Learning to look ahead

Can anyone recommend some resources (preferably free, but not required) to help me look ahead more in my games. I seem to be limited to like 2 moves and even then I'm shaky at best. I have chessmaster XI and just started using it. Any other suggestions? God bless! Neil

One thing that REALLY helped me with that regard was John Nunns excellection "1001 Deadly Checkmates".

All the mates are in sections, and graded from 1 to 5 on difficulty.

which is brilliant, because the Grade 1 mates are usually just 2 moves to mate or so, Grade 2 is 3 moves etc etc.

Because they're laid out in sections, the Grade 1 moves get you used to the mating idea, then the Grade 2's get you to look for the same ideas, but 3 moves later, and on and on up to the 5 puzzles.

Brilliant book. I've knocked out a couple of mates in 5 recently that I would never have seen before reading that book.

I am interested in that as well. Why do you think that a computer program will not help at that stage?

Ok (looking up the word patzer)

I'm with IM pfren on this one.  I used to play Chessmaster exclusively before I joined Chess.com.  I was under the illusion that I was a "pretty decent" player (at least over 1300 strength).  I got a very rude awakening when my face got thumped in by players of 1100 strength.

Just like me, these players probably did not have a world of chess knowledge, but they knew basic opening principles, have practiced some tactics, studied a master game or two.  And all of those combined made them quite formidable opponents.

I was at the level where I had trouble seeing a mate in 1. What has helped me a great deal was:

1) Tactics trainer on Chess.com.  No hints.

2) Tactical puzzle books.

3) Going over my own games.

4) Reading the articles on Chess.com (getting tips on opening play etc. Sometimes just a bit here and piece there helps paint a broad picture).

5) Going over the master games.

I just learned one scary word in two languages! Thanks pfen...

I think that most people don't use books out of laziness, at least that's my case. Calculating ahead is frightening if you are a beginner, because you hve no faith in yourself. Computers immediately say "blunder!" which is convenient but doesn't really help I guess...

I don't remember where I've read this, but someone said that calculating three moves ahead is enough. No more, just three. Not that it's easy, but it gives you something to work on.

Some link(s)? I'd like to look at something like that (annotated master games) very, very much. Thanks in advance.

That's interesting. Kind of goes against everything Dan Heisman has ever said about improving your game.

Then there is Teichmann's adage that "Chess is 99% Tactics". Psh. He beat Marhsall, Nizowitisch, Tarrasch and Rubinstein, but he clearly misses the point right?

And of course, after Kasparov played deep blue he said:

"What I discovered yesterday probably is now clear to everyone. Now for the first time we see the computer at chess and quantity becomes quality because the number of the moves this monstrous machine can play in fact prevents it from making bad positional mistakes within reach of its calculation."

Universally, in almost all the books from people who have learnt how to think and how to study chess, I'm thinking Nunn, Watson, Silman, etc., etc., the advice: study tactics FIRST. Only once you stop falling for tactical blunders will you be able to win positional chess. To anyone under 1800, who gives a toss if you have an isolated pawn if you re down a rook?

There is vast difference between knowing the game well and knowing how to teach it.

This is a very interesting conversation.

PawnPusher4, just asking: is your name Columbus?

Yeah, also the point should be made, that the ability to calculate far ahead really depends on the position itself too.

I think it was in Dan Heismans "Novice Nook" column (chesscafe.com, completely free, completely awesome, and the entire back catalogue of articles is in their "archives" section)  that I first came across the idea of WHEN to apply calculation.

Paraphrasing (poorly, apologies to Dan) :

Not much point trying to calculate in the opening, if you know the opening, play the moves you know, if not try to stick more to principles - central pawns, pieces out to active squares, get your King safe etc.

In the middle game there is more scope for calculation, but its often more about developing a plan or long term strategy where exact calculation isn't as important as understanding whats happening in the positiong.

Trying to calculate too much in the opening and middle is going to burn you out (unless you're some kind of calculation monster), and its best to save it for the endgame where often calculation of moves is everything.

So as much as developing the skill of looking ahead, I'd agree that its just as important to know WHEN you need to calculate ahead.

http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman45.pdf

"Improving Analysis Skills"  - definitely worth a read.

When people talk about calculating three moves ahead, I always wonder whether they mean moves or plys.

Actually, I think the advice isn't sound anyway as the number of moves you should as well as the number of moves you can reasonably calculate depends on the position.

You always should calculate a tactical line until quiescence and you only can calculate long lines if they are forced.

If from a given position you and your opponent would have just two reasonable candidate moves at each point along the line, the search tree already gets big very fast. In three moves (i.e. 6 ply) you will then have 2^6=2*2*2*2*2*2=64 lines to consider and 2+4+8+16+32+64=128 positions to evaluate along the way. 

Regarding the number of positions to consider, this would be the equivalent of calculating a totally forced line 64 moves (or 128 ply) long!

I do believe it was KASPAROV who said it best " It does not matter how far ahead you can see, If you do not understand what you are looking at ! " Can you validate the soundness of that position 6 or 7 moves down the road ? For a novice as has been stated, learn how to play sound solid principled chess in time deep visualization will come.