19-07-2013, 02:59 AM
Hi Mike
I don't have a problem with anyone disagreeing wth me.
These lads are hitting a brick wall.
We do not appear to have anyone can who teach our lads how to get the best out of these things.
All they have is the glossy manuel telling them what wonderful chess players they will become.
All the current titled players - those that have crossed the hurdle - got good before
computers. So it's no use calling on them.
Everyone acknowledges there is gap, something is lacking.
I'm not one to stand around with my thumb up my bum. So let's get it sorted.
If it's not the use and abuse of computers then what is it?
I'm open to any ideas. I'm fed up going on about it as much as you are fed up listening to it.
I'm trying to kick a few butts back into the bedroom with a book and board because I know that works.
You do not need a computer helping you in anyway at all to become a good chess player.
History is on my side with this and so is the present. (the future...all I can see is Roddy McKay
winning the Scottish title again when he 71, then again at 81 and 91...)
How did Roddy McKay get so good?
Rampant Chess page 157. Roddy McKay: Favourite Book: Golden Treasury of Chess.
That book is just a collection of games with no notes.
You play through the games and any questions - well you have dig in and find them out for yourself.
It called studying chess. You just have to keep asking yourself why?...why?...why?,,,and why?
It's not going to be easy, there is no quick fix in chess, that is what you are looking for using a computer.
And if you cannot figure out why a move was played. Then this is what this forum is for.
There are a crowd of good players who frequent this place that enjoy explaining things.
You will get a human answer from an experienced player and not just a silent and cold 1.89.
But go for it by yourself first, and even suggest why you think it was played.
Comng soon:
Rampant Chess II - 13 players who never made it to IM.
First question: What is your favourite computer?
Look I'll help. go here.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.gambitchess.com/semi/dbbooks.htm">http://www.gambitchess.com/semi/dbbooks.htm</a><!-- m -->
You can download either editions of Golden Treasury - print one out and off you go.
The password (it seems to fit all the books is) qcIG7@3wmFt
It a no hassle site - just a quick download. You don't have to sign up for anything.
You get just the games used (no notes) in all of them books.
No copyright is being infringed, chess games (unfortunatley) are not copyright, just the written word.
You can only get the games - nothing more. no notes.
(I say unfortunately because to me it's a sin that a game like Nigel Short's King walk v Timman which has
brought pleasure to so many and the player who created that masterpiece does not get a single
cent for it if say a clown like me publishes it and rakes in the money. This is wrong. This so wrong.)
So Mike, all I'm trying to do is address a problem with the lads.
If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, I'll admit it.
But will they admit that perhaps, just perhaps......I might be a tad correct.
I don't have a problem with anyone disagreeing wth me.
These lads are hitting a brick wall.
We do not appear to have anyone can who teach our lads how to get the best out of these things.
All they have is the glossy manuel telling them what wonderful chess players they will become.
All the current titled players - those that have crossed the hurdle - got good before
computers. So it's no use calling on them.
Everyone acknowledges there is gap, something is lacking.
I'm not one to stand around with my thumb up my bum. So let's get it sorted.
If it's not the use and abuse of computers then what is it?
I'm open to any ideas. I'm fed up going on about it as much as you are fed up listening to it.
I'm trying to kick a few butts back into the bedroom with a book and board because I know that works.
You do not need a computer helping you in anyway at all to become a good chess player.
History is on my side with this and so is the present. (the future...all I can see is Roddy McKay
winning the Scottish title again when he 71, then again at 81 and 91...)
How did Roddy McKay get so good?
Rampant Chess page 157. Roddy McKay: Favourite Book: Golden Treasury of Chess.
That book is just a collection of games with no notes.
You play through the games and any questions - well you have dig in and find them out for yourself.
It called studying chess. You just have to keep asking yourself why?...why?...why?,,,and why?
It's not going to be easy, there is no quick fix in chess, that is what you are looking for using a computer.
And if you cannot figure out why a move was played. Then this is what this forum is for.
There are a crowd of good players who frequent this place that enjoy explaining things.
You will get a human answer from an experienced player and not just a silent and cold 1.89.
But go for it by yourself first, and even suggest why you think it was played.
Comng soon:
Rampant Chess II - 13 players who never made it to IM.
First question: What is your favourite computer?
Look I'll help. go here.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.gambitchess.com/semi/dbbooks.htm">http://www.gambitchess.com/semi/dbbooks.htm</a><!-- m -->
You can download either editions of Golden Treasury - print one out and off you go.
The password (it seems to fit all the books is) qcIG7@3wmFt
It a no hassle site - just a quick download. You don't have to sign up for anything.
You get just the games used (no notes) in all of them books.
No copyright is being infringed, chess games (unfortunatley) are not copyright, just the written word.
You can only get the games - nothing more. no notes.
(I say unfortunately because to me it's a sin that a game like Nigel Short's King walk v Timman which has
brought pleasure to so many and the player who created that masterpiece does not get a single
cent for it if say a clown like me publishes it and rakes in the money. This is wrong. This so wrong.)
So Mike, all I'm trying to do is address a problem with the lads.
If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, I'll admit it.
But will they admit that perhaps, just perhaps......I might be a tad correct.