Hello ChessMood family, hello champions and future champions!
Welcome to the "Best games of September 2021" competition.
Under this post, we invite you to post the best games that you will play this month.
The Prize fund is 350K Moodcoins which is equal to 350$.
The 1st prize - 150K
The 2nd prize - 100K
The 3rd prize- 50K
The 4th Prize- 30k
The 5th Prize- 20k
Good luck with your games and keep the Right Mood!
#Right Mood - Right Move
Here are the winners of August:
Paul Alejandro Cardones
Here you can find sparring partners.
You can write, for example,
"Hey guys, my name is Bob, I'm from the USA, my rating is 2000 I'm looking for a sparring partner."
Or even more specific like "I just finished the Caro-Kann course and I'm looking someone to play a friendly sparring games".
Hopefully, you'll find good friends too.
Hello champions and welcome to the ChessMood team!
We all are from different countries, different ages, have different professions... But one thing bounds us - the passion for chess.
Champions, we'll grow together and keep a warm relationship in our team.
Please tell a bit about yourself in this post.
Hello champions and future champions! Hello ChessMood family!
Thank you all for sharing your games. It’s great to see you play some really strong chess! Keeping crushing the same way!
Moving on to the prizes,
The first prize goes to Jaylen Lenear for his Tal-like approach to finish the game.
The second prize goes to Vladimir Bugayev for the way he conducted a crushing attack in the Anti-Sicilian!
The third prize goes to Yuma Okabe for brilliantly handling the initiative after 11...Nxe4! and converting it into a win.
The 4th prize goes to Karl Strohmaier for this brilliant attack in the Accelerated Dragon.
The 5th prize goes to Paul Alejandro Cardones for the picturesque 16.Nce4#!
Congratulations to all of you, and thank you once again everybody for sharing your games!
Keep crushing, and keep the #COGRO
See you soon for next month’s contest.
Hello ChessMood Family!
Now I'm adding model games in each section of our course, so you have a better understanding of the positions. Some of them, I'll also add in the book, that I'm writing now (later about that.)
Why did I write this post? :)
If you played nice and instructive games with our ChessMood openings - please post here.
I would be happy to add them as well.
The first course, where I'm going to add model games, gonna be the Scotch game. If you want to make a research in your games, start from the Scotch :)
Chessmood team,good afternoon,hope u guys r doing well,i was wondering it would be much better if u guys provide pgn study material of endgame positions after viewers study the endgame course,or else u can also suggest an endgame excercise book,but i think first option will be awesome
I have just finished my second Over The Board tournament after eight months of COVID pause. I have entered with a rating around 1780 and played 7 games in the section A >= 1700. All my seven opponents were stronger, ranging from 2012 to 2311.
In the months leading to this tournament I mostly worked on my Chess Mood Openings. Now I realize, this was a mistake, as either main lines were avoided or in two cases where main lines were played I didn’t guessed them ahead of the match and was reviewing other openings.
Interestingly, all games were played with 1.e4 while recently (last two months) I was working intensively on my black 1.d4 repertoire :(
There are also some good news. My result was 5 points out of 7, which will give me about 150 ELO points raise as I stil have 40 coefficient.
I have spotted a few weaknesses in my game: calculation, endgame and concentration. For this reason I am canceling my next tournament due in three weeks in order to work exclusively on my middle and endgame.
My plan is to play >= 1900 tournament in September and to be successful I need to step up.
Now in order for you to understand my decision related to the openings I will post next screenshots from each round.
I would also like to hear, what do you think about my preparation for the next tournament.
And finally I might call the coach Avetik to use my yet unclaimed consultation hour for pro members.
Finally made 2200 in rapid on lichess.
Don't know if that would translate into breaking 2000 or 2100 FIDE when I can finally play over the board (safely) again. It does feel that even 2000s blunder quite badly which is rare for players 1800 and above over the board, as well as a lot of the points gained by 'eeking' (becoming a big fish by eating lots of small ones). On the other hand, I've had one or two games against 2300s where I was losing throughout the game and didn't even realise it was so one-sided until the end (I guess that's a whole new level to get to).
Current schedule is 2-3 15 0 games a day (+- 200 points) which I'm finding is excellent training, however I imagine at some point it's going to be hard to find opponents or those I do find I bunched up into a small area at the top (getting an opponent anything from 2000 to master).
Once again thanks to the Chessmood team and members.
Last night I played an OTB classical game at my local chess club as Black. After 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 g6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d3 Bg7, my opponent played 6. Nbd2. CM explores the main line 6. h3 and explains why 6. Nc3 is a mistake but I could not figure out during the game the downsides of 6. Nbd2. It seems like a good move as the knight was better posted on c4 eventually than c3 (he eventually anchored the knight with a4, preventing ....b5 kicking the knight. I will annotate the whole game and check some games in my database later today, but thought I would share this experience with others. - Sarathi
This message is for the chessmood team of teachers,today in india we remember our Guru's(teachers) for all their hardwork,and time they give to their students,i thank each and every chessmood teacher,hope u guys are safe and fine,Avetik is one of my best inspirations,thank you avetik and GM Gabuzyan for helping me undrestand myself in the1 to 1 call,Have a great day and year ahead guys
HI COACH , TODAY IN THE NATIONALS JUNIORS ONLINE TMT I WAS FACED WITH THIS EARLY D4!? MOVE WHERE WHITE AFTER CAPTURING WITH QUEEN GOES BACK TO QD2 AND PLAYS B3 BB2 AS I HAVE ATTATCHED . THIS WAS PLAYED BY AN STRONG INDIAN IM AND WITHOUT KNOWING THE THEORY , I LANDED UP IN BIG TROUBLE AND LOST. I WAS THINKING THAT U KNOW THIS SIDE LINE TOO SHOULD BE RECORDED IN OUR COURSES AS IT HAS BEEN PLAYED BY CARUANA AND OTHER TOP GMS . I LATER WENT AND CHECKED THE THEORY IN THE DATABASE AND FOUND INTRESTING OPTIONS FOR BLACK BUT I DONT KNOW THE BEST OPTION.
I read all articles (on the blog) about this thematic (how to create a PNG file and how to memorize variations) and I made my own PNG file based on my rating.
I asked my self how could improve the quality of my study adding comments, idea and strategy. This is my question: How is it important in my PNG file include personal comments, idea, strategies, plans? I think in this way we can enhance memorization and understanding of the positions..I think... but maybe we could get confused and file became a mess! I need a professional help, thank for the support!!
Hello ChessMood people!
I have an idea for moodcoins. As you know, they are useless to PRO members. Here's my idea: perhaps, PRO members could have other uses for moodcoins, such as a second study plan meeting with a GM, playing a one on one blitz game with GM, being able to berserk in lichess tournaments, etc.
Tell me what you think, Thanks!
Had an OTB rapid game againt GM as white: 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Bd3 dxe4 4.Bxe4 Nf6 5.Bf3 Nc6!? hitting d4 and with idea of e5 next. How to play in this position? Imo it's a good practical move for black. Game continued 6.Be3 e5 7.Bxc6 bxc6 8.dxe5 Qxd1 9.Kxd1 Ng4 10.Nf3 Ba6 and black gained I would say compensation, initiative.
In the courses I believe something similar 3..Nc6 was covered, the difference is that 4.c3 dxe4 5.Bxe4 Nf6 white has 6.Bg5.
Please add your suggestions after 5..Nc6 for white, txs
I want to open a discussion on this as I feel there is a little too much of a hardline against engines.
The prevailing wisdom is that players under (2200 or thereabouts) should avoid engine use or at least do some serious analysis first. There are however I believe several assumptions underlying this:
. That the student has a coach who can answer why a move is good or not if the student is unable to come to a conclusion no matter how many of such positions there are
. That the student has a large amount of time to do such analysis
. That 2200 equates to some kind of level without explaining what the underlying level means
. That bad engine discipline leads to overuse (cf. as using a calculator when you should be learning your times-tables)
. That comments and material in courses and books is always accurate and appropriate for the student's level
. That weaker players will not be able to use the engine appropriately or will misread it
. That it's unnecessary for below 2200 play
. That becoming a Grandmaster is the goal
First my own feeling on this:
If you are using an engine appropriately for your level and you are aware of the limitations of an engine, and you do not have a coach on hand, then some engine use is beneficial, probably more so than not using one at all. It can be used to check your own analysis and assumptions as well as speed up your ability to work through material when time is limited.
I think if you ask the top trainers most would say don't use a computer, but they are already coaching their student and some of their students have many hours each day to spend doing things a computer would short-cut (the should cut might cut out some practice or learning of course). However I think this wisdom doesn't always translate well to the club player with a few hours each week to spend on their chess - plus limited concentration span for study when it's a hobby, hence the discussion.
The limitations of the computer need to be understood:
. Computers are bad at endgames, better now, but still need to improve unless it is a tablebase like or tactical position (I consider tablebase position use databases not engines).
. Computers often do not tell you straight out (without some investigation) why one move is better than another (unless the line clearly shows a tactical error etc). Certainly no explanation is given and the few tools that do are still in their infancy.
. Computers perform better in tactical positions than positional (though this is changing) because of the insufficient evaluation function coupled with very deep search ability.
. Centipawn measurements are a little arbitrary
. Psychological or human difficulty factors are not considered in an evaluation (including gambits) which is why the Benko or Sicilian variations get a hard time
. Sometimes computers need to run for a while to get a true evaluation even in positions that aren't so profound to humans.
What the above shows is it's very easy to misuse/read a computer, which is where a fair bit of the adage of don't use a computer comes from.
Second I take a little bit of disdain to mentioning ratings as if they are levels of skill. A 2200 is something that is on the face of it strong, but there is a big rating difference between a player who got 2200 by playing mostly strong players and the few draws or very occasional win got them there, versus someone who plays in clubs and lower level tournaments and the constant barrage of weaker players which the occasional loss or draw keeps the rating lower. The rating pool (sometimes artificially constructed by choosing which games a player plays) is very important. Similarly one might be 2400 in the Sicilian, but 2000 in the Benko, or 2400 in the endgame and opening, but 2000 in the middle game. They might be 1800 after a day at work, but 2000 on a weekend. The weakest point is probably going to determine the rating more than someone who is all round good. In addition rating does not equate with experience: there are plenty of players in the 1800-2000 range some who are pretty good (just not consistent or hobbled by just playing in a small pool of 1600-2000 players) who have been playing chess for 40 years, and there are plenty of 2200s who have been playing just a few years. The question is what does this 2200 really mean in terms of chess skill or maturity.
I feel the time factor for study really needs to be explored further. As I've mentioned elsewhere there are those who can spend 5 hours a day on chess, whereas some only get 5 hours a week. In the latter case it's 'getting the best bang for your buck'. Spending 15 minutes analysing to get an answer why a move was bad (after spending 15 minutes already looking at in the game but without the hindsight of what happen), is often too much of a task, so soon no analysis takes place at all. Similarly trying to understand master moves in a book of 500 positions/fragments/games will take years for just one book if you take this approach with only 5 hours study available per week - most will give up or not finish the course - and while they are studying it nothing else is getting worked on.
I'm somewhere in the middle for study time and here is where I use an engine:
. As a blunder check after online games, and to understand whether a marked inferior move was inferior and to try to tease why another move was superior.
. When I can't understand why a move was/wasn't played after a bit of thinking
. To check my own analysis
. To check for errors in published material before I commit it to memory (some errors in positional based material aren't necessarily a problem if the pattern is intended to be conveyed not the specific example).
. Openings when looking at the database for what was played as there is usually too much complexity for a non-master to properly make a decision on whether a plan or move was a bad one. Plus just because it's a game in a database played by someone strong, doesn't mean there are not errors.
. New ideas or things to consider in a position that I haven't seen before
Examples of where I would say is bad engine use:
. Studying tactical/analysis material before having a proper go at solving it
. To quibble over a couple of centi-pawns whether one opening move was better than another
. To find deep lines to study in openings so 'you know more' beyond what is appropriate in the games you have been facing
. Before actually playing through a published game at least once to get a feel of what went on
. When your eye is more on the engine than the material itself
. Getting definite evaluations of endgames
. As a substitute for thinking (aka the analogy of using a calculator vs mental arithmetic)
Finally what level would I say is appropriate (beyond blunder and material checks) from my own personal feelings (without the view a grandmaster or a coach has):
. You make few blunders, certainly nothing too serious in longer games
. You understand tactics well
. You understand positional concepts well
At least at this point you have the ability to question a computer evaluation as well as less likely to use it as a first point of call. Whether that is 1700, 2000, 2200 of course depends on the factors I've mentioned as well as the individual.
In the last advanced section video 8...e6 at minute 1:00 in the video where Black has just played 10...dxe5, in the main video course you did cover this move earlier where you recommended 11. Bxc5 by White. However, in the advanced video course, you give the line 11. fxe5 by White but this seems to open the board up in Black's favor which is why you recommended the change to 10. Bb5 to avoid this. Is the 11. Bxc5 move instead playable or do you still recommend the change to 10. Bb5?
Hi -- after e4 c6 : d4 d5 : e/d c/d : Bd3 Nc6 : c3 my opponent played Qb6 straight away . This seemed effective, as it stopped Bf4 ( b2 is a tender spot). I was much higher graded, so didn't fancy an early exchange of Queens . Ended up playing Nd2 which didn't give me much. What is the best approach here for White ?
I would love it if there is a Repertoire against 1. Nf3 2.b3,i know u guys are really working hard and are busy,but please chessmood team,if possible can u recommend a repertoire against the nimzo larsen,which starts with 1Nf3 2b3,repertoire against 1b3 is covered in youtube by GM EUGENE PERELESHTYN,thanks in advance
https://chessmood.com/course/classical-chess-endgames/episode/1919 6 min 37 sec in the video, I noticed that black can take on g2 with the bishop forcing white to play Kg1 (otherwise there will be some discovery), and then playing f3 with a protected passed pawn. Doesn't this work?
Hey folks, I just wanted to share a game I played where I was able to implement the Sicilian opening I learned here on Chessmood.
I know I am not highly rated, and I missed a tactical opportunity early in the game, but I did have a very nice Rook sac that led to a 6 move forced mate. I don't think these always happen in games and they are fun to see so I thought I would share here for others to also enjoy. I also almost had a nice smothered mate that was possible because of the opening formation.
Thank you Chessmood team, I am very much enjoying the content!