View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Apr 25, 2018 11:37 pm



Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
FlintEastwood - 1-2: W vs Saunders 151ECF [42:37] 
Author Message
Video Manager

Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 6:17 pm
Posts: 524
Post FlintEastwood - 1-2: W vs Saunders 151ECF [42:37]
Poster: FlintEastwood
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000) | Videos Made: 6
Login or register to rate this video...
Average Rating: 5.00 (3)

Video Tags: Alekhine-Chatard Attack French Gambit Tournament

Video Download: Login or register to download this video for your iPhone/iPod Touch

Like (Login Required)
Liked By: kamus, eimaj, NightMover, Moa


Thu Jun 19, 2014 7:11 am
Profile
King

Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:45 am
Posts: 805
Location: England
Rating: 1840
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
Post Re: FlintEastwood - 1-2: W vs Saunders 151ECF [42:37]
Sorry for the weird cracking sound, I'm not sure why that happened...will try to sort it for the next vid.


Thu Jun 19, 2014 7:58 am
Profile
King

Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 2:38 am
Posts: 745
Rating: 1802
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
Post Re: FlintEastwood - 1-2: W vs Saunders 151ECF [42:37]
Hi Flint. Enjoyed this game, thanks!

I did feel the pace was a bit slow. You kind of got caught up in side variations a lot. This was something I was a lot worse than you at when I first started making videos.

Sarc

_________________
http://www.chessvideos.tv/wiki/index.php/Sarciness%27_Videos


Sun Jun 22, 2014 2:31 am
Profile WWW
King

Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:45 am
Posts: 805
Location: England
Rating: 1840
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
Post Re: FlintEastwood - 1-2: W vs Saunders 151ECF [42:37]
Sarciness wrote:
Hi Flint. Enjoyed this game, thanks!

I did feel the pace was a bit slow. You kind of got caught up in side variations a lot. This was something I was a lot worse than you at when I first started making videos.

Sarc


Hi, thanks for watching. I'm glad you liked the game!

I guess the variation analysis is a matter of taste. Personally I learn more from watching videos which show how play could have been improved. In the case of this game there were quite a few mistakes to learn from. :)

If the general consensus is that the vids are too long I'll tighten them up, but probably for every person that prefers faster videos there will be somebody else who prefers longer. Anyone else reading this, let me know your thoughts!


Sun Jun 22, 2014 10:55 am
Profile
Knight

Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2008 8:21 pm
Posts: 48
Rating Class: Class C (1400-1600)
Post Re: FlintEastwood - 1-2: W vs Saunders 151ECF [42:37]
Leaving aside length and how long to spend on sidelines etc., I do like the spontaneity of your videos, the fact that you don't prep them too much. I feel that way you get more insight into how the player thinks about the positions at the board. I feel this is more valuable than videos where the producer has simply analyzed the positions with a computer in advance (which is kind of boring at times). I much prefer seeing how the player would approach a position at the board and you do that really well, even though you are looking at the game in hindsight.


Mon Jun 23, 2014 12:29 am
Profile
King

Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:45 am
Posts: 805
Location: England
Rating: 1840
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
Post Re: FlintEastwood - 1-2: W vs Saunders 151ECF [42:37]
Thanks Nightmover! Actually I do spend a couple of hours analysing the game before I make a vid, but I don't have Houdini on the whole time, or sometimes forget to check another idea that I was thinking about. I also like it when vid makers do this, like Greg for example. I find it also gives time to the viewer to mull over the position and makes the vid a bit more engaging. The result is of course that it is longer/slower paced, which - again - probably isn't to everybody's taste. But personally I feel I get more from the vids (as a viewer) when they are like this so I try to make them the same way.


Wed Jun 25, 2014 2:45 am
Profile
King

Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 4:59 am
Posts: 1442
Rating: 2200
Rating Class: National Master
Post Re: FlintEastwood - 1-2: W vs Saunders 151ECF [42:37]
Flint, try asking yourself what both you and your opponent both ' want ', rather than just describing the current situation. You are not a computer, you should not just ' try ' a move and look for ways to justify it. To have a idea ( starting point for analysis ) you must be able to name it. For example, in the early part of the video the move Rh6 is suggested, but you said you did not understand it. Rh6 is a blocking move ( the idea! ). One rook holds all of blacks kingside - his rook, knight etc. A fixed point which cannot move is a weakness. You would follow with simple development and build up pressure against the h7 pawn. Another reason to start analysis from the point of an idea is it makes calculation better. Rh6 would be a strategic idea. Sacrificing a knight for both central black pawns early in the game, would also be a strategic idea. Asking what black wants would start your tactical calculations with him playing moves like Nxd4 and Qb4 in response to any Qg4 attacking his g7 pawn. A computer might not even mention such moves as candidates, but both the computer and a strong player would have to start calculating variations with these moves first, if only to dismiss them. Why start with such moves? Because if they work for black, white will lose instantly. Computers can make human analysis very lazy.

I mention the above because I do not want you to train and perfect the wrong way of thinking.

There are very few ideas in this world that allow us humans to make sense of it, and in chess even fewer.

For example - you can block something ( physically stop it from moving ) 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.cxd5 sometime, and target the d pawn which cannot move, just like Rh6 idea in your game. No difference. In the endgame Ke7 pawn f2 against black Kc7. The white king blocks the black king who is not in time to capture the pawn. Same idea in all three examples. In chess the last example is called the seventh rank opposition. The second example is called the Carlsbad central strategy. The first example restraint. Lesser minds confuse themselves and others by pointing out what something is like and describing it, when really to understand you just need ( must ) note the difference between things. The variations in how they apply. Sometimes there is no difference and it is just a case of not being able to see the woods for the trees.

It is a brave thing to lay open your thoughts in a public format. I shudder at the newspaper articles I wrote 20 years ago. It is the mistakes we make that allow us to learn. Public mistakes burn lessons so much faster. Though there was little I agreed with in this video, I think it was well worth doing - even vital for your chess understanding and improvement.

Good luck.


Sat Jun 28, 2014 6:43 am
Profile ICQ
King

Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:45 am
Posts: 805
Location: England
Rating: 1840
Rating Class: Class A (1800-2000)
Post Re: FlintEastwood - 1-2: W vs Saunders 151ECF [42:37]
Thanks for the feedback and advice Pobble! Actually Rh6 was my idea, not the computers. But I didn't think it was the strongest continuation. I understood the idea of blockading and making use of the h-file, but for whatever reason chose another continuation.

I guess the problem is I know the video will be very long anyway so when I make it I don't always focus on every single idea in the game. Also in general I analyse without the computer first - this one, I spent about 4 hours on, just using Houdini to check my analysis rather than tell me from the beginning. Although, in the video I do see some new ideas (like the knight sac) which I check with Houdini for the sake of brevity.

I'm in a rush but will read and reply properly later. Thanks again! I do feel this tourney will be an important learning curve for me, so I am starting chess tuition starting next week to ensure that - as you say - I don't perfect the wrong way of thinking :)

Also aside from Rh6 I am very interested to hear what else you disagreed on. Can you pinpoint any specifics (in terms of things I overlooked, or the way I misunderstood a certain continuation)? I would really be very grateful. Thanks!


Sat Jun 28, 2014 10:17 am
Profile
King

Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 4:59 am
Posts: 1442
Rating: 2200
Rating Class: National Master
Post Re: FlintEastwood - 1-2: W vs Saunders 151ECF [42:37]
Do not concern yourself over details. It is the correct thinking process which matters most. The correct thinking process will change the way you see everything in chess.

I am interested in who your getting lessons from. Lessons must be systematic. You must be able to see how lessons build up upon each other.

There are some very good teachers out there, but also a lot of very bad ones.


Sun Jun 29, 2014 4:10 am
Profile ICQ
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 9 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF