this order, pawns, pawn and piece(first R then Q then N then B) then simple Rooks, then simple Bishops of same color, then B opposite, that was suppose to last me thru yr 1, then I would go to complex Q, Rooks, Minors, etc.

For those thinking it is not a lot, which I did at first, remember you are mastering the positions. I am just finishing up Pawns after 4 months, due to my focus actually being on this course and it is taking most of my study time. However, I can look at a board with only K and Pawns and tell you the correct plan for both sides within 2mins some are obviously much easier, but dbl p positions take a while longer (the goal is 30 seconds so I am still working on it LOL) Huh, I lost my train of thought...anyway its tough to fit in ICS, tactics, endgame, openings, playing chess with a wife, kids and company. So I guess I cant complain...hope this info helps.

Yes, it is difficult indeed to fit in all the desired studies with the rest of life... unless you're a professional chess player.