Forum pubblico/privato: Pubblico
Permessi di scrittura: Utenti registrati
Giorno: 28/01/2015, 09:59:16
Il titolo della versione inglese del libro di Soltis è:
"The inner game of chess. How calculate and win".
"...whenever you have to make a rook move and both rooks are available for said move - you should evaluate which rook to move and, once you have made up your mind... MOVE THE OTHER ONE!!!" - GM Oscar Panno
Giorno: 29/11/2020, 00:01:57
Link sponsorizzati
Giorno: 29/01/2015, 15:03:01
Del grandel Soltis segnalo il libro Studying chess made easy. Un libro molto utile che spiega in maniera esaustiva i metodi per imparare seriamente gli scacchi, fra cui quello da me menzionato del gioco attivo prima e dopo la teoria. Particolarmente interessante è il primo capitolo: pp.9-32 dove si discute approfonditamente il metodo di allenamento-apprendimento corretto per ogni aspirante giocatore.
Inoltre vi consiglio anche il classico di Reuben Fine
La psicologia del giocatore di scacchi, dove viene discussa ampiamente tutta la complessità psicologica del gioco e delle varie personalità dei campioni del mondo della storia passata. Secondo me è un libro altamente didattico e formativo, forse il primo libro che ogni giocatore esordiente dovrebbe leggere prima di affacciarsi nell'immensità degli scacchi.
Entrambi i libri sono facilmente reperibili in rete, soprattutto il primo. Scaricateli e leggeteli accuratamente, vi saranno di sicuro beneficio!!!

A titlo di esempio, riporto alcune frasi del libro di Soltis che mi hanno molto colpito:

There are better ways to learn chess, as I discovered over the
years. They follow a few elementary principles:
Learning chess should be fun
Let's face it, getting better at chess is hard. It's like learning a
foreign language. It takes repetition, memorizing and book study.
A lot of repetition, memorizing and book study.
There's so much that if you aren't enjoying yourself, you will
become discouraged, frustrated and bored. You will study less and
less. Or you'll give up entirely.
Fortunately, unlike many, if not most, school subjects, chess can be
fun to study. This book will try to identify some ways to make it so.
This leads to another principle of good studying ...
It has to include hands-on learning
There's a formula for improvement in chess and many other
things as well. You probably know it already:
Theory + Practice
= Success
9Chess isn't school
Theory means the technical material. It is opening theory. It is the
principles and finesses of handling the middlegame. And it is the
'exact' positions and techniques of the endgame, the good and bad
pawn structures and so on.
Most of the time that you spend studying theory you are
relatively passive. You sit back and receive information. This
happens when you are watching videos or listening to a teacher.
You are only slightly less passive when clicking through games on
a computer screen or reading a book.
What makes this worse is that much of the material being
presented to you will be fairly abstract. Teachers and authors like to
talk about subjects like 'the strength and weakness of an isolated d-
pawn.' But students usually get bored because they wonder how
they can apply the esoteric material to their own games.
Abstract themes and passive learning aren't necessarily bad. But
whatever you learn has to be underlined in a more active way.
Otherwise you will forget it, the way to you will forget
trigonometry once you stop using sines and cosines.
This is where practice comes in. Practice means playing games
against humans and machines in various fonnats and time limits.
When you get to apply - in a real game - what you've learned from
a book or computer screen, the information is reinforced in a
powerful way.
Black to play
10Chess isn't school
This position comes from one of the practice matches I played
with other young players at the Marshall Chess Club when I was
just starting out. I was beginning to spot some simple mating
patterns. Here I saw 1 ... .ttxh2+! and then 2 'iitxh2 :h8+ mates.
This is a basic tactical pattern. It's not very hard. The rook controls
the h-file and a bishop controls the king's escape square at gl.
I had read about this kind of combination in books. I'd never
gotten a chance to use it until this game. But after I got to play
1 ... lhh2+ it was indelibly etched in my memory. It was no longer
an abstract idea out of a textbook. When the pattern recurred in
later garnes, I never missed an opportunity to exploit it.
The more active the learning, the more fun it can be and the more
motivated you will be. Vishy Anand, the future world champion,
chose chess over tennis because of these factors.
Anand became serious about chess about the same time he was
serious about tennis. He took early morning lessons at a tennis
training camp. But the lessons consisted of drills. Just drills. No
games. It was theory without practice. He hated it.
"It just drove me nuts that at 5:30 in the morning I couldn't even
play tennis," Anand said in a recent interview. "I liked the chess
scene simply much more because I got to playas much as I
wanted."
Another principle of good chess study is ...
It should be mainly independent
The lessons that will stay with you are the ones you learned on
your own. They can be buttressed by talking to other people, such
as a teacher or friends. You get more out of looking at a game, an
opening, an ending, whatever if you follow it up by talking with
others.
But working alone works best. As Grandmaster Nikolai Krogius
said, exchanging opinions is fine. But "one must first form those
11Chess isn't school
opinions." We'll talk more about this in a few pages. Another
principle of good study is ...
It's often subliminal
This sounds strange, but the fact is you learn a lot about chess
without being aware of it.
Just flipping through the pages of a magazine and looking at
diagrams, or analyzing random positions with a board and pieces,
is beneficial. If you were lucky enough to have been born with the
ability to absorb information well and to focus your attention, this
kind of casual reading can be nearly as good as more intensive
study.
World Champion Jose Capablanca famously boasted he never
read chess books. He was known as the player who didn't have to
study to become great.
But he was studying in his own way. After all, Capablanca
flunked out of college after about a year and devoted his time to
chess. He rarely played serious games during the next few years.
Yet when he began to enter tournaments and matches he turned out
to be among the world's best players.
Capablanca may not have thought that what he was doing was
studying. But he was doing something right.
And the final point about good chess studying:
You have to be well motivated
You won't retain what you try to learn if you feel that the subject
matter isn't worth learning.
In school you may wonder whether it matters if you know the
year of the Battle of Waterloo. Well, after you're finished taking
history exams, it probably won't matter. And once you realize that,
you're likely to forget the year.
12Chess isn't school
But in chess there's a better chance you'll retain what you learn-
provided you know why you're learning it. Take the example of
how to mate with king, bishop and knight against a lone king.
White to play
Primers tell beginners they need to know this 'because it's a basic
checkmate.'
Well, that is a reason. But not an honest reason. Saying that this is
a 'basic checkmate' suggests that it occurs often. In fact, most
players will go through their entire career without getting a chance
to play either side. (I've never played it.)
But if you are given an honest reason, learning how to mate with
king, bishop and knight turns out to be one of the best lessons you
will ever have.
The real reason to study this endgame is it teaches you techniques
that you can apply to a much wider range of endgames. What you
learn from practicing it is that you can't deliver mate just by
checking the Black king. Instead, you have to restrict the king until
the net is tight enough for a mate.
You'll discover this quickly if you play the White pieces against a
computer. In fact, every player below expert strength would
probably benefit by playing out versions of this ending against a
machine.
This particular position offers a dramatic example of restricting.
13Chess isn't school
After 1 .li.b5! Black's king is caught in a net of six squares. It can't
escape because a6, b6, c6, c7, d7, e7 and eS are controlled by White's
minor pieces.
Even if White's king were at hI, the net would still hold. Mate
would just be delayed a few moves until the king arrives.
As it stands, the game should end in about a dozen moves. For
example, 1 ... ~c8 2 '1t>f6 'fit>d8 3 '1t>e6 ~c8 4 '1t>e7 '1t>b7 5 ~d8 ~b8.
White to play
After 6 .li.a6! ~a7 S i.cs Black is limited to three squares, a7, as
and bS.
The end comes when the knight goes beyond just restricting the
king - 8 ... 'itb8 9 Cfje7 ~a7 10 '1t>c7 '1t>a8 and now 11 .li.b7+ 'it'a7
12 Cfjc6 mate. Note that only one check was given and it came just
before checkmate.
The point here is that an aspiring player will benefit most from
this kind of exercise when he understands why it is useful: It
teaches him an extremely valuable and common technique.
The same goes with every other aspect of chess lore. It's simply
not enough to lecture to a student, "You must understand how to
triangulate because it's good for you."
Even players with so-called natural talent need motivation. Tony
Miles was a promising math student at the same time he was
becoming very good at chess. But he gave up his math studies in
14Chess isn't school
college. He wanted to apply his knowledge immediately. Only
chess allowed him to do that.
"I can't study something abstract that does not have practical
significance for me at the moment," he recalled many years later,
after he'd become a grandmaster. "I could find no impetus
whatever to study for an examination that I would have to do in
three years' time."

Leggetelo!!!ciao.gif
Giorno: 29/01/2015, 19:29:55
Ho un libro molto interessante che si intitola: "Pump up your rating" della Quality Chess. Non credo che sia stato tradotto in italiano.

Lo scopo dell'autore , il MI Axel Smith, è quello di insegnare a pensare e come allenarsi. Nella sua introduzione precisa che è pensato per giocatori "ambiziosi" dove per ambiziosi si intendono quei giocatori, non importa se maestri o semplixi categorie nazionali, che vogliono veramente migiorarsi. quindi è riservato, a mio parere, a giocatori che vogliono giocare tornei ufficiali.

Se siete interessati posso provare a dire qualcosa di più e se andate sul sito della Quality Chess potete anche scaricare un'anteprima in PDF.
Quanti psicologi ci vogliono per cambiare una lampadina? Solo uno ma a patto che la lampadina voglia veramente cambiare
Giorno: 03/02/2015, 18:53:14
Un ultimo consiglio che vorrei dare all'approccio di studio-allenamento-apprendimento-gioco è il seguente:
se non si ottengono dei buoni risultati praticando un certo tipo di allenamento, allora non abbiate timore di cambiare strada!
Se ad esempio trovate troppo ostici i finali all'inizio, allora dedicatevi solo alla TATTICA e ai MATTI FONDAMENTALI; se ritenete di aver qualcosa da dire sulle APERTURE allora cimentavi in esse, etc.
D'altronde l'approccio di ogni studioso verso il gioco è sempre diverso; chi ha doti mnemoniche può ad esempio seguire l'ultima strada; chi non lo è può pensare in termini di schemi come è consigliabile....
ciao.gif
Giorno: 04/02/2015, 14:04:22
@medievil
mi trovi in sintonia e la penso come te. Per questo ti prego di fare richiesta di entrare nel nostro circolo su gs. Ci stiamo attrezzando per seguire gli open di Mosca ed il leggere una voce critica che pensa e riflette prima di scrivere ci farebbe piacere
Giorno: 04/02/2015, 19:54:06
Prima o poi i nodi arrivano al pettine e bisognerà fare i conti con quello che non si è studiato.
Se decidiamo di non studiare i finali per ora,lo dobbiamo fare in futuro.
Anche se saliamo di punteggio,arriveremo ad un livello dove la conoscenza dei finali è essenziale e quindi dovremmo comunque studiarli.
Non ti porre troppe domande,alcune volte la risposta è quella che già sai o che non vuoi sapere.
Giorno: 17/02/2015, 21:04:20
Avrei voluto discutere con medievil su una sua frase su 3 posts dientro che riporto :
D'altronde l'approccio di ogni studioso verso il gioco è sempre diverso; chi ha doti mnemoniche può ad esempio seguire l'ultima strada; chi non lo è può pensare in termini di schemi come è consigliabile....

Qualcuno è riuscito ad unire la fase dell'apertura agli schemi, seguendo un concetto semplice ' l apertura prepara il mediogioco' ed il qualcuno è stato Mark Dvoretsky con un suo libro, frutto delle esperienze dei suoi corsi, "Opening Developments - School of Excellence 4" .
Il maestro (vero maestro e non come alcuni che scrivono "i libri non servono a niente, solo una cosa serve per imparare: giocare ed avere un istruttore") non parla di aperture ma come comportarsi e pensare in apertura in funzione del mediogioco...il resto viene da sè, e cioè, dare una etichetta o un nome all'apertura, aspetto mnemonico, è secondario e superfluo
Giorno: 18/02/2015, 13:45:59
Se il tema della discussione è "miglioramento",non bisognerebbe parlare di "aperture"non credete?
Non ti porre troppe domande,alcune volte la risposta è quella che già sai o che non vuoi sapere.
Giorno: 21/02/2015, 15:56:50
@Roberto54:
Nel suo libro Preparare le aperture, o Opening Preparation nella versione inglese(pp.113)nelle pagine 90-91 nella fattispecie, Mark Dvoretskij parla di "schema di apertura" da consigliare ai giocatori meno dotati mnemonicamente, anzichè lo scegliere la lunga trafila di lunghe e violenti varianti... Un esempio di "schema" può essere ad esempio il KIA o il Colle o il Londra per il Bianco, o che ne so 1...d6, 1...g6 o altre difese per il nero.La discussione sull'argomento è corredato da alcuni esempi. Questo è un libro che sto ancora studiando e che mi sembra molto interessante.
Se si possa migliorare o meno in apertura non spetta a me dirlo, solo un Maestro può dirlo.
Io nel mio piccolo posso solo dire che il miglioramento in questo stadio presuppone alle spalle una solida preparazione nel campo del mediogioco e dei finali. I motivi credo che si possano intuire facilmente, quindi non mi soffermo qui a spiegarli...
ciao.gif
Giorno: 21/02/2015, 21:18:40
scusami medievil, ma mi riferivo al corso "school of exellence" di dvoretsky e nel particolare al libro "opening developmets - school of exellence 4 "...sviluppo delle aperture, argomento che dvoretsky pone dopo i finali, il mediogioco e tattica-strategia, per i quali dedica un libro per ognuno di questi argomenti.