I miss him a lot in this world, and my heart still gets all twisted up thinking about it. Thinking about his family - sending support and hoping they're getting through it. Gonna watch some of his videos today, and probably learn a thing or two.

You were the best! 💙🤍

Full Quote:

Hikaru Nakamura on the top players in classical chess:

"If I were active and still studying all the time, which I have started doing in advance of Clutch Chess, I think I'm still in the top five.

A lot of people don't realize that the Candidates is a very different animal from other events. Everyone is juiced to the gills with preparation, so it's much harder to get an advantage. People see someone play badly at the Candidates and think they're completely washed and can't play chess, which is completely wrong, in my opinion.

If you ask me for the top five right now, I'd say Magnus, myself, Nodirbek and Sindarov, and then it's a free-for-all. Fabi, Arjun, Pragg, it's everybody. You can even put me in that same group with Fabi.

But again, it's hard to judge because classical chess doesn't happen that frequently. There just aren't that many classical tournaments, so it's very hard to judge."

Source Link

Hans is having a terrible US Championship, he really wants to be considered one of the top players. Has in the past complained about invitations, constantly counts himself among the best youngsters but actually Hans has never been in top 10, in fact clearly the invitations he gets has more to do with the attention he brings with himself rather than his play. I’m always curious as to why Hans is in talks as one of the top young talents when he clearly isn’t. His recent rating fall is definitely in the worst place he’s been in years but really he has never shown incredible promise. Also the opportunities he has gotten is more than anyone at his rating level gets tbh.

This was a 2200+ rated puzzle on chess.com in which black has to find the precise moves to win what looks like a simple conversion.

Solution when you end up Stalemating by accident...

Both lines are very similar but the evaluations are so different. In both lines, White will respond with Rg3, black defends with f6, white plays Qxh6. There must be some sort of defensive resource that Bx affords, but I can't find it even after playing around with the engine for a while.

I got lucky that it went exactly like what i planned, I think, but queen sac is queen sac.

Tomorrow will be a a year since Dayna left us. With Blitzstream (I'm french) he was my favorite streamer, his ability to explain high-level concepts and popularize his knowledge with a very colorful vocabulary being unmatched.

The content of the speedruns is so rich that I have always felt the need to have a support to maximize the knowledge I get from them, an index of the themes covered that cross-references the games is in my eyes the easiest way to anchor ideas and consolidate learning.

So here it is, I hope that others will find it useful and that Danya's knowledge will continue to "contaminate" more and more people :

https://senseidanya.com

I have noticed that political comments that support one side of the discourse are left to exist while the comments supporting the opposite view are deleted. The rule should be applied consistently.

Do not discuss politics in the comments. Just comment on the behavior of the moderation.

My opponent was beating me most of the match, felt like a very strong opponent, but we reached this position, and I couldn't figure out any way to advance and ended up flagging here...

Game analysis said that this was the very moment that I gained an advantage, but for thlife of me, I can't find it. Any idea I have seems to either lose my rook or my queen, and I don't see any cheeky checks or anything...and further, I don't know lichess well enough to get it to tell me how I should have proceeded.

Does anyone see why there is a sudden advantage?

Find all the games & full standings on Lichess: https://lichess.org/tournament/oct26bta

Photo: Lennart Ootes / FIDE

Hey everyone! I'm currently around 750 Elo in rapid, and I've been trying to improve at chess. Recently, my friend who's around 1200 Elo told me that analyzing my old games is better than just spamming rapid games. I agree with the idea, and I do analyze my games sometimes, but there's one problem I can't seem to solve.

Whenever I review a game, I can often identify my mistakes and understand what I did wrong. Maybe I missed an opponent's threat, made a bad calculation, or overlooked a better move. The problem is that when I play my next games, I still make similar mistakes. Even though I understood the mistake during the review, I struggle to apply what I learned in an actual game.

It's like I understand my mistakes after the game, but I can't recognize them when I'm actually playing. I don't know how to turn my analysis into real improvement, and it's getting frustrating because I feel like I'm repeating the same cycle.

For those of you who have experienced this, how did you overcome it? What should I actually do after analyzing a game to make sure I learn from my mistakes and don't keep repeating them? Should I focus on solving puzzles related to my mistakes, reviewing specific positions, or changing the way I analyze my games? I'm not looking for a shortcut to gain rating quickly. I genuinely want to improve my chess understanding and make the lessons from my games stick.

I'd really appreciate it if you could share a practical method that worked for you, especially if you went through the same problem at a beginner level. Thanks!

My Chess.com account: https://www.chess.com/member/leaferation

“Magnus is for sure the best chess player. But the thing is also that people are actually intimidated to play him, without playing a single game with him. So, when I first played him, I played much weaker than my level and I got crushed.
But over time I have played enough with him. Now I no longer feel intimidated and I do pretty well against him. In the last one year I probably don’t have a negative score against him.”

From a recent rapid game. Black took a knight on c4. Three ways to recapture, engine suggests they are similar evaluation. Would be interested in peoples thoughts. Pros and cons from my perspective:

Qxc4

- Pros: C file remains open to target double pawns.

- Cons: D pawn remains a weakness

dxc4

- Pros: Gets rid of backward d pawn

- Cons: makes e4 weaks, closes C file

bxc4

- Pros: Takes towards centre

- Cons: Black would be first to take the now open B file

I ruled out bxc4 quite quickly, it just felt wrong. I ended up playing Qxc4 for the pro listed above and also because i felt I could defend the backward d pawn a lot easier than they could defend their double pawns, but I do feel dxc4 was perhaps more natural.

Thoughts? Im about 2000 rapid chessdotcom.

I’ve played a decent amount of games now but I can’t seem to win any, I can’t really recognize when I can attack or when they can, and I don’t know how to set up a checkmate or anything, Is this fixable or is it just a skill issue

Whazzap

Just looking to watch some good game recaps. I want good commentary, and really interesting games! Not learners stuff, like, games between the greats! Maybe a Magnus and hikaru one? Or a more historical game, but must have good commentary, since I’m a dumby and need good explanations on why every move is so insane/interesting.

Any recommendations from anyone?

By the Platov brothers

Ideally max 5 years old