Here is a great example of what I’ve been talking about.
Kurt is in H.S., and you can see how brilliant of a kid that he is from coming a move away from checkmate. In reality, though, this to me is obviously weak positional chess.
I am looking at ‘Game of the Year VIII’
Move 13, Black should play ..c5, not ..b5? IMHO. You can see how brilliant that this kid is and why he is rated what he is rated, but it is tactics, not positional play. Positional play represents experience, and even the brightest kids may not have that part down nearly as much.
A good way to think of positional play is WHEN something is or is not tactically feasible. The kids can execute the tactics, it’s a matter of WHEN. If all there are is good, quiet moves, then they may find those because it’s a matter of elimination. So, don’t think that they can’t maneuver optimally, if they are high rated.
Instead of 17..Nc3+??, Black could defend with 17..Re8 and if 18.Qe4 then ..f5, and if 18.Rg1, then upon hxg6..QxQ, NxQ g6 and Black can try to scoop up the h6 pawn with the king or ignore it. I’m not even using an engine for this. Have to defend well and play positionally, though.
Hard to not mention this positional win:
Here is a positional question that I just finished asking myself. Assuming White hadn’t blundered his queen and had played 20.QxQ instead, how can Black continue to play for a positional advantage? I’ll give my answer in the comment following this post:
Lastly, I have to thrown in this blitz game. I played an exchange sac, and it looks like a joke, at first, but I don’t see the refutation to my own attack. It was an inspired move and I got a strong attack for it. I think he’s got to play the zwischenzug move 27..Rf8. That one took me a long time to find.
Progress on ‘Combination Challenge’ 772 problems completed. Quite a few of these are “sack 3-5 pieces to find the forced checkmate”, and I don’t remember such problems on a tactics server that went like that. A tactics server seems to keep feeding you at your rating, which is measured by speed of board-vision. I still don’t have fast board-vision, except possibly in time-trouble. I also find these problems to be mentally fatiguing, so that I usually require a nap when done to clear my mind.
Takchess completed 70,000 problems on a server. I think BDK may have completed the 7 circles. But I can’t even google and find out anyone else who completed the 7 circles. A lot of people started on it, talked about it, complained about it, complained about difficulty of duplicating MDLM’s results, but where are the people who finished it. I would be surprised if it’s more than a handful, and that includes MDLM himself.
My take on studying both endgame and tactical positions is that many of them are either composed or something that the computer found out for them when they got home. In practical terms, I think it makes a person want to analyze endgames and tactics more critically OTB, recalling patterns as they analyze, giving them an edge in “messy” situations.
Let’s put it this way, does anyone who has done the seven circles, completed it, have a higher OTB rating that me? lol. It’s been out there for over 5 years now, we should have some results. Blunderprone is the only other active player/knight that I can point to besides myself. I see some have 2100 rating on chesstempo, so I don’t doubt that tactics makes you better at tactics.