Ill coach for free if you are sub 800 rated

So im 1400 blitz and 1500 rapid. So for you people that are less then 800 rated i might be able to teach you some things.

I had an idea that i tried today and i kinda like it. So what i did was to start my stream and invite a sub 800 rated player to an hour long game that was unrated. During the game i was live analyzing the game, Telling my ideas of my moves, but also telling the opponent what was good or bad with his move. The idea is simply that this will teach you to get a bit better faster and for me i get some activity on my twitch channel in return.

So i have set the limit to 800 rated. Its not a hard limit but the thing is if i tell my every idea about how a move and etc the games will be way harder for me. Since you know what im thinking etc.

Anyway, the idea is that i can use this thread so we can set up the "meeting". If anyone is intressted. And also feel free to live a review or a comment after the game if i did help you in any way

One of the fundamental principles of chess is the "Principle of material".

Why didn't you take a pawn there? 5. c3 is really good? Isn't it losing a pawn in one move?

I'm a GM and you're not because I'm taking free material (c) Ben Finegold

Oh you looked at the game from today, with my first lesson. Well you are higher rated then me. But for me i like to castle before taking pawns in front of my king. So if i take that pawn he can move rook to E1 to attack both my knight and my e pawn.

I dont think i even consider to take that pawn at all. But you can hear all audio from my thoughts on https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1200448839 but replay dosnt usally work, it usally get muted.

But to sum it up, im not that high rated eihter so i will not play perfect.

But after Re1 there's Nxf2 and your opponent can resign already... But even if you don't see knight takes f2, just a simple d5 is completely winning. 

     The mistake was not that he missed something. We, human players, blundering all the time. Someone more often, someone less often. But if somebody blunders something, he understands that.

     In our case, @Jimemy has played 5. ... 0-0 in a few seconds without thinking what are pros and cons of his opponent's last move 5. c3. He didn't even think whether he could take the pawn on e4 which his opponent left undefended. I want to emphasize. The mistake wasn't that you missed something complicated. The mistake was that you didn't even consider this simple move 5. ... Nxe4. This is a gap in your thinking algorithm.

What a nice idea!

     You can't play chess well based on "I like to do..." You have to play the moves which the position asks you to play. If your opponent gives you free material you should take it, otherwise you'll lose an opportunity.  If your opponent gives you a free queen will you take it? (suppose there are no checkmates against your king and queen is indeed free) Or you'll say I like not to take the queen and play, I donno, nothing pawn move instead? I reckon the answer is obvious. In our case, it was just a pawn (huge central pawn) but it doesn't change anything.

    After Re1 at very-very least, you have quite easy to find Bxf2-->Bxe1 winning everything.

I do agree, in fact every coach emphasizes this aspect of the game, every move in the opening is cristal clear logic instead of a memory contest.. I mean at the end of the day he played Nf6 to attack the pawn, should have at least calculated if knight takes was possible... In my post I was just trying to say that the follow up was rather simple to calculate, I know it does have nothing to do with the concept in general. 

Who says you can't play moves that you like to play? I can understand fully how black can be wary of taking on e4. The fact that your analysis is focusing solely on Re1 is a big mistake. There's also Qe2, d3 and d4 to consider. In fact, black probably might be able to get away with taking the pawn, but it's not so easy and one inaccuracy can lead to a big advantage for white. Sometimes it's good to be practical and not calculate everything to the last move and just play a decent looking move. Especially if you're afraid that your pawn grabbing will give your opponent a ton of compensation.

But in this case there's absolutely nothing... Like, I don't know.. I'll share your comment to an IM I know, just to see what he thinks of it.. In any case thanks for your opinion, every comment is appreciated. 

I think people missing the idea a little.

Of course a 2000 player will be better then 1500. And a 2500 will be better then a 2000. etc.

But i still think i can teach the people below 800 sine its half my rating. Will i be as good as a coach as someone 2000+, the answer is no.

Will a game be won between two 600 rated player based on taking the pawn on E4 or not, i don't think so.

Yeah but castling here can potentially get you into a lot of trouble as black quite quickly as well so I’m not sure how practical that move really is (although don’t get me wrong, I do agree with your overall philosophy) and in anything longer than a blitz game …Nxe4 has to be considered strongly, as if it doesn’t run into immediate trouble, then it’s clearly pretty good. 

That said, he can probably still teach 800 rated players a substantial amount about board awareness, blundering etc so full credit to him for giving up his time to help for free. 

Of course that you can help some beginner. First of all it is free, so you can look at it as a friend helping out someone to take his firsts steps into world of chess. It is a lot harder for someone rated 800 to understand by himself why excessive pawn moves in the opening are a mistake for instance. Some concepts will be acknowledged a lot faster with a little help from someone higher rated.

I mean most of us have learned how to play chess from members of our family, and some of them are realistically novice to intermediate players themselves.

By the way, some people rated 2 200 for example may be more suited as teachers than some Super GMs, it is a separate skill. Someone rated 2 800 may be an incredible teacher, while some might not be. He may lack patience or the ability to explain their knowledge in simple enough terms.

In any case, OP has a good idea, and it can be helpful. I mean, as far as 1 500 rated people are concerned, they still can talk for hours about chess with someone who is just starting out.

This is a cool idea. I'd be willing to learn if you're up to it.

Hey sure, lets have a game. I can play right now if that suits you?

This is a nice idea by you  when I was 800 I wish I had a higher rated player to give me some free lessons! I hope your coaching goes well

Thansk alot. We played a few games today vs two lower rated players. And the games is actually really hard. They are very good. Also i think it gets alot harder when i tell all my plans and what moves im thinking on. But the idea is to open up the vision on what im thinking at etc.

But yeah i would love if someone 2000+ would give me a lesson or two but they usally cost money. And sometimes bigger streamers plays with viewers to but usally they have 300-1000 viewers so that is a little to many.

Yes the lower rated players are actually pretty good most of the time. Whenever I play them, they always give me a run for my money! And yeah it’d be great if more people did this as I’d love to have a coach lol.

*sigh*I would take one of these lessons or try to help, since it seems cool, but I’m above 800 and I am 1066, so I am not good enough to coach

I guess we could play tomorrow. I just played 2 hours today so now i am gonna chill. The difference if i play you is that i have to hold back a little when telling all my moves, because if you know what i am thinking i don't think i will be able to do something hehe. But lets try a game tomorrow if you have time.

Also if you wanna help new players lets not your rating stop you. I think you can teach a lower rated player some stuff to. I think you should try it out. I believe that you always can learn something from a higher rated player no matter the exact number. I mean i even learn stuff from lower rated players.