Chessle 989 (Expert) X/6

🟨⬛🟨🟨🟨⬛⬛⬛⬛🟨

🟩🟩🟩🟨⬛⬛🟨⬛⬛⬛

🟩🟩🟩🟩🟨⬛⬛⬛⬛⬛

🟩🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛⬛🟨🟨⬛

🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛🟩⬛

🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩⬛⬛🟩⬛

https://jackli.gg/chessle

The solution contains 4. cxd5, which I did play, but Chessle doesn't highlight it orange as a viable option.

Hello everyone,

I always struggled with chess as a child, so during lockdown I decided to try and finally learn how to play properly. Problem is that I have undiagnosed at the time mild perfectionism, and the scoring system started to become an addiction, I HAD to keep playing to fix my score. In the end, for my own sake I quit cold turkey.

After that, I decided to quit online as it was only wrecking me mentally. I switched to playing with a friend who was better than me. It took a while, and I had a few mental freakouts, but I was able to get to the stage I could beat him regularly.

I also started doing chess puzzles on chess.com app (though I can't afford the paid for version). I've managed to get to 1800, but I just can't seem to break 1900. I get close, but then I fail multiple puzzles in a row. They are just so obtuse, I can't see what they are trying to get at, in an actual game I could see what moves were played before so I could see what would come next. As it is, I play a 'good' move but not the 'best' move, and the scoring kicks my ass since, once again, I loose more points than I gain so my win streaks mean nothing against a couple of failures.

Where do I go from here?

I don't want it coming up when I my username is searched on google, as anyone can see who I play against reguarly, I see this as a privacy concern. Thanks

(P.S. note that I closed the account manually thinking it would delete, I wasnt banned)

Can someone explain to me why it's a blunder?

So I used to play chess pretty well a couple of years back (with a bullet highest rating of 2097 and blitz 1900 on lichess). But I got a big break. I feel I want to return back to chess as soon as possible (but it's difficult to restart with the same intensity).

Can anyone please suggest me some good books to wrap my head around (which aren't very basic, I've heard Silman's books are good, but something related to tactics/study etc/other books/topics also would be great)? Or any online resources (I don't wanna buy premium membership, since I might not be able to give dedicated continuous time).

I feel many working professionals might be like me, who have basics covered but with some resource guidance can do well in less time to catch up/keep improving (and enjoying life).

Thanks in advance :)

I'm talking about the video with the reflections. Hear me out here. I am/was fully on team Danya and think he is one of the best chess educators out there (shoutout Aman the 🐐). I don't think Danya cheats in competitive chess or TT. But I have been following this fairly close and I gotta say Kramnik is actually making me go hmmph... sometimes.

Like even on the c2 pod listening to Danya explain to Fabi why he pulled up the engine during the game in the speedrun it just felt...off? And I know it's crazy that we're talking about the reflection of his monitor in a bookcase but like...from Kramniks video and you see Danya look off to the side, opening + minimize a tab and then make a comment about "this is winning" or "actually this move is slightly better." Like if you asked me now I would bet Danya uses an engine during the speedruns. And probably not even to make his position better, but actually for educational purposes, and I don't even have a problem with that. But then it does make one think....

I think the craziest outcome of this, and one no one is really considering, is what if Kramnik is right?? Would be absolute chaos. And I kind of want to see it now

(please don't auto assume I am just a crazy Kramnik fanboy as that is not the case, just a guy watching a Russian guy ask some interesting questions 😵‍💫)

Hello all,

I have been playing online chess on/off for about 3 years and started taking the game seriously a few months ago. I decided if I ever made it to 1500 rapid I would give otb rated tournaments a try. After achieving my goal, I joined USChess and entered the U1600 section in my state's championship. I snagged a couple of wins against a 1400 and 1500 rated player, but since then, I have done a lot of drawing and losing.

I have found the competition much stiffer. I have had some hard fought draws and even losses to players rated in the 800s. I can't think of a single obvious, egregious blunder any of my opponents have made (though I can certainly think of several I have committed).

I have been having trouble with my board vision OTB and writing moves really breaks my concentration, and I know I need to work on that. I am connecting with people in my local scene and using the time I would play online to play with them instead to try to rectify this unexpected difficulty. However, when I do play online, I am winning pretty consistently and have nearly made it to 1600 in just a few games.

I don't know what to make of this. My USChess rating is currently in the low 1100 range and falling. Is it normal for the difference between otb play and online play to be this stark? Part of me wants to say that it is a product of switching to an actual board and writing moves, but another, likely more reasonable, part of me is saying that I actually am trash at chess and I am just among my people playing online.

I am sure many of you have made the same transition and I would love to hear your stories, insights, and suggestions.

TL:DR - Only ever played chess online, I am now playing in rated otb tournaments and getting absolutely wrecked by people many hundred elo points lower. Is this normal?

Hi everyone!

I'm an 1800-1900 FIDE player looking to buy a Chessable course, but I'm torn between two options: The Grünfeld Supercharged by IM Krykun and Leningrad Dutch: Simplified by GM Arturs Neiksans. Both courses seem to focus on model games, typical structures, and ideas, but neither has a "Short and Sweet" version. Here are a few specific things I'm wondering about, and I'd love any insights from people who have tried these courses!

1. Line Recommendations: What kinds of lines do each of these courses cover? I'm curious if either approach is more aggressive or solid. And wether you can always play for the win with black (which is important because I mainly play open tournments)
2. Theoretical Soundness: I feel like the Grünfeld might be more theoretically sound than the Leningrad Dutch. Do you think this is important for my level, especially for long-term development?
3. Endgames vs. Pawn Structures: Krykun's course has a chapter on endgames, while Neiksans' has one on pawn structures. Do these chapters cover similar themes, or do they have a unique approach in each course?
4. Author Expertise: IM Krykun and GM Neiksans are both strong players, but Neiksans has the higher title and rating. Does this matter when it comes to opening analysis, especially in courses like these?

Any advice on which course might suit my level and goals best would be awesome. Thanks!

https://preview.redd.it/twlb8ht1qfxd1.jpg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=deace49f5274d2ad188dd91eea49a51ef52a58e6

I've been following some of the online chess drama. I'm surprised to see how often the chess creators (any platform) are able to shift the narrative and sway the audience any way they want. I was wondering if you guys could help me understand some of the following:

1. Do chess fans follow someone blindly? For example, if you're a fan/follower of a particular creator, are you biased (or supposed to be biased) towards them and assume that they can never do anything wrong (minor/major)?
2. Do chess fans know anything about what goes on behind the scenes? Is any creator ever going to present anything that might harm their image? Isn't all the content that's being uploaded or available to the audience moderated.
3. Do people don't realize that there have been so many cases in the past where a person did something wrong and everyone (even who knew them personally) thought they could have never done so. So how can chess fans really come to a conclusion that any of the creators can never do anything wrong? A recent case that comes to my mind is of Alejandro Ramírez. Was there anyone (chess fans specially) who thought of him as someone who could do something wrong?
4. Why do chess fans often get caught up on personal remarks and forget about anything of matter.

How do you keep track of memorable chess games and share them with your chess buddies? (Both online and OTB)

https://preview.redd.it/94s0a9ulafxd1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=f0268b17f4fd1efc0cbfc4b7a889210f0bae6073

https://preview.redd.it/5ai6zmqmafxd1.png?width=901&format=png&auto=webp&s=73efc69240a2ddc34c4f28d7f3d4dc692c983f78

I played a no-increment blitz game, and it reached a drawish position. However, my opponent had very little time left and he offered me a Draw, so I decided to keep playing instead of accepting the draw. He lost on time. He got really angry, messaged me, and then blocked me.

Isn't managing time also part of the game? Why would he get so upset?

r/chess Weekly Discussion Thread

You are welcome to ask here all kinds of chess-related questions that don't warrant their own post. You can also discuss or ask questions about upcoming tournaments that don't have their own thread yet.

​

Moderation

OPEN CALL for new moderators! Interested in: creating event posts, hosting AMAs, making sure only the finest queen sacrifice puzzles make the front page? Apply Now!

Event Threads

Interested in making threads for tournaments, but don't know where to start? Our Event Template page is a great way to get the basic layout.

An alternative would be to start a subthread directly in the weekly thread.

​

Announcements

REWORK OF r/chess RULES

UPDATED Oct 27th - r/chess Announcement Regarding Coverage of St. Louis Chess Club and USCF Events

​

Recent AMAs

• GM Judit Polgar

​

Active Tournament Threads

​

Other Active Tournaments Web Links

​

Upcoming Tournament Schedule

​

Recently Completed Tournaments

​

Other Notable Threads

Coach a Player - Recent Threads

​

Community Content

Here we'd love to highlight community content to show our appreciation for the energy spent. Content like Game analysis, info-graphics, etc., and we'd love to hear from you what kind of content you'd like to see as well.

Want to post your game to r/chess? - for people who want to solicit feedback on their games

Advice to people asking for advice - for people who want to ask about how to improve

I had this idle thought and was wondering if someone more knowledgeable could weigh in. I initially tried playing through the Opening Explorer on Lichess but there's just too much Chess to get through, and I had no luck using Google.

So basically my question comes from a game I was watching earlier today. Actually it was a Modern Defense, with the fianchetto'd King's Bishop for Black, with White having an e4-d5 pawn center. White also had their c3-Knight blocking their c2-pawn, so it wasn't a KID.

That position inspired some brief commentary about closed pawn structures, during which I got wondering about the usefulness of Black's fianchetto'd King's Bishop in Modern Defense / KID positions.

From what I've heard, it just seems kinda taken as fact that the KID fianchetto'd bishop will become useful eventually. I've played a few KIDs and on the whole this does seem to be the case.

So my train of thought then went to the other Bishop. What if the pawn structure were flipped, with White having pawns on d4-e5, as in the Advanced French? Why doesn't having the Queenside fianchetto for Black in Advanced French positions offer a similar long-term asset as it seems to do for the Kingside fianchetto in KID / Modern Defense positions?

I know the French Bishop is famously considered a bad piece, but what makes a Queenside fianchetto in the French any worse than a Kingside fianchetto in the Modern? Seems if White castles Kingside - as they usually do in the French - then Black's Queenside fianchetto could stand to be even stronger later on in the game, no?

Are the pawn structures just innately different in some way that I'm not appreciating? Is there some tactical / strategic detail that I'm missing? I was also thinking that perhaps the move orders of the Openings themselves may play a role, but I'm just not really sure.

Again, I don't play much of the French or KID so I'm not very knowledgeable here. Hoping somebody actually good at this game can help me out here! Cheers for any thoughts!

I need to figure out how to regain my passion for chess. I started when I was young and quickly rose to 1500 before covid hit. Then from 8th-10th I hit 1900. I really wanna get to 2000 for just satisfaction but also cuz 2000 should put me in top 100 nationally for my age based on recent charts which will look good for college. The problem is with 5 APs, other clubs, and more I don’t have mental energy to study chess after getting what I need to done, not like I used to at least when I genuinely loved the game. and the fact is I can’t rely on intuition to break 2000 uscf without putting in extensive time, and it’s hard to put time into something you don’t have passion for, especially something as slow paced as chess. So if anyone has been in a similar situation, or is even an adult who obviously has passion and is using their limited free time I’d appreciate any anecdotes or advice. Thanks so much

Been playing chess.com on my phone for about 5 months now. The number of 10 minute games I've won on time alone is insane....Why does it take so long for players to move? I honestly don't get it.

Sorry if this is a dumb question

Edit: thanks for the quick response and it’s cool to find out I have a higher IQ than Hikaru

Well I am relatively familiar with chess but from last 2 months I started watching theory and videos of different top players playing in championships and stuff . I am a doctor and I am comfortable grinding my brain, I started looking into more of analytical play and checked out some theory. But I realise its too much, I like playing for fun and want to improve and after 1500 10 min game, I think people do know different lines and its becoming rather cumbersome. What do you guys suggest and think?! 💪

I mean tf is even the point of this stupid game,Chess is absolutely, the most pointless game ever invented.Chess is a total scam. That’s right – people have been falling for this overly complicated, ridiculous board game for centuries, and it’s about time someone calls it out for what it truly is. Honestly, if you’re still playing chess, it’s time to rethink your life choices. Let’s dive into exactly why this "intellectual masterpiece" is nothing but a frustrating, mind-numbing waste of time.

1. The Ultimate Snoozefest

First things first: chess is boring. And I don’t mean regular boring – I mean the kind of boring that makes you want to do your laundry or organize your sock drawer instead. You’re just sitting there, staring at a grid of black and white squares, moving pieces one square at a time, hoping you don’t make some devastating mistake that ruins everything. Honestly, watching paint dry has more suspense. There’s a reason no one throws chess-viewing parties. If someone did, they’d probably be arrested for inflicting public torture.

2. The "Thrill" of Memorizing 10,000 Rules

Chess fans love to brag about all the "strategy" and "critical thinking" involved in the game. But let’s face it: it’s just memorizing a bunch of arbitrary rules about how each piece moves. Pawns move one way, rooks move another, knights jump in L-shapes like it’s some kind of weird equestrian dressage, and bishops go diagonally as if they’re just too fancy for straight lines. Why? Because chess said so. There’s no logic, just a bunch of arbitrary moves that have somehow convinced people that they’re "learning." It’s basically the board game equivalent of memorizing your Wi-Fi router’s user manual.

3. The Pawn’s Sad, Depressing Life

And let’s talk about pawns. Poor, innocent pawns. The literal cannon fodder of chess. These little guys march forward one square at a time, knowing full well they’re just going to get sacrificed for the “greater good.” It’s like the creators of chess thought, “You know what this game needs? A piece that exists just to be disposable.” Imagine if every time you played a game, you had to pick one piece that existed only to be thrown away. Depressing, right? But that’s chess for you.

4. The “High Stakes” of Moving at Snail’s Pace

Oh, and the excitement of moving pieces one square at a time – can you even handle the suspense? This is why the game lasts forever. You’re crawling across the board, each turn taking at least 10 minutes because, god forbid, you make a mistake and leave yourself open to a “fork” or a “pin.” Meanwhile, people in checkers are jumping all over the place, but no, not in chess. Chess pieces are just too proud to move quickly. They take their time, like it’s a medieval waltz on a black-and-white dance floor.

5. Openings: Because Apparently, We’re All in School Again

Chess lovers talk about “openings” like they’re some sort of advanced calculus formula. “Oh, I’m playing the Sicilian Defense,” they’ll say, as if anyone else knows what that means or cares. It’s like taking a history test where you memorize old, irrelevant moves that other people used hundreds of years ago. Imagine explaining that to a beginner: “Yes, we know it’s your first game, but here’s a 300-page book on openings. And if you don’t know them all, well, prepare to lose horribly.”

6. Endgames: The Ultimate Letdown

Ah, the endgame. After hours of moving pieces at the speed of molasses, you’re finally down to just a king, a rook, and maybe a pawn if you’re lucky. This is the grand finale everyone’s been waiting for. It’s like going to a concert where the band plays one note for 30 minutes and then packs up to leave. Congratulations, you’ve reached the end of the most intense, mind-numbing battle of your life, and it’s… a slow-motion chase of two pieces around the board. Riveting stuff.

7. The Genius Trap: Only for “Smart” People

Let’s not forget, chess players love to think they’re intellectual elites, looking down on the rest of us mere mortals. They’ll talk about “deep strategy” and “tactics,” dropping names like Kasparov and Carlsen as if they’re talking about old friends. Newsflash: memorizing how a bunch of pieces move on a board doesn’t make you a genius. But sure, go ahead and feel superior for knowing that a knight can fork a king and a queen. I’ll just be over here actually having fun, thanks.

8. The Humiliation of Checkmate

The real joy of chess comes in that humiliating final moment: checkmate. After hours of painful concentration, your opponent moves a piece, looks you dead in the eye, and says, “Checkmate.” Oh, the horror. The shame. Imagine playing a game that not only lets your opponent win, but rubs it in by saying, “Oh yeah, your king? Totally trapped. Nothing you can do. Have a nice day!” Imagine if every game ended with that kind of humiliation. Monopoly? “Bankrupt!” Scrabble? “You lose, try harder next time!” No thanks, I’ll pass on the public shaming.

9. Grandmasters are Basically Superhuman

Let’s be real here: no one is ever going to be as good as those grandmasters. The rest of us are just moving pieces and hoping for the best, while they’re out here playing 20 games at once blindfolded. These are people who can checkmate you with just a king and a pawn, while the rest of us can barely remember where our pieces are. It’s like watching a magician and pretending you’ll be able to do those tricks someday. Spoiler alert: you won’t.

Conclusion: Chess is a “Classic,” but So is the Flu

In conclusion, chess is overrated. Overcomplicated. Overhyped. People say it’s a “classic” game that’s “good for the mind.” Well, you know what else is a classic? The flu. Just because it’s been around forever doesn’t mean we should celebrate it. Chess players might insist on the “beauty” of the game, but it’s really just a cleverly disguised torture device that masquerades as intellectual entertainment.

So let’s all agree to move on from this brain-bending, painfully slow, glorified puzzle and find a game that doesn’t make us question our sanity. Chess? No, thank you. I’ll stick to games that don’t require me to overthink every move and treat pawns like sacrificial lambs.

P S - I wrote this blog on chesscom too,and some guys got offended,but I think I am free to give my opinion

Another P S -i wrote this blog after going on a 17 game bullet losing streak.

Hi there! At our school we need to organize a small chess tournament, to decide which four kids we will send to the regional qualifications.

Ideally we would make a tournament like this: We have 12 kids playing two rounds of 20 min. After those rounds, the best 8 go on to the final. And the winners of these games will be the happy four to form a team.

My question is: how do I make a fair ranking to know who is disqualified after two rounds already? Since there must be a few players that have won only one game? Do I also include time or pieces captured?

Please help me out!

Now we know magnus and levy are partners in that new take take take app. Let's put a hypothetical question. Imagine levy wants to become the world chess champion. He would be given all the resources. He would be trained by magnus 24/7. Do you think there's a universe where this happens?

I am very proud to have defeated a titled master in a game that isn't blitz or bullet. My opponent was their country's current no.2 player, I won't say who for privacy reasons. The game went like this:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Be7 4. O-O Nf6 5. Re1 O-O 6. Nc3 d6 7. h3 a6 8. a4 Bd7 9. a5 Nb4 10. d4 exd4 11. Nxd4 c5 12. Nf5 Bxf5 13. exf5 d5 14. Bf1 Bd6 15. Bg5 h6 16. Bxf6 Qxf6 17. Nxd5 Nxd5 18. Qxd5 Rad8 19. Qxb7 Qxf5 20. Bd3 Qf4 21. g3 Qg5 22. b3 Be5 23. Rad1 Bd4 24. Kg2 Rd6 25. Qe7 Rf6 26. Re2 Qd5+ 27. Qe4 Qxe4+ 28. Bxe4 Re8 29. Rxd4 cxd4 30. Bh7+ Kf8 31. Be4 Rfe6 32. Kf3 f5 33. Bd3 Rxe2 34. Bxe2 Re6 35. Bc4 Rd6 36. Kf4 g6 37. f3 Ke7 38. Ke5 Kd7 39. Bd5 Kc7 40. Kxd4 Rd8 41. Ke5 Rf8 42. Bc4 Kb7 43. Ke6 g5 44. Ke7 Rc8 45. Kf6 Rc6+ 46. Kxf5 Rc5+ 47. Kg6 Rxa5 48. Kxh6 Kc7 49. f4 gxf4 50. gxf4 Kb6 51. Kg6 Rc5 52. f5 a5 53. f6 a4 54. f7 Rc8 55. Kg7 a3 56. b4 Rc7 57. Bb3 Kb5 58. Kg8 Rxf7 59. Kxf7 Kxb4 60. h4 Kc3 61. h5 a2 62. Bxa2 Kxc2 63. Be6

I spent a lot of time in the opening, since I have not studied the Hungarian Defense from the Italian, as it is an uncommon but solid move. After 26. Re2, which was a blunder due to an overloaded rook, we were both down to about a minute with no increment so we both played quick from then. My opponent had multiple chances to save the game, like 49. f4 but as we were having a time scramble, we both missed them. I'm sure in classical the outcome would be different, but this is an achievement for me.

My next step is playing in a local chess tournament in November, where I will compete to get my otb rating up.

https://lichess1.org/game/export/gif/D8gyIDgL.gif

Stafford Gambit and repertoire sidelines theory

I am just sick and tired of playing the 2.e5 & 3.d4 allowing Scandinavian and have wanted to play open gambits. Rousseau is great and has awesome practical chances, but the Luccini gambit is no better than equal with a TON of theory needed to play it and is just as popular as allowing the Rousseau after 2.Bc4.

I watched several of Mr. Rosen's Stafford Gambit videos, and considered that with transpositions into 2 Knights and trying to find the best lines against Scotch and Danish which I'd love to test off my King's Gambits. If any of you other gambiteers have adopted this into your repertoires, what are the aggressive sidelines you play out of the Stafford?

Here's what looked statistically best as a repertoire. I'm eager to get the breathing room out of "unsound Englund Hartlaub-Charlick" with its open center and rapid attack mobility versus stuck behind my own pawns "Slav-Walling" and get into SOME gambit or even sound attacking (2 Knights/Fritz) repertoire more active than wishy washy Scandinavian.

Maybe my homework might help YOU. The stats for game frequency and performance were from LiChess' database with players rated 1600-2000. Any improvements? Pet favorite sidelines?