One tip he mentions in the book is predict-a-move. This where you try an predict what your opponent is going to do next, and play a move that sets a trap. In the past I've occasionally done this, and occasionally it has even worked.
But looking back on years of coaching I've realised that most new chess players employ this method, just that they do it in a far worse way than Gary suspects. Instead of predict-a-move, they go for hope-for-a-move or even pray-for-a-move. In this method you choose a move that relies upon your opponent playing the worst possible response for it to work. And I don't mean overlooking a hidden threat. I mean failing to move the Queen to safety after it is attacked by a pawn.
Of course as we improve we move beyond that. But only to what I call (and too often use), ignore-a-move. In this method you choose a move that looks good, but only if you ignore the best reply by your opponent. If you are lucky, you opponent will also ignore their best reply, thereby justifying this strategy.
Here is an example from a game I played last week (I was White).
1.Nc3 e6 2.d4 d5 3.e4 Nf6 The position now reached is a Classical French Defence, although I played the first 3 moves from "left-to-right" rather than the other way around. 4.Bg5 Be7 5.e5 Nfd7 6.h4 Bxg5 7.hxg5 Qxg5 8.Nh3 Qe7 9.Qg4 9.Nf4 is usual, although I can transpose to main lines if I choose. g6 10.0-0-0 Qb4N This artificial move sets a small trap, b
No comments:
Post a Comment