📈 A Complete Guide to Your Chess Progress. Get "Level Up Your Chess" - online.chess-teacher.com/course/level-up-your-chess/ 💡Get The Crystal-Clear Guide To Reach 2000+ ELO Rating Faster . Join the FREE Masterclass ► chess-teacher.net/masterclassyt/
► Chapters 00:00 3 Tips To Calculate Better In Chess 00:10 Example 00:36 Tip-1 (calculating your moves) 04:12 Tip-2 (calculating opponent's moves) 05:24 When to STOP calculating a variation? 06:35 Tip-3 09:53 Visualization Training 13:01 Positional understanding helps your calculation
Great as usual, but can you do a video on how to calculate when you're deep into the middle game and your pieces are spread out and un-coordinated. What is the principle for restoring order to really chaotic situations?
I'm not a chess master myself, but from what I know as an intermediate player, perhaps the approach to "un-fudging" your positional structure is to think to yourself "how can I improve each piece so that it has more available squares to move to later?" Examine your position. Figure out which pieces seem badly placed (which ones seem to have a very limited amount of available squares to move to) and then seek to improve their positioning. For each piece whose position you're trying to improve, figure out how to improve its position. You may need to move it around another piece to get it onto a square or line where it can see more squares in its new position. You may need to move another piece out of its way so that it can see more squares from its current position. In some cases, you might try to exchange it for one of your opponent's more active pieces. Try to trade it for one of your opponent's good pieces (in this context, a piece that has plenty of available squares for it to use). That way, your position improves by getting rid of a bad piece that was clogging up the rest of your position. You also have the additional benefit that you made your opponent's position somewhat worse since you diminish the amount of activity and space control in their position by trading one of your inactive pieces for one of their active pieces. Anyway, there's probably a whole world of positional theory knowledge about how to skillfully maneuver one's pieces, but here are at least a couple simple ideas to help you get started.
@@johnwalker1058 OK, but I'm really thinking of bullet and blitz games where time is limited to calculate, and I am looking for a simple strategy or rule of thumb to re-order pieces that have been scattered.
Personally, I just believe in improving the best piece. Identify the worst piece, which is usually the most passive or the one with the least prospects, and reroute it to a better position. If all pieces seem equally advantaged, look for a weakness to target or look to create a weakness. If there are no Weaknesses for your opponent and your pieces are all bad, you've probably messed it up too badly already
I bought your superpack with the huge discount, and all i can say is, wow, I bought a brain of a GM, and no one in my chess club knows your secrets (including my coaches). Thank you for creating these courses and bringing me closer to my goal of getting a title!
Damn thanks for the stockfish diss at 5:45 i need to keep in mind that maybe it's not the objective truth, at least in attackers advantage. Maybe other things too.. How about a video on that?
Igor, can you do a "system" vid again? Your dutch system with f5 and b6 works great for me! I don't have to remember a ton of variations and get good games in which I know what to do. Often results in strong attacks for black! More systems please, I too tend to forget dozens of variations. Greatings from a big fan! You are leagues ahead of the YT competition!
Thanks Igor for all you do for the chess community. I'm still confused be example 1. Rook to B1 is bad because it's passive but Queen to D2 then Room to B1 is good? The knight defended by Queen to D2 was not under attack originally. In my mind the only thing that has happened by switching the move order from Rook to B1 then Queen to D2 if necessary is the loss of a pawn. Now, I know, because I'm not a GM that my thinking is incorrect but I still do not understand why.
The reason why this Qd2 line is playable for white is because they get compensation for that pawn. White can gain many tempos attacking the queen while they develop. If I was you, I’d play a3, as there’s a really cool queen trap if Qxb2.
@@ytth439Another difference between those two lines is that in the first, the Rook is just passively staring at its own pawn, whereas in the second, not only has White made two developing moves for free (Black has moved the Queen again both times), but also the Rook is now active and on a semi-open file, playing a part in the game.
This video has helped me get back to 2000+,but igor...how do you see an advanced advantage,like weak square,pawn structure,well developed pieces etc As in keeping your advantage... especially on pawn structure and opposite side castling?
Pretty good lesson again by igor smyrov again and I love you and your lessons so much❤ I have a question: in 8:05 what if he takes my bishop and then plays Qxb2? Does this make any difference?
Why do you even consider Knight takes Bf6? Isn't it a mistake to take? And isn't the Bishop a little stronger than the knight? What do you get out of that exchange?
Capturing the knight on f6 allows white to play nd5 on the next move (if you dont capture the knight on f6 before, black can just trade knights), which attacks the queen and threatens nc7+, forking the king and the rook. So it gives white a strong attack Moreover after exf6, the d6 pawn is backward and isolated, and white will very likely capture it later in the game because its so weak. And after gxf6 black's pawn structure on the kingside is in bad shape, and the black king could be in danger because castling would be unsafe
He just explained that!! You can put your knight on d5. To take is a mistake is a rule to remember when u want to trade unnecessarily or without a clear goal
Actually I don’t agree with Knight D5 on C7, cause black Queen next move will make a fork A5, and you’ll lose your Knight. Knight on B5 is much better, because it’s will be protected by rook. Am I correct? 13:59
8:33 what is wrong with the white bishop taking a pawn in this position? Letting the opponent develop their bishop? My understanding with the situation is that it's a "free" pawn because you were going to lose that bishop anyway, and if the opponent captures your knight in response they blunder a free piece to your bishop. So they have to take the bishop first and then you end up back at the same position but a pawn up. Clearly there must be something wrong with that logic if he didn't talk about that move being an option for an attacking move. I just don't see why.
