Margin for error is biggest in endgames. Checkmates and endgames are most important imo.
There's no perfect answer to this question because chess is enormous, but it's probably not the opening. One answer would be that you should study whatever interests you the most, not only because that's where you'll find the most joy, but because our ability to learn anything very deeply depends a lot on sincere interest. Another answer would be that you should focus on the endgame. Much of the beauty in chess is found in endgame positions: it's no coincidence that chess composition—the "poetry of chess"—is devoted almost entirely to endgames. Furthermore, I think there's a lot to be said for a "reverse" approach to chess understanding, which Capablanca championed. Studying the endgame helps you appreciate the power of individual pieces as well as pawn formations. It's really the only place where you see the power of the king as an active piece, for example, but it's also where you can best see the differences between bishops and knights, or the overwhelming force of queens and rooks. You can translate that knowledge back into middlegame decisions and start to have a better sense of what pieces to trade, when to push pawns or not push pawns, and how to steer the late-middlegame liquidation. Likewise, understanding middlegame strategy helps you to understand the basic principles of opening play beyond memorization. You might develop a bishop to a certain square because it has a promising diagonal, a knight because it has a promising outpost or helps to defend a key square, or a rook for control of an open file or a battery on a half-open file. These things are all typical chapter topics in middlegame manuals.
@lavanya1969 said in #1:
> Please check my profile or if you don't want to what aspect would a person my rating need to focus on? Middlegame, Endgame Opening? Thanks!
Playing lesser bullet.
> Please check my profile or if you don't want to what aspect would a person my rating need to focus on? Middlegame, Endgame Opening? Thanks!
Playing lesser bullet.
Probably the endgame as most of the blunders occur then (I think so) and if decides your endgame
Queen pawn game was to slow...try king pawn game then related to gambit... example center game and their variation
Whatever you are bad at really is the short answer.
What I think is constantly undervalued is
1. Blundering less. Just being far more aware of what is loose in your position and how your opponent can exploit these weaknesses should help here.
2. Conversion skills. Play winning positions against stockfish and actually win.
3. Defending. defending losing positions, defending much worse positions. Defending against aggressive play and piece sacrifices. Defending is overpowered.
4. Tactical intuition (the ability to essentially feel when there is a tactic against you or your opponent's position)
5. Calculation. Training your ability to actually calculate tactics.
6. Creativity. Looking at interesting moves that look ridiculous. Usually they are ridiculous, but sometimes they are not, and many players miss them because they simply do not look in the first place.
Any concrete skill is miles and miles less important than these. When I study openings and endgames and middlegames, the value I am getting out of it is almost entirely related to one of these factors, and has very little significance attached to any of the concrete ideas I am seeing. This is because you might only use that idea in 1 out of 200 games, but you use these 6 things in nearly every game. If you play a GM and lose, you didn't lose because he read some trick or idea in a book, or had exactly memorized any opening or endgame or whatever. You lost because he is just a better player and can do literally all 6 of those things better.
What I think is constantly undervalued is
1. Blundering less. Just being far more aware of what is loose in your position and how your opponent can exploit these weaknesses should help here.
2. Conversion skills. Play winning positions against stockfish and actually win.
3. Defending. defending losing positions, defending much worse positions. Defending against aggressive play and piece sacrifices. Defending is overpowered.
4. Tactical intuition (the ability to essentially feel when there is a tactic against you or your opponent's position)
5. Calculation. Training your ability to actually calculate tactics.
6. Creativity. Looking at interesting moves that look ridiculous. Usually they are ridiculous, but sometimes they are not, and many players miss them because they simply do not look in the first place.
Any concrete skill is miles and miles less important than these. When I study openings and endgames and middlegames, the value I am getting out of it is almost entirely related to one of these factors, and has very little significance attached to any of the concrete ideas I am seeing. This is because you might only use that idea in 1 out of 200 games, but you use these 6 things in nearly every game. If you play a GM and lose, you didn't lose because he read some trick or idea in a book, or had exactly memorized any opening or endgame or whatever. You lost because he is just a better player and can do literally all 6 of those things better.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.