A lot of literature has grown over the years on chess strategies, the pins, forks, traps, pitfalls and what not apart from chess openings, middle games, end games, sudden checkmate possibilities, and so forth, that the beauty of the game seems to be lost in a morass of permutations and combination -- what the experts choose to call "the analysis of a game". To me, playing chess with basic knowledge of, and strict adherence to the rules, spontaneously and just for the fun of it, seems more appealing than trying to enhance one's ego or earn prize money out of the game! Worse still would be to join the commercial world of sponsoring a 'product or service' after becoming a celebrity in the game! And worst, rigging the game to favor those who 'bet' on championship games!
It often happens that a chess player studies a lot, but the rating does not go up. On the other hand, sometimes one just plays in tournaments, and the rating keeps growing and growing, without the player putting much effort into learning chess theory. Today, I thought I’d break this down into pieces.
There are various sources of chess knowledge:
These contribute to your “chess culture”, but if you stare at an opening encyclopaedia all day, and cannot remember a thing a day later, that does not help you much in the next tournament. Success during any given game depends on how well you processed that information, and whether you turned it into so called chess skills:
Today I made an ‘observation’ – I spend time acquiring bits of chess knowledge year after year, but my skills stay about the same, at least my rating says so. For almost 10 years. While preserving one’s playing strength does not come for free, some progress would be nice too. So I wrote this up so that I can ask myself a few questions:
For myself, the answer is probably “yes” to all those questions! What about you?