Homepage of Tartajubow provided by Bravenet.com

Homepage of Tartajubow

Interesting Chess Stuff

Welcome...

Services

Navigation

Here is what you will find:

Advice and Instruction
Interesting and instructive Web Sites
Games
The best places to play chess
Places to buy books and equipment

I am a 6-time qualifier in the US Open CC Champ, recently finished in the top 10 of the Correspondence Chess League of America's championship and have been playing CC for over 50 years. My official US Correspondence Rating is 2060. I also play at Chessworld where my rating is over 2300.

I've tried to share some of the things that enabled me to advance from a perennial 1600 player. Any advice on improvement I’ve given here is not something I’ve thought up on my own. It is information I have gleaned over the years from some of the best chess teachers in the world: former World Correspondence Champion C.J.S. Purdy and the late US Senior Master Ken Smith.

I hope it helps you play better chess.

Hit the BACK ARROW to return here after visiting the below sites

CHESS NEWS

Play chess online!

PUZZLE of the DAY

Some Advice

Recommended Books

The below summary is a good definition of the strengths and weaknesses of players at different level and can be used a guide to determine what needs to be studied to advance to the next level.

1400-1500 At this level chess players are still learning the basics. The most important lesson to learn here to is to avoid common chess blunders. They usually have some tactical skill and but positional understanding and endgame knowledge is usually lacking. Opening play is often unsound.

1600-1700 Rarely make gross blunders. Often lack fundamental chess knowledge more than they realize. In order to improve they must more often than not go back and study the fundamentals. By playing over GM games you can get an idea of how to apply fundamental knowledge. Good solid opening play and endgame knowledge is often lacking. They have often neglected studying positional play and the study of the classics.

1800-1900 Chess players at this level usually don’t make obvious mistakes. They more aggressive. Any player in this range who wants to get higher needs to start learning a good opening system and increase their endgame knowledge. Tactical skill and positional understanding are good and sometimes very good.

2000-2100 These players often play good openings they have developed over time. Their fundamental chess knowledge is almost solid and well founded. They make very few obvious mistakes. They have a lot of knowledge in pattern recognition gained from playing over hundreds of GM games. Very Good opening and endgame knowledge combined with specific opening variations in their favorite opening lines. Tactical skill and positional understanding very good

Opening theory is fascinating to lower rated players and Fine’s old Ideas Behind the Chess Openings book is still one of the best to get acquainted with the general ideas. However this is not the way to increase playing strength and will actually hinder your advancement if it’s the main thrust of your study program. FM Pelts and GM Lev Alburt in Comprehensive Chess Course (Vol II): "We beg students who are addicted to opening manuals to remember that most players who spend their time studying theory never reach A-level."

One of the single most important keys to succes is pattern recognition. This is what enables Grandmasters to have such quick site of the board. They have thousands of positions in memory. Most of us can't do that but we can impress some information on our subconscious that will allow us to recognize, however vague it might be, that we've seen something similar before and recall how strong players continued.

To increase your pattern recognition:
Play over UNANNOTATED master games, spending about 5-10 min. a game and trying to guess the next move. You are going after quantity, not quality. The quality will gradually increase. This is very important because onceyou have played over a hundred Sicilian Dragon Variations, say, you will start to recognized the patterns and the correct strategy as well as various possible tactical motifs in your own games. You can make this part more interesting by keeping track of your percentage of correct guesses.

In the now out of print Thought and Choice in Chess I noticed a couple of things: Lower rated players looked at more moves and further ahead than strong masters. Probably because masters quickly cut to the heart of the position. One interesting observation was that almost always in the first few moves lower rated players considered, at least one was a move the strong players had also looked at. Maybe they did not play it, but at least it was good enough to be considered. Consider only the first 2-4 moves that occur to you and usually go no more than 2-3 deep in your analysis; pick the move looks the most threatening even if it is only in a general sort of
way. Remember, mostly you will only be able to make small gains improving your position little by little.

Playing over hundreds of unannotated master games will start to form patterns which you do not even need to consciously think about. Studying themed tactical exercises so as to get as familiar as possible with those themes and to train the brain to recognize them without effort will get you a long way.

British IM Michael Basman said he thought playing through lots of master games was a good idea. One master said from the many coaching games he had played it was apparent that a lot of weaker players thought he saw more than they did. But it was more often the case that he saw less! The weaker players considered moves he never looked at. He went on to explain that when he was being coached by an IM he did not know how many times he was told 'Well, there is only one move to consider here...', or maybe it was two, or three, but in any case he had several more he was considering. This is because a GM quickly cuts to the heart of the matter. Some things even strong masters can eventually work out, but a GM will just 'know.'

So, while there is no quick fix approach to improvement, if you still want to improve your game with a minimum effort, playing over hundreds of games is the most effective and least painful route.

Any book by C.J.S. Purdy, but I especially recommend the following: The Search For Chess Perfection. This is Purdy's bio, games collection, and most important, a collection of his magazine articles. You can open this book up just about anywhere and learn something. Especially valuable is his advice on a system for avoiding errors and how to select a move. Highly recommended!

Long out of print, but The Endings (in modern theory and practice) by P.C. Griffiths. This is one of the best books I have ever seen on the endgame. His explanations are the most succinct I have ever read. If you can find this book used, buy it!

The Road to Chess Mastery by Alex Yermolinsky. He does not pull any punches in giving advice on how to improve, advising there is no "secret Russian training methods" or quick fixes that will easily make one a better player. He advocates hard work and tells you how to do it.

Simple Chess by John Emms

This book is out of print but I recommend it because it offers a clear introduction to strategy in simple, easy to understand terms. Good for club and Class B players and below.

100 Selected Games by Botvinnik. This is a classic. I wore the cover off mine. His games were masterpieces of positional and end game play.

Reshevsky on Chess by Samueal Reshevsky. Reshevsky's clear style is very instructive. This old book is out of print but worth reading if you can find it.

My 60 Memorable Games by Bobby Fischer. Enough said.

Super Nezh (Games of Rashid Nezhmetdnov) by Alex Pishkin. Botvinnink said nobody saw a combination like Nezhmetdinov did and Tahl admired his play. Great games. One annoying feature is crosstables don't have the usual 1, 1/2 and 0. They have small filled in squares for the results.

The Art of Positional Play by Samuel Reshevsky.

It has 61 games arranged by positional theme. The games are classified by theme to help reinforce the principles demonstrated.

500 Master Games of Chess by Tartakower and DuMont. The games only go up to the mid-50’s, but they are among the best ever played and the annotations are clear and concise. 500 great games arranges by openings.

Sorcerer’s Apprentice by David Bronstein. Fantastic games and annotations by the man who was almost World Champion.

Zurich International Chess Tournament, 1953 by David Bronstein. Must read. One of the best tournaments ever.

The World’s Great Chess Games by Graham Burgess, John Nunn & John Emms. 100 of the best games ever played up to 1997. Superbly annotated.

Bobby Fischer Goes to War by David Edmonds & John Eidinow. Behind the scenes machinations in the chess world during the Fischer-Spassky match in 1972. No games. Just an inside view of what went on.

Curacao 1962 by Jan Timman. The story of the event is facinating. Light notes to the games. Fischer wasn't quit ready to play for the world championship. Did the Soviet players cheat like Fischer claimed?

The Art of Bisguier by Arthur Bisguier. His games are a great pleasure to play over. The notes are superb, explaining the essence of the position so clearly that even ordinary players can understand. There are two volumes and both are full of anecdotes, trivia and chess history.

Misc Musings

Computer use and CC chess:

I have been playing CC for 50 years so remember way back before we ever dreamed of chess playing computers!

Almost all top level CC players use engines and freely admit it. So if you are playing at the 2400+ level, they are probably using an engine to check their analysis, but NOT select their moves.

I do not think there is any way a 1600 with an engine will beat a 2200 with an engine. My guess is most engine users only let their engines run a minute or two to select their moves which is not long enough at the higher levels of play. There are a lot of people complaining, and for some reason at lower levels, fear of engine users. Personally I do not worry about them too much. If I lose to an occasional engine user it is OK. It will cost a few rating points but who cares what my CC or server rating is anyway. If it is a strong player to begin with, he will soon be out of my class and the 2400 rated players can worry about him. Computers are here to stay and there is nothing we can do about it so my advice is do not worry about them, just enjoy the game.

Etiquette

I frequently see complaints on servers about opponents who will not resign in obviously lost positions and opponents who, once they are losing, slow down to the pace of a snail. The questions always are how to handle the situation. So, here are my thoughts.

No matter how irritating it is, slow movers in lost positions are exercising their right to take as much time as the time limit allows. The current US CC champ, Edward Duliba, says you should do this in ALL games. His reasoning is that it annoys and frustrates some opponents and increases the likelihood they will get impatient and blunder. If they are playing within the rules there is no room for complaint no matter how frustrating it might be.

I think it is foolish to toy with an opponent once you have a won game because you are increasing the chance that you, yourself, will blunder and stalemate an opponent through your carelessness. Finish them off and be done with them. Remember, your opponent my not realize he is dead lost and that is why he is contiuing to play. This is especially true if he is not very highly rated.

Occasionally I see people asking their opponents to resign. This is not good etiquette. No matter how irritating, your opponent is playing within the rules and has the right to play on. I understand lower rated players wanting to continue in hopeless positions because at their level blunders and quick turnarounds are frequent, and they have the right to do so. Allowing yourself to let them irritate and frustrate you is asking for trouble.

The Correspondence Chess Player's Creed

By John C. Knudsen

There is more to correspondence chess than playing the game. If I were just interested in the game itself, I would be satisfied playing my computer all day and night, or by replaying the games of famous masters. I play correspondence chess because I enjoy the stimulation of the contest and interaction with other people. I will attempt to treat each of my opponents with respect and courtesy. If my opponent is a beginner, and I am experienced, I will not become annoyed when my opponent does not resign. I will prove my superior skills by making strong moves and ending the game. I will become familiar with the rules and try my best to abide by them. I will not be a "silent withdrawal" from my games and will promptly notify my opponents and the tournament secretary if I can no longer continue in a tournament. When the game is over, I will always send a thank-you card to my opponent, regardless of the result. I will also remain tolerant of opponents who must withdraw from their games, because sometimes the troubles of life interfere with avocations.
I will at all times respect the correspondence chess administrators who have been selected to watch over and regulate an event. If I disagree with a decision, I will gracefully appeal to a higher authority. I will not become involved in petty disputes with dedicated administrators who are trying their best to do the right thing. On the other hand, I will always expect the rules to be enforced on an equal basis. There is virtually no situation where politics and correspondence chess can exist with each other peacefully. The game is the thing, along with the interaction with my opponents - many of whom will become my friends. There is no place in correspondence chess for the legal beagle, or the person who is always on guard for some vague insult. It is, after all, a game, and should be treated as such.
I will only use a computer to analyse in my correspondence chess games if it is allowed by the rules and my conscience will permit it. In that event, I will at least have the decency to inform my opponent. Perhaps, then, my opponent will want to buy a better program, and then the game could evolve to a higher level.
If my correspondence game is published when it is over, I will not gloat over my opponent's mistakes, but will attempt to clarify the ideas in an impartial way. I will not assume that my reader is skilled or understands the ideas involved, but will attempt to show how and why things happened as they did. I will give credit where credit is due.
I will try and give something back to the game I love so much. Whether it is in encouraging a beginning player, writing an article, annotating a game for publication, editing a magazine, or serving as an administrator, I will try and promote all that is good about correspondence chess. At this moment I will realize that it is true - we are all friends.