2024-12-12
Ding Liren - Wikipedia
Personal life
He is accompanied by his mother on his travels. In an interview with Die Zeit in February 2024 he said he was dysphoric and had problems sleeping. In November 2024 he was quoted as saying he simply no longer enjoyed his work and suffered psychological problems.
He is accompanied by his mother on his travels. In an interview with Die Zeit in February 2024 he said he was dysphoric and had problems sleeping. In November 2024 he was quoted as saying he simply no longer enjoyed his work and suffered psychological problems.
2024-12-01
2024-11-26
Testing old chess computers through emulation
In the days before everyone had computers, if you wanted to play chess, your only option was to play with another person. In the late 1970's Fidelity introduced a series of electronic computer chess games. These early models played poorly, but I knew people who bought them just to be able to play and practice whenever they wanted. I managed to borrow a few of these so that I could get a feel for how well they played.
Although the early machines did not play well, things started to improve in the 1980s. There was a golden age of dedicated chess computers that went from 1983 to about 1993. In 1984, I purchased the Novag Super Constellation electronic chess game for what I think was $200, which was quite a bit of money in 1984. The U.S. Chess Federation had given it a rating of 2018, which is better than at least 90% of all adult tournament players. Any rating between 2000 and 2199 is considered to be the skill level of "Expert" and a higher rating of 2200 is considered to be "Master."
Although I am currently rated 2016, at the time I bought the
Novag Super Constellation I was rated just a little over 1700. In a few months, I would reach a rating of 1800 which is considered to be "Class A." Nevertheless, what I remember about the Novag Super Constellation is that it played better than me, which is surprising since it only contains an 8-bit processor running at just 4 MHZ. That is not very fast compared to modern 64-bit processors with multiple cores running at gigahertz speeds.
Over time, I bought a couple of better chess-playing computers and I have fond memories of practicing with all of them. I sold all these machines when I got a desktop computer in the mid-'90s, but I kind of regret it because they all were fun to play with it.
This became an issue when I was researching these old chess-playing computers where I saw many online claims that these computers were not as good as the ratings that had been assigned to them. For example, I saw the claim that the Novag Super Constellation was only about 1750 strength, and two other computers that I owned rated 2100 and 2265 were also claimed to be weaker than their advertised ratings. None of these claims match my experience, since all of the computers played better than I did.
I was so curious about this that I wanted to get my hands on one of the old chess computers, assuming that one can be found, however unlikely, and see how it compares to my current chess ability. Fortunately, I found software that allows me to emulate dozens of old chess computers on my Windows PC.
In my first game against the emulated Novag Super Constellation on level 1, the lowest level, I was able to win by only the slimmest of margins. I tried the same thing on the Fidelity Designer 2100, a slightly better machine, and I lost. I have no doubt that the other computer I owned, the stronger Fidelity Designer 2265, would stomp me like it used to when I played it 30 years ago. I will confirm this eventually.
So I tested a variety of chess computers with a somewhat difficult chess problem..
Based upon my testing, this is how long various chess computers take to solve this chess problem...
| # | Model | Year | Processor | Speed | ROM | Time | Depth | Nodes/S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
It is noteworthy that the Super Constellation solved the problem in roughly 2 minutes, which is within tournament time controls. I am disappointed in Chessmaster on the Super Nintendo because it failed to achieve this. It is running on a similar processor, and it is a port of Chessmaster 2000 written by Dave Kittinger, who also wrote the Super Constellation program!
* The second version of the Constellation 3.6 solves this problem on its top two tournament levels, but the first version moves too quickly to see the answer. It can only solve the problem on its infinite level, even though it takes about the same amount of time to see the solution. The second ROM set is based upon the Novag Expert program.
Super Constellation game #1.2024-11-21
2024-11-18
2024-11-15
Magnus - I am not a Perfectionist
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/gChcUAJ62HI
I am guilty of spending too much time on positions looking for the perfect move
2024-11-11
2024-11-04
2024-10-26
Thoughts on Getting Better at Chess
Players need to work on tactical pattern recognition and calculation. These are two sides of the same coin. We can't calculate very well unless we can also recognize the patterns on the chessboard.
My personal goal is to be able to either recognize or calculate 3 move tactics while playing speed chess. I think that there is a difference from 1500 to 2000 where the players go from calculating tactics to recognizing more of them instantly. Starting in the mid-1990s, I spent a great deal of time studying tactics and this took me from 1800 to 2000.
Many people claim that speed chess is bad, but I don't agree. It builds pattern recognition and teaches quick calculation, although it depends upon the person. Speed chess can create bad habits and some people just need more time to calculate.
There is this idea called "The Woodpecker Method" and a book by the same name. The method is to study the same set of a thousand tactical problems repeatedly. Each time you do them you will get faster at doing the entire set. Another author, Michael de La Maza, had the same idea in a book called "Rapid Chess Improvement". Before he wrote his book, he first published it as an article, but first, he sent the article to me to ask what I thought of it because I had already created a website advocating a similar idea.
I inadvertently discovered this method when I created my chess lesson website around 1996. The Internet was still very young and there wasn't much chess content so Chess Life magazine gave me an "award" for my site. After I spent months creating the 1, 2, and 3 move problems on my site, I challenged myself to see how long it would take me to go through each set of the white-to-move and black-to-move problems. It took a long time. However, the second and every subsequent pass was faster. I think that a 2000-level player should be able to get through each set of 1, 2, and 3 move problems in 30 minutes, but only after much practice. I have achieved this many times, but now I fall short so I intend to study the problems more.
I've been accused of just memorizing the answers to all my problems and not doing any actual tactical calculation. This is half right. For some problems, I remember the answers, but for others, I just remember the pattern involved and a few I don't remember at all. Even if the accusation were 100% correct, this would not be a bad thing. Chess skill relies on remembering what we have seen before and recognizing those patterns over the board.
Some people improve just by playing a ton of games, and this can work, but I think that it is less effective than studying tactics. Although most people play a great deal, I don't play many games and prefer to spend my time studying chess.
I also have thoughts on what it takes to become a chess master...
In the late 1970s, I studied basic King and Pawn endgames and became proficient at them. In the mid-1990s I studied more complex king and pawn endgames, all of which were from my games, and became skilled at those. I didn't have to memorize these endgames because I understood why the moves were correct. It is easier to retain information if you understand it, but this is harder to apply to other areas of the game like openings. I think that endgames are easy to learn, except the more difficult ones like the bishop and knight mate or the queen versus rook ending.
I have a full course covering King and Pawn Endings on my website.
My point is that I think that it is possible to take one small area of the game and master it. I have done this with King and Pawn Endgames. Chess is not just one skill, but many, so I think that a person could master chess by just focusing on one aspect of the game until they master it, and then move on to studying a different aspect of the game. For example, I think that it is possible to learn a particular opening as well as a master, although this would require much effort.
Online ratings mean very little to me. I can't control how well the anonymous person on the Internet plays or if they are cheating, which many of them do. What matters to me is how well I play. Likewise, losing games at the chess club doesn't phase me. I see losses as an opportunity to learn something. My goal is to always keep learning. Losing a game doesn't mean that I am a bad player, and I have confidence in my chess skill. I have no problem playing and losing to stronger players because my goal is to play the best that I am able regardless of the result.
2024-10-18
Chess Level 02: Black to Play
I think that this is interesting.
2024-10-14
Magnus explained why Chess is popular
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/aGc5lYv3cvI
Chess is too complicated for humans to completely master, but Magnus Carlsen has come closer than anyone.
KQ vs. KR Endgame
Recently, I have put much effort into learning the endgame KQ vs. KR. This is probably the most difficult chess endgame to study. Many moves are counterintuitive compared to other endgames where you crowd the enemy king until you get forced checkmate.
It tempting in many positions to check horizontally or vertically. This is often wrong, and the correct procedure is to check once or twice along a diagonal before checking horizontally or vertically. In some positions, the best move is to not check but attack the squares around the opponent's king. To win, you have to be able to calculate well.
Against a good defense, there is a desired position that you must reach to separate the King and Rook. I note this position on the web page below.
This is also the kind of ending that you might only see twice in a lifetime. Because of the difficulty, studying it might not be time well spent. You cannot learn it overnight or just through general principles.
However, I want to be prepared for it.
I have created 33 study positions on the webpage below. These start with the easiest and progress gradually to the more difficult. Most problems build upon the ones that came before them.
If you are interested, scroll down until you see "KQ vs. KR" on the right side.
This is not yet complete. I plan to add more positions regarding the "3rd rank defense" and how to push the enemy king to the corner.
2024-10-02
Trying out the NEW Internet Chess Club
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73oJD5nf3Ok
The different speeds of playing chess from the fastest to the slowest are called: Bullet, Blitz or Speed Chess, Rapid or Quick Chess, Action Chess (Antiquated. Between 30 and 59 minutes per player.), Standard, and finally Correspondence or Postal Chess, also known online as Daily.
@john2001plus
9 minutes ago (edited)
As far as I know, ICC was the first place on the Internet to play chess.
I joined ICC back around 1995. I didn't even have the World Wide Web at that point. I had used a text-only version of the Internet called "Usenet" for about five years. Within a few months, I downloaded Netscape and accessed the World Wide Web for the first time. It was slow and I had no idea what to do with it. There was hardly any content.
So back then to play chess on ICC you had to download a program that would act as a graphical user interface. It communicated with the server using text but displayed the board on the screen. The most popular program was called "Ziics", but it would be later replaced by a program called Blitzn which was the standard until recently.
BTW, back in the mid-90s, I was having an online chat with the owner of ICC, who told me that he was inventing a new time control, which was less than 3 minutes for the whole game. He wanted to know if I had any ideas for a name for the new time control. I tried to come up with something, but he suddenly had an inspiration and called it "bullet". I told him that this was a terrible name because what do guns have to do with chess? However, he stuck to his guns, sort of speak.
The different speeds of playing chess from the fastest to the slowest are called: Bullet, Blitz or Speed Chess, Rapid or Quick Chess, Action Chess (Antiquated. Between 30 and 59 minutes per player.), Standard, and finally Correspondence or Postal Chess, also known online as Daily.
@john2001plus
9 minutes ago (edited)
As far as I know, ICC was the first place on the Internet to play chess.
I joined ICC back around 1995. I didn't even have the World Wide Web at that point. I had used a text-only version of the Internet called "Usenet" for about five years. Within a few months, I downloaded Netscape and accessed the World Wide Web for the first time. It was slow and I had no idea what to do with it. There was hardly any content.
So back then to play chess on ICC you had to download a program that would act as a graphical user interface. It communicated with the server using text but displayed the board on the screen. The most popular program was called "Ziics", but it would be later replaced by a program called Blitzn which was the standard until recently.
BTW, back in the mid-90s, I was having an online chat with the owner of ICC, who told me that he was inventing a new time control, which was less than 3 minutes for the whole game. He wanted to know if I had any ideas for a name for the new time control. I tried to come up with something, but he suddenly had an inspiration and called it "bullet". I told him that this was a terrible name because what do guns have to do with chess? However, he stuck to his guns, sort of speak.
2024-09-24
Hitler vs Lenin | Chess Game in 1909
https://youtu.be/GYUQYsLWlMI?si=uvwAv7afS2WIOh6E
There is an old story about Hitler and Lenin playing a chess game and there is even a drawing depicting this, but many historians think that it is a myth.
Many famous people played chess. Albert Einstein played Robert Oppenheimer. Mike Tyson played Muhammad Ali. Humphrey Bogart and John Lennon were both officially Experts. Many movie stars would play chess on movie sets while waiting for their scenes, such as John Wayne, Lauren Bacall, and Tony Randall.
Benjamin Franklin was an avid player and met the French master Philidor.
There is an old story about Hitler and Lenin playing a chess game and there is even a drawing depicting this, but many historians think that it is a myth.
Many famous people played chess. Albert Einstein played Robert Oppenheimer. Mike Tyson played Muhammad Ali. Humphrey Bogart and John Lennon were both officially Experts. Many movie stars would play chess on movie sets while waiting for their scenes, such as John Wayne, Lauren Bacall, and Tony Randall.
Benjamin Franklin was an avid player and met the French master Philidor.
2024-09-16
2024-09-08
2024-08-30
2024-08-15
2024-08-14
Magnus on Generational Shifts
This is interesting. Magnus Carlsen relies a great deal on intuition. In an interview from about a dozen years ago, he said that he usually sees the best move right away, but still has to calculate to ensure that intuition is correct. His pattern recognition is the best in the world. He seems to know more about chess than anyone else.
Kasparov and Fischer were better at chess calculation than anyone in their generation. As a result, they tended to play aggressively. Karpov had a completely different style, where he was a strategic player who relied on being able to outmaneuver his opponents. Magnus Carlsen can do both, making him a nearly perfect chess player.
However, in recent years, we have seen the rise of many young players, especially from India and Asia, who could someday become World Champion.
2024-08-09
2024-08-03
2024-07-27
Symmetrical English Opening
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: John Coffey <john2001plus@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jul 27, 2024 at 6:57 PM
Subject: Symmetrical English Opening
To: Jay, John, Craig
This is the last game I want to share from our group coaching session.
It is most likely the best ten-minute game I have ever played.
https://onethousandpositionstochessmastery.blogspot.com/2024/07/symmetrical-english-opening.html
I am in the process of updating both of my chess lesson websites, which mirror each other. I plan to drop my web-hosted site next year and stop paying for it because the free blog page is good enough.
On the blog page, I have ordered the games chronologically, which is meant to show the advancement of my playing style over the last 50 years.
I have a detailed endgame lesson I could give some time. It would take maybe 1.5 to 2.5 hours.
P.S. Although I have added a bunch of games, both sites contain a bunch of unnecessary posts that I am going to remove.
--
Best wishes,
John Coffey
http://www.entertainmentjourney.com
From: John Coffey <john2001plus@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Jul 27, 2024 at 6:57 PM
Subject: Symmetrical English Opening
To: Jay, John, Craig
This is the last game I want to share from our group coaching session.
It is most likely the best ten-minute game I have ever played.
https://onethousandpositionstochessmastery.blogspot.com/2024/07/symmetrical-english-opening.html
I am in the process of updating both of my chess lesson websites, which mirror each other. I plan to drop my web-hosted site next year and stop paying for it because the free blog page is good enough.
On the blog page, I have ordered the games chronologically, which is meant to show the advancement of my playing style over the last 50 years.
I have a detailed endgame lesson I could give some time. It would take maybe 1.5 to 2.5 hours.
P.S. Although I have added a bunch of games, both sites contain a bunch of unnecessary posts that I am going to remove.
--
Best wishes,
John Coffey
http://www.entertainmentjourney.com
Slav Defense
I hadn't looked at this game for a very long time, but it is interesting enough that I want to share it.
It is maybe more complicated than most games I share.
2024-07-21
Utah Senior Championship, June 2010
I spent some time analyzing an old game which I think is instructive...
2024-07-18
2024-07-15
Fwd: French Advance Variation
FYI.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: John Coffey <john2001plus@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 12:21 PM
Subject: French Advance Variation
To:
From: John Coffey <john2001plus@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 12:21 PM
Subject: French Advance Variation
To:
I would have shown this game if we had more time, but our session was long as it was.
2024-07-04
2024-06-27
Chess Game as best as I can remember
[Event "Columbus Chess Club"]
[Site "Lewellen Chapel"]
[Date "Jun 27, 2024"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Omar"]
[Black "John Coffey"]
[Result "0-1"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. g3 e5 3. dxe5 Ng4 4. e4 d6 5. exd6 Bxd6 6. Nc3 O-O 7. f3 Nxh2 8.
Bf4 Bxf4 9. gxf4 Qh4+ 10. Ke2 Qxf4 11. Qd2 Qxd2+ 12. Kxd2 Nxf1+ 13. Rxf1 Nc6
14. Nd5 Be6 15. Ne2 Rad8 16. c4 Ne5 17. Kc3 g6 (17… Nxc4?? 18. Ne7+ Kh8 19. Rxh7+!) 18. Nef4 Bxd5 19. cxd5 Kg7
0-1 eventually
[Site "Lewellen Chapel"]
[Date "Jun 27, 2024"]
[Round "5"]
[White "Omar"]
[Black "John Coffey"]
[Result "0-1"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. g3 e5 3. dxe5 Ng4 4. e4 d6 5. exd6 Bxd6 6. Nc3 O-O 7. f3 Nxh2 8.
Bf4 Bxf4 9. gxf4 Qh4+ 10. Ke2 Qxf4 11. Qd2 Qxd2+ 12. Kxd2 Nxf1+ 13. Rxf1 Nc6
14. Nd5 Be6 15. Ne2 Rad8 16. c4 Ne5 17. Kc3 g6 (17… Nxc4?? 18. Ne7+ Kh8 19. Rxh7+!) 18. Nef4 Bxd5 19. cxd5 Kg7
0-1 eventually
2024-06-26
2024-06-02
Familiar Endgame
I have reached this king and pawn endgame a couple of times, once online and once in a tournament, so I studied it. I show this endgame in my chess lessons.
The rise of American Hikaru Nakamura
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7hhB7Oko2A&t=1126s
We are also seeing the rise of Indian players.
I watched Nakamura play in a speed chess tournament at the National Open in Vegas when he was 10 to 12 years old. He beat a Grandmaster.
2024-06-01
2024-05-06
2024-05-04
2024-04-30
2024-04-23
2024-04-21
2024-04-19
Re: KPPPP vs. KPPPP
The first time I did this problem, I was impulsive and got it wrong. It is not that difficult.
https://www.chess.com/puzzles/problem/588620/practice
2024-04-11
2024-03-18
Chess Puzzles
I've done this problem a few times. I go back over the problems that I have done before.
This problem has given me some difficulty. I suppose that it is a relatively simple king chase, but my brain doesn't like to calculate that far ahead.
2024-02-17
2024-02-14
Chess IS IN DANGER...
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/6Qw5D8DZMOI
I have no opinion about this whatsoever. I like chess.com so I am willing to pay for it. I am also willing to play some on lichess.
2024-01-26
Push to 3000 on chess.com puzzle rating
The puzzle ratings on chess.com don't correspond in any way to USCF ratings. I complained about this to chess.com, but they responded that their puzzle ratings are where they want to them to be. (BTW, the upper limit on puzzle ratings is ridiculously high at around 32768. Some people have actually reached this limit. For computer nerds like me, this matches the upper limit on a 16-bit signed number. This tells me that they are using 16 bits to store ratings in their database.)
I wanted to see if I could push my Chess.com puzzle rating up to 3000. I've been there before, but it is a hard rating to maintain.
My puzzle rating averaged around 2935. At this level, I am almost as likely to fail to solve a puzzle as I am to succeed.
I had a theory that if I did enough puzzles I could reach 3000 through a "random walk". The idea was that if I bounced up and down enough I would eventually hit 3000 through random variation. This wouldn't mean that I deserve to be at 3000, but got lucky.
It appears to me that chess.com will present puzzles with a sizeable range of difficulty. This is where luck plays a factor. However, every time my rating would creep up, I would face problems that seemed too difficult. This definitely took me out of my comfort zone.
It took me about 2.5 hours to reach 3000. However, to get there I had to analyze at a deeper level than I am used to. Whereas the simple chess problems on my website are designed to build pattern recognition, it seems to me that the puzzles on chess.com are more of a measure of how well a person can analyze. However, pattern recognition is still a factor.
2024-01-20
2024-01-11
White to play and mate in 2 moves
Composed chess problems often involve zugzwang, which essentially means that after our move every possible move of the opponent leads to a loss.
2024-01-10
HIKARU vs LEVY: EPIC CHESS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJCHzQpCjSA
I found this very instructive, more than the recap videos. I would like to see more like this.
@john2001plus
0 seconds agoI found this very instructive, more than the recap videos. I would like to see more like this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)