kasparov chess games

Kasparov Chess Games

Grant and you will find!
Wild name, real passions
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
ccmcacollister 38 ( +1 | -1 )
NOVICE NOOK 19 wschmidt asked me to post this up for this week. { Have a good time W ! } This one is titled "An Improvement Plan". And here's hopin ...
-> www.chesscafe.com
cascadejames 106 ( +1 | -1 )
Fun? As usual, this article was interesting and I believe it will be helpful. In fact, I found the discussion
of books more helpful than his earlier article about books, because in this article he focuses on a
reasonable number and gives more guidance about what to read first.

But having said these positive things, I feel that I have to make a counterpoint. His improvement
plan does not seem to factor in the need for the game to be fun. Most of us are never going to be
masters, and few have any aspirations to make a living from the game. Why do we play it? I
suppose everyone has their particular reasons, but I think most players are motivated to play
because they find chess to be a fun game. Or am I wrong about this? Do most of you think of
yourselves as potential chess artists? Masters to be? Professionals in training? I am curious.

Craig thanks for posting the link and WSchmidt thanks for continuing this project. It is a fun
series to read, even if Heisman doesn't seem to pay attention to that factor. <G>

James.
alberlie 77 ( +1 | -1 )
I guess that practicing scales isn't exactly fun either, but extremely important when learning any kind of instrument. I was playing classical guitar seriously for quite some time in my teens, and it's no fun playing scales for 30 min each day. What's fun is sitting around a campfire and playing Clapton. And practicing scales enables you to do that right on the first try (sorry, Eric ;)! ). But of course, playing Clapton doesn't improve your classical guitar play.

I guess it's kinda the same with chess. All the serious stuff Heisman talks about is necessary to become a better chess player - and for that, it's not necessary to be fun. What's fun is that you win more games, become a better Blitz player and that the girls start adoring your for that :o))
cascadejames 13 ( +1 | -1 )
Alberlie I guess it's always easy to start and win an argument by exaggerating what the other person is
saying and then proving him wrong.
alberlie 75 ( +1 | -1 )
Whoa, uhm, ... , I like you too! :o))

Actually, I wasn't trying to prove anything...
I was merely trying to point out that the fun part of most hobbies is derived from putting together many in themselves non-fun bits and pieces.
If you want to play the trumpet, you better practice a few years on your embouchure - which isn't _exactly_ fun. My teachers never insisted on me jamming every weekend. They probably figured that I would take care of that myself. So I would assume that Heisman is simply having trust in our ability to find a Blitz partner with whom it is simply fun to play. Thus his lack of emphasis on the fun aspect of the game, which he probably feels is increasing with increased training and skill etc.
cascadejames 22 ( +1 | -1 )
Thanks Thanks to all who have posted to the Novice Nook series. I am facing a sudden time crunch at
work for the next 4 or 5 months so I need to say goodbye to recreation for a while. Maybe I will
see you all in October. Good luck.
wschmidt 49 ( +1 | -1 )
Just got home from a 1400 mile drive... and checked in.

Didn't Heisman have an earlier column where he talked about chess being fun and that for some the "work" part of chess isnt' fun, just playing is, and that there's nothing wrong with that. It's a given, though, that if the "work" part of chess isn't fun too, a player's improvement will probably be limited to compared to one who is enthused about study as well as play. (My misremembered interpretation of what Heisman really said, probably). ws