title: Stuck at 1100 elo for some months now

text:
# Question
Title: Stuck at 1100 elo for some months now
i have been stuck at around 1100 elo for some months now and it's getting so frustrating and kinda demotivating. Iam playing a lot on chess.com but still stuck. Any tips and good resources for me to get better. Honestly, any advice would be very helpful. FYI, i don't have a membership so i can only do like 3 puzzles a day.

# Answer
> 6 votes
All plateaus are different -- what holds *you* back is not the same as what holds another person with the same rating back.

So you need to look at *your* games, and see what causes you to lose. Then stop doing that.

Much of the time, it's things that you already know -- like losing pieces because you didn't notice that they were attacked, or that there was a simple tactic that you usually see but not that time. Then you need to figure out how you can notice them during the game and not make such mistakes anymore. Tips from others (without seeing your games) and resources aren't necessarily the answer.

# Answer
> 4 votes
**Tips:**
The main tips for improving at this level are almost universally agreed upon by chess coaches, titled players, etc:

* Play (a lot).
* Analyze your games. Try to find 1 key takeaway / lesson per game.
* Train basic tactics. These need to be ingrained until they are mastered.

Don't focus too much on rating, focus on the process and enjoy! Chess is a game and should be fun.

**Resources:** There are a number of low cost resources that are also suitable.

# Answer
> 2 votes
At your level, improvement will mostly come down to tactics. You can find free tactics all over the internet. The short answer is:

1. Spend more time doing tactics than you spend playing games.
2. When you do play chess, avoid super fast time controls like bullet--they train you to react, not to think.

# Answer
> 0 votes
learn easy to understand systemical openings such as KIA, Pirc, London, Colle. Stick with one of them. This way you come accross different variations against the same setup

# Answer
> 0 votes
It is normal, in any field, to stay at a certain level of knowledge for some time. However, if you continue studying and practicing, you will progress.

One activity that can help is teaching the subject. When you do so, you will discover that improvement is not only challenging for you but for everybody. Another important lesson from teaching is that, as you teach, you need to analyze not only your thoughts but also the thoughts of your students.

Finally, when you have to prepare the material, that process helps you fill in any gaps you may have in your understanding of the subject. If you do not have students, you can always create a YouTube channel, but if you teach in person, you will have more fun.

# Answer
> 0 votes
> i have been stuck at around 1100 elo for some months now and it's getting so frustrating and kinda demotivating.

First tip: don't care so much about the number. Care about learning and improvement, and the number will certainly follow. I know that it's easier said than done, but it's extremely common for chess players to get obsessed with their rating, which can ironically lead to less success.

> Iam playing a lot on chess.com but still stuck.

The advice given here that you should play a lot is both correct and misleading. Surely, you need practice and skills to become better. But also don't play **too much**! You need to spend a decent amount of time to learn chess, solve tactical exercises, analyze your games, etc. 3 puzzles a day is insufficient. And remember when solving puzzles: never guess a move and try it, **always see the entire variation in advance before making the first move**! Also it is very important in the beginning to **play long time control games**, as you'll never learn the skills and habits that will make you strong if you only play blitz games.

So here are my concrete tips:

1. Play longer games, but fewer games and analyze them after you've played them.
2. Register on ChessTempo. This is the best site to train tactics on, better than lichess and chess.com - and tactics training is entirely free!! The puzzles themselves are better, you have the option to have 'mixed' puzzles (read about it), as well as a spaced-repition opening trainer for your openings (similar to chessable), endgame training against the tablebase, etc. You can also play on this site, but I prefer lichess (and chess.com) for that.
3. Get good thinking habits, that's easily worth 200 Elo. Never move without asking yourself what your opponent's next move would be. Calculate a concrete move/variation. To put it like IM Andras Toth (great chess coach, check out his YouTube channel): "If your decisions are not based on concrete variations, you're not playing chess". This will heavily reduce your blunders, the #1 reason to lose.
4. Study chess. Watch YouTube lessons, or register on ChessFactor (where you can get master-taught chess courses for free!). You can also consider learning from books, chessable courses, etc ...

---
Tags: online
---


title: Exercises for positional evaluation

text:
# Question
Title: Exercises for positional evaluation
I would like to improve my position evaluation skills. And as we all know - there are tons of tactical exercises , endgames studies, etc. But when it comes to exercises for positional evaluation - well - things are getting complicated.

So far I know these sources: \- 'How to Reassess Your Chess' workbook \- Aagard 'Positional Play' contains some exercises \- Khmelnicky 100-exercises test book (but it contains all kinds of puzzles)

I've read Dan Heisemann idea to work with complicated middlegame position and then process it with an engine. But IMHO it lacks clear plan presentation and overall view of what is going on the board. So my question is - can anyone point me to specialised book or webpage that contain more of position evaluation exercises with long descriptive answers?

# Answer
> 3 votes
Three recommendations from me:

1. *Mastering chess strategy* by GM Hellsten has annotated games with more than 350 positional exercises with detailed answers. He has also authored *Mastering opening strategy* and *Mastering endgame strategy*
2. *Chess strategy: move by move* by IM Hunt isn't quite a puzzle book, but looks at annotated games and asks you questions as you analyse the games
3. *Practical Chess Exercises* by Ray Cheng has a mix of all types of positions (tactical and positional across all phases of the game). There are a total of 600 positions with detailed explanations here

# Answer
> 2 votes
The sources you have (Reassess Your Chess and the Aagard book) are two of the best positional books out there. I would definitely recommend getting those, if you haven't already. The Reassess Your Chess book is better for really grasping the basics of positional play. The Aagard book is more advanced, and it's better if you already have a solid positional base.

Another option is going to chess.com and getting a coach... there are many Grandmasters on there giving lessons at relatively cheap prices ($30 / $40 an hour). You could maybe take 10 lessons and get them to just focus on positional exercises with you, which I think would be beneficial. Some coaches on there are renowned for improving their students' play in an area very rapidly. Although I think the two positional books I mentioned above should be good enough.

# Answer
> 0 votes
I'd recommend reading annotated games or watching videos of commented games. If you wish you can pause before the comment, do the evaluation yourself and then compare your analysis with that of the commentator. You can find plenty of commentaries of major chess tournaments for free online and also you find streams of online matches commented by the master players live.

I'd find this much more efficient than trying to make sense of an engine evaluation of a middlegame position, because the engine will not tell you anything about the position but only give you the best continuation (or whatever it thinks is the best continuation).

# Answer
> 0 votes
I believe Understanding the Sacrifice by Dunnigton is a great book on positional understanding . Here is link of the below .Understanding the Sacrifice

Even in Google you can get a free pdf of this book. I downloaded it some years back.

# Answer
> 0 votes
Ray Cheng has a good book with 600 problems to solve where the solution is often of a non-tactical nature.

There are also some good training resources on youtube. For example this channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpUUMhWg5GPD5ynP\_vhnMJg

# Answer
> 0 votes
1. "How to reassess your chess" by jeremy silman ( increased my FIDE rating by 100 in 2 months! )
2. Books with in-depth annotated games are also very useful to study

P.S. Positional Play by Jacob Aagard is good, but the puzzle are very tricky.

---
Tags: positional-play, training, evaluation
---


# Question
Title: Chess calculation when there's more than 10 best moves
I have seen quite few positions where opponent has more than 10 good moves if I play a specific move. Even at that time, I have seen people calculate for so long. Is it that they are looking at all the moves and variation of what can happen after that? It's completely uncertain at some times what my opponent can play on the next move. Like in opening, who doesn't know theory they always look at something, but what do they actually think (or I have think to mastery on positional concept)?

# Answer
> 1 votes
There are many positions where there are a lot of good moves. 10 seems like a lot, but say that you have that many candidate moves. That doesn't mean that they're all as good as each other. In fact unless there are transpositions it is likely that there are going to be significant differences between moves.

This could be hidden tactical shots (the longer the game, the more time you should spend looking for these), or simply subtle differences in the pawn structure and the position of the pieces. A strong player might spend a long time in this sort of position as these factors become more and more significant and avoiding small weaknesses can become almost as important as avoiding losing a piece.

Another reason for spending a long time in such a position could be to decide on a plan, as although in strategical positions with a lot of moves there may be too many variations to full calculate, especially in closed positions there will often be a certain set of things you want to achieve: pawn pushes, piece manoevers etc. Deciding on where you want your pieces and how you are going to get them there will likely form part of the decision process.

# Answer
> 1 votes
There can be lots of variation in some positions as stated above. So what exactly one should calculate? *I have found the same question in Daniel Naroditsky's book*.

> A question arises, "What exactly do you calculate?"
>
> In other words, in a very complex position, how do you choose when to stop your calculation? The answer is simple: calculate as much as you can without getting into bad time trouble. The more you calculate, the higher chances of playing the correct move will be. ~ Mastering the position chess, Daniel Naroditsky. - page no. 47 chapter. 2

# Answer
> 0 votes
I'll keep it short and simple. *The reason they are taking a lot of time is that they are searching for the BEST move. Ironically, they often don't find it.*

---
Tags: strategy, positional-play
---


title: Is this position a draw?

text:
# Question
Title: Is this position a draw?
I was playing at my local chess club on Sunday and I had the position below as white. Me and my opponent continued for a while before finally agreeing to a draw. When I play it against bots as white sometimes I lose and sometimes I draw. For example, when I played against the lichess bot I lost, but when I played against the chess.com bot I got a draw. Is the position below a draw?

```

[Title "White to Move"]
[FEN "6k1/7p/6p1/5q2/6R1/5P1P/6PK/8 w - - 0 1"]
[FEN "7k/6p1/7p/5q2/6R1/5P1P/6P1/6K1 w - - 0 1"]

1. Re4 Qc5+ 2. Kh2 Qd6+ 3. Kg1 Kg8 4. Rg4 h5
5. Re4 g5 6. Rc4 Kf7 7. Re4 Kf6 8. Rc4 Kf5
9. Re4 Qd1+ 10. Kh2 Qd6+ 11. Kg1 Qb8 12. Rc4 Qb6+
13. Kh2 Ke5 14. Re4+ Kf5 15. Kh1 Kg6 16. Ra4 Kf5
17. Re4 Qb1+ 18. Kh2 Qd1 19. Rc4 Qd6+ 20. Kh1 Qd1+
21. Kh2 Qd6+ 22. Kh1 Kf6 23. Re4 Kg6 24. Rc4 Qd5
25. Re4 Qd1+ 26. Kh2 Kf6 27. Rc4 Qd6+ 28. Kg1 Qb6+
29. Kh1 Ke7 30. Kh2 h4 31. Re4+ Kf7 32. Rg4 Ke6
33. Re4+ Kd6 34. Rg4 Ke6 35. Re4+ Kd5 36. Rg4 Qb1
37. Re4 Qc1 38. Rg4 Qc7+ 39. Kg1 Ke6 40. Re4+ Kd5
41. Rg4 Qc1+ 42. Kh2 Qb1 43. Re4 Qf1 44. Rg4 Ke5
45. Re4+ Kf6 46. Rg4 Qd1 47. Re4 Kf5 48. Rg4 Ke5
49. Re4+ Kd6 50. Rg4 Ke5 51. Re4+ Kf5 52. Rg4 Qc1
53. Re4 Qa1 54. Rg4 Kf6 55. Re4 Kf7 56. Rg4 Kf6
57. Re4 Kf5 58. Rg4 Ke5 59. Re4+ Kd5 60. Rg4 Kc5
61. Re4 Kd6 62. Rg4 Kc5 63. Re4 Kd5 64. Rg4 Ke5
65. Re4+ Kd6 66. Rg4 Qc1 67. Re4 Kd7 68. Rg4 Ke7
69. Re4+ Kd7 70. Rg4 Qc5 71. Re4 Kd6

```

# Answer
Based on this line you wrote, it's a probable draw.

> When I play it against bots as white sometimes I lose and sometimes I draw

Given that bots are much stronger than the best humans, they're likely to be light years better than you, so if you manage to draw some of the time it's probable that another bot will be able to draw all of the time - and hence the position is objectively drawn.

The following observation backs up the above too: if you run Stockfish in multi-PV mode on that position, it suggests several different lines that all have the same evaluation. Then, after making its suggested move, it still suggests several different lines that all have the same evaluation. This is known to engine chess fans as a "flatline" or "horizone", and is very suggestive of fortresses. It doesn't prove a fortress *per se*, but it is very suggestive.

If you want to analyze the position in detail, you can also increase the half-move counter in the FEN to speed up the engine pruning.
> 1 votes

# Answer
Adding to Ryley's answer (which gives no strategies): Assume two pawn pairs get exchanged. Pg2 + R walking between f3 and h3 is a fortress - draw. Avoid for Black. Most else Q/RP is won, but sometimes even only in DTZ 50+! My strategy for Black would be using pawn moves only very sparingly and trying to break through with your K behind the enemy lines, i.e. Kf1/f2 with no checks possible. It doesn't matter if it costs your own pawns if you also get two. (Pf3+Ph3 is drawish again.) White should teeth-clenchingly defend the rook position somewhere on the 4th.
> 0 votes

# Answer
Don't listen to computers! This position can very well be drawn as the 2 pawns will probably be exchanged into a Q vs R + P ending. It is very hard to win Q vs R not to mention this! The only possibility to lose is to get checkmated. Or else, it is drawn.
> 0 votes

# Answer
The Lichess analysis board evaluates it to be around -2.2 which indicates a pretty (but not totally) losing position for white.

If white plays well then it's possible to draw but unless black blunders, white will almost certainly not win.
> -3 votes

---
Tags: analysis, endgame
---


# Question
Title: Why local Stockfish Eval is not matching with Chess.com and Lichess.org?
Experimenting with stockfish and stuck on a situation. PGN (The Game of the Century)

`1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. d4 O-O 5. Bf4 d5 6. Qb3 dxc4 7. Qxc4 c6 8. e4 Nbd7 9. Rd1 Nb6 10. Qc5 Bg4 11. Bg5 Na4 12. Qa3 Nxc3 13. bxc3 Nxe4 14. Bxe7 Qb6 15. Bc4 Nxc3 16. Bc5 Rfe8+ 17. Kf1 Be6 18. Bxb6 Bxc4+ 19. Kg1 Ne2+ 20. Kf1 Nxd4+ 21. Kg1 Ne2+ 22. Kf1 Nc3+ 23. Kg1 axb6 24. Qb4 Ra4 25. Qxb6 Nxd1 26. h3 Rxa2 27. Kh2 Nxf2 28. Re1 Rxe1 29. Qd8+ Bf8 30. Nxe1 Bd5 31. Nf3 Ne4 32. Qb8 b5 33. h4 h5 34. Ne5 Kg7 35. Kg1 Bc5+ 36. Kf1 Ng3+ 37. Ke1 Bb4+ 38. Kd1 Bb3+ 39. Kc1 Ne2+ 40. Kb1 Nc3+ 41. Kc1 Rc2# 0-1`

Now after `18. Bxb6` (FEN `r3r1k1/pp3pbp/1Bp1b1p1/8/2BP4/Q1n2N2/P4PPP/3R1K1R b - - 0 18`) both the Chess.com (-5.47) and Lichess.org (-8.3) showing `Black` is good position but when I test this on my local stockfish 16, it's showing white is in Good Position (+6.06).

Any suggestion what I'm missing?

This is how I'm testing-

`position fen r3r1k1/pp3pbp/1Bp1b1p1/8/2BP4/Q1n2N2/P4PPP/3R1K1R b - - 0 18`

`eval`

# Answer
The `eval` command returns a static evaluation, so just the position without any search. Therefore, the local command and the online tools return different results.
> 5 votes

# Answer
The online tools have a specific depth, ponder, CPU and other such parameter values, out of which some can be editted in lichess.org. Chess.com on the other hand, uses other engines, by which I mean not Stockfish 15+, and therefore presents different results. If you actually view it, you realise that it is either Komodo, or the latest version of stockfish available is stockfish 11. Parameters such as depth are probably different in both cases as well.'

Now, when you open it locally, the same parameters are not 'tuned' as per lichess.org, and the depth is usually 24 or so, in contrast to lichess.org which is now updated to be infinite!
> 1 votes

---
Tags: stockfish, lichess, chess.com
---


# Question
Title: What could explain strange performance pattern among Stockfish engine variants?
I have run computer chess tournaments among Stockfish engines, set up for various nominal strengths. The results were really strange, some are in reverse order to their supposed performance. For example, here is a crosstable (8x2 rounds) for Skill Levels 4-7, as well as two UCI-Elo settings of 1700 and 1900:

```
 Rank                                     Name    1     2     3     4     5     6  Games  Score  Score%
1      Stockfish_Ver16_Skill=7_st=0.100sec    x  12.0  12.0   8.5  13.5  14.5     80   60.5   75.62
2      Stockfish_Ver16_Skill=6_st=0.100sec  4.0     x  11.0  11.0  13.0  14.5     80   53.5   66.88
3      Stockfish_Ver16_Skill=5_st=0.100sec  4.0   5.0     x  12.5  11.0  13.0     80   45.5   56.88
4 Stockfish_Ver16_UCI_Elo=1900_tc=40/15min  7.5   5.0   3.5     x  10.0  11.0     80   37.0   46.25
5      Stockfish_Ver16_Skill=4_st=0.100sec  2.5   3.0   5.0   6.0     x   5.5     80   22.0   27.50
6 Stockfish_Ver16_UCI_Elo=1700_tc=40/15min  1.5   1.5   3.0   5.0  10.5     x     80   21.5   26.88

```

So, the 4th ranked had quite good 7.5:8.5 showing against the 1st, and progressively worse against the 2nd and 3rd! How could this be?

# Answer
Michael West is right that the sample size is small.

> I do not consider these numbers, each player with 80 games (16 between every pair), too small for discerning some signal above the natural noise level.

Check this out, it's from TCEC small sample size tests. You get the *same engine* to play 100 games against itself, in 1000 matches (so, 100,000 games). Note a 65-35 score happens twice. That's a +30 point difference, even though it's the *same engine* playing both sides. That's small sample size for you.

There is a reason engine devs need tens of thousands of games to prove a patch is superior.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: stockfish, computer-chess, performance
---


title: How do I improve my endgame technique?

text:
# Question
Title: How do I improve my endgame technique?
I have decent endgame technique and recently bought Jesus De La Villa's *100 endgames you must know*. How do I shift it closer to top level endgame technique?

# Answer
> How do I shift it closer to top level endgame technique?

The simple answer is you study the more difficult endgames which normally require IM or GM level playing strength to master. What you should be looking to learn here is:

1. When the endgame is won, how to win for the stronger side
2. When the endgame is won, how to put up the greatest resistance for the weaker side
3. When it is drawn, how to draw
4. When it is drawn, how to win when the weaker side goes wrong

These endgames would include:

1. K+Q vs K+R
2. K+R+B vs K+R
3. K+Q vs K+R+P
4. K+R+f+h vs K+R
5. K+R+a+f+g+h vs K+R+f+g+h

A useful resource is *Fundamental Chess Endings* by Karsten Mueller and Frank Lamprecht.
> 0 votes

# Answer
The simplest answer to you question is:Now read and master your endgame book!

Without knowing your rating there are some general points to be made; applicable to players of all strengths.

1.Take every opportunity to apply this new knowledge to your own games when ever you play.

2.Self analysis and application of your newly learned endgame technique.Analysis with a mentor or buddy of greater strength is especially valuable.

3.I should point out that you should attempt to make parallel improvements in the other phases of the game :all the endgame instruction in the world is entriely superflous if you loose in the middlegame or opening.

4.Widen your experience by playing many games frequently.

So in summary : Read and master your book and Applicaction , Analysis , Advice (from a stronger player),Attention ( to the whole game) and Acquire experience by frequent play.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: endgame, books, recommendations
---


title: Center control - Model games

text:
# Question
Title: Center control - Model games
I'm searching for some games to explain 3rd/4th grade kids the concept of "good control over the center" opposed to "bad center control". Since I want them to somehow see that concept, I'm searching for a couple games where player's strength level is very different (some GM vs Intermediate in simul games or similar).

# Answer
> 2 votes
Morphy's games are easy to understand the ideas for his moves. Frisco Del Rosario's *A First Book of Morphy* uses a collection of Morphy's games to illustrate key ideas in the opening, middlegame, and endgame.

In the opening portion of the book, one of the key themes he specifically highlights is controlling the center. You'll find illustrative & annotated games with this theme.

I recall at least a few games where Morphy is playing an amateur. In the other games, the skill gap between Morphy and contemporaries is so large, I think those games will also serve your interests.

Morphy's play is very clear, so there are many games. A few examples:

* Morphy-Dominguez, Havana, 1864 (blindfold simultaneous exhibition by Morphy)
* Anderssen-Morphy, Paris, 1858

```
[Event "Blindfold simul, 3b"]
[Site "Havana CUB"]
[Date "1864.02.16"]
[Result "1-0"]
[White "Paul Morphy"]
[Black "Placido Dominguez"]
[ECO "C55"]
[Title "Morphy-P. Dominguez, Havana, 1864, 1-0, Blindfold Exhibition"]
[FEN ""]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d4 exd4 5. O-O Bc5 6. e5 Ne4
7. Bd5 f5 8. exf6 Nxf6 9. Bg5 Be7 10. Bxf6 Bxf6 11. Re1+ Ne7
12. Ne5 Bxe5 13. Qh5+ g6 14. Qxe5 Rf8 15. Nd2 c6 16. Ne4 d6
17. Nxd6+ Kd7 18. Be6+ Kc7 19. Nxc8+ Qd6 20. Qxd6# 1-0

```

```
[Site "Paris FRA"]
[Date "1858.12.29"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Adolf Anderssen"]
[Black "Paul Morphy"]
[Title "Adolf Anderssen-Paul Morphy, 1858, 0-1"]
[FEN ""]

1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.e5 d5 5.Bb3 Ne4 6.Nf3 Bg4 7.O-O
Nc6 8.Ba4 g5 9.Bxc6+ bxc6 10.d4 c5 11.c3 Be7 12.b4 cxb4
13.cxb4 O-O 14.Qb3 Rb8 15.a3 c5 16.Nc3 Nxc3 17.Qxc3 cxb4
18.axb4 Bxb4 19.Qd3 a5 20.h4 h6 21.hxg5 hxg5 22.g3 Rb6 23.Ra2
Rg6 24.Rg2 Bh3 25.e6 Bxg2 26.exf7+ Kg7 27.Kxg2 Qc8 28.Ne5 Rh6
29.gxf4 Rfh8 30.fxg5 Rh2+ 31.Kg1 Rh1+ 32.Kf2 R8h2+ 33.Ke3 Rh3+
34.Nf3 Rxf3+ 35.Rxf3 Qxc1+ {36. Kf2 Qg1 37. Ke2 Qe1#} 0-1

```

---
Tags: opening, teaching, center
---


title: Best move in algebraic notation

text:
# Question
Title: Best move in algebraic notation
I have no experience in chess, and I tried my best to answer this question myself but am finding difficulties. What is the answer? It's for another game.

# Answer
> 1 votes
**1. Nxf8?! Qxg4+ 2. Kh1 Qe4+** is winning for White. But **1. Qxf8+ Bxf8 2. Rxf8#** is undeniably better.

```
[Title "White to Move"]
[FEN "5rk1/1p1q2bp/p2pN1p1/2pP2Bn/2P3P1/1P6/P4QKP/5R2 w - - 0 1"]

1. Qxf8+ Bxf8 2. Rxf8# (1. Nxf8?! Qxg4+ 2. Kh1 Qe4+)

```

# Answer
> 0 votes
Nxf8 wins material and probably the best. Potential attacks on the king though.

---
Tags: positional-play, puzzles
---


# Question
Title: Is there any program which I can use to train custom tactics puzzles?
Essentially, I would like to have the following features/workflow:

1. I obtain a `.pgn` file with (puzzle) positions and moves (the solutions)
2. I load that `.pgn` into the program and then solve (sequentially) the puzzles, with an interface similar to the lichess.org or chess.com tactics trainer

Of course some options might be nice (i.e. sequntial vs. random order, hints that are generated by an engine in the background, some statistics etc.) but the above two things are essentially that.

Surprisingly I cannot find such a program, let it be open source or commercial. The only thing similar was an apparently abandoned freeware program dubbed *Chess Hero*, but that threw a lot of errors even with very simple `.pgn` files...

# Answer
Lucas Chess can do what you're asking for. I use it myself to train custom tactics pgns on my computer. Lucas Chess also supports managing pgn databases.

To create a custom tactics training:

> Databases: Tools/Databases create new, import PGN, Trainings, create ....

For mobile, you can use Scid on the go which I also use myself.
> 2 votes

# Answer
This chess puzzle editor accepts one puzzle at a time in PGN format and creates a public link for an interactive puzzle. It has the following features:

* the computer replies even if the user goes wrong
* the computer tries multiple defenses before admitting success
* the user is allowed a choice of alternative solutions

The two last features need the PGN to include multiple defenses and alternative solutions.
> 1 votes

# Answer
I have written a chess GUI called Nimzo\_2023. It is a fork of the Tarrasch Chess GUI with some added features. One of the features that I added was puzzle mode, which provides most of the puzzle features that you require.

I had not thought of random puzzle selection, I might add that. The program can be downloaded from the website - Nimzo\_2023 Chess GUI website or directly from the following link - Nimzo\_2023 Chess GUI Mediafire link

I based the puzzle mode on the one in the free ChessX program. You could check that one out too.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: software, tactics, puzzles, pgn
---


title: What do I do in unfamiliar openings?

text:
# Question
Title: What do I do in unfamiliar openings?
Recently I lost to an FM in 28 moves due to lack of opening knowledge. Can someone help me out and summarize the general principles to follow in unfamiliar openings? Please make it easy to memorize.

# Answer
Your four main goals in the opening are:

* Develop your pieces : playing (only once, and toward the center, if possible) each knight, bishop, central pawn, queen, and later rook.
* Control the center
* Put your king to safety ; most often, by castling
* Annoy your opponent : as much as possible, prevent them to do the same and to reach a comfortable position; this requires carefulness about their options and tactical alertness.
> 2 votes

# Answer
I like Evergalo's answer, although I would modify it a bit.

* Develop your pieces. No one could disagree with this. But not *necessarily* toward the center. Fianchettoed bishops can be very good. Rooks, since they start on the edge, always move toward the center (at least on their first move) but the key for rooks is not center vs. not, but open file vs semi-open vs. closed. And which pawns should move isn't absolute, just look at hypermodern openings.

and I would add "connect your rooks" which will involve a queen move.

I do like the last bullet about "annoy the opponent" -- that one doesn't get mentioned so much.

Also, if you lost to an FM in 28 moves, it may well not be because of opening knowledge. I don't know your rating so excuse me if I am way off, but if you are asking this question, you probably aren't close to FM strength and 28 moves is a pretty long game.
> 3 votes

# Answer
I think @Evergalo's answer is 100% the best due to its conciseness. For those seeking a bit more detail...

**10 Opening Principles** from *A First Book of Morphy* by Frisco Del Rosario:

1. Open with a center pawn.
2. Develop with threats.
3. Develop Knights before Bishops.
4. Don't move the same piece twice if you can help it.
5. Make as few pawn moves as possible.
6. Don't bring your Queen out too early.
7. Castle as soon as possible, preferably on the kingside.
8. Play to get control of the center.
9. Try to maintain at least one pawn in the center.
10. Don't sacrifice without a clear and adequate reason.

Also very relevant is this answer: just play good chess.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: opening, memorization
---


# Question
Title: Rook endgame book that goes through the strategy of such positions
Consider this position:

```
[FEN "8/R4p2/P4kp1/7p/7P/4K1P1/r4P2/8 w - - 0 1"]

   1. Kd4 Rxf2 2. Rc7 Ra2 3. a7 Kf5 4. Kc4 Kg4 ( 4... Ra1 5. Kb5 Rb1+ 6. Kc6 Ra1 7.
Kb7 f6 8. a8=Q Rxa8 9. Kxa8 Kg4 10. Rg7 Kxg3 11. Rxg6+ Kh3 12. Rxf6 Kxh4 13.
Rg6 Kh3 14. Kb7 Kh2 15. Kc6 h4 16. Kd5 h3 17. Ke4 Kh1 18. Kf3 h2 19. Ra6 Kg1
20. Ra1# ) 5. Kb3 Ra6 6. Rc4+ Kxg3 7. Ra4 Rxa7 8. Rxa7 Kxh4 9. Kc3 g5 10. Rxf7 Kg3 11. Kd2 h4 12. Ke2 h3 13. Kf1 h2 14. Rh7 g4 15. Rh6

```

I want to read a book that explains the winning method of such positions. I read "100 Endgames you must Know" by De la Villa, and currently I'm reading "Endgame Strategy" by Shereshevsky. But none of them goes through examples like the one that I mentioned above. Let me know if you know any online references or books that talk about such positions. These positions are like one stage before the endgames that I saw in "100 Endgames you must Know".

# Answer
> 3 votes
Dvorestsky's Endgame Manual has a section dedicated to this type of ending titled "Balance on One Wing and an Extra Pawn on Another". It is 31 pages in my third edition.

It contains exactly the position in your question.

It describes three plans for these kinds of positions when the extra pawn is on the 7th rank.

I recommend this book in general as a help for understanding the correct method in endgame play.

# Answer
> 2 votes
First some disclaimers:

1. I will refer to mainly English language publications ( and Translations into English)
2. There will inevitably be other choices: I can only recommend the ones I know from my own experience or from collegial word of mouth.

3.You need to read and practice and play and loose a great many games to derive any benefit from these!

A. There are several comprehensive General Endgame books that will have great coverage of rook endgames that well are worth looking at of which two stand out especially well :

1. Silman’s Complete Endgame Course -From Beginner to Master: Jeremy Silman - Siles Press November 2006 With detailed explanations and problems in the great teaching style of this Author Comprehensive coverage endgames in general You can dip into the table of contents online at what ever retail website you favour (Interestingly it is also available chess able with a free lesson to try)
2. Fundamental Chess Endings Karsten Muller & Frank Lamprecht: Gambit Publications- Feb. 2023 Again Comprehensive coverage and eminently readable (I remember learning how to mate with N &B vs K from this)

B: Others:

1. Secrets of Rook Endgames John Nunn As the title suggests Rook specific Gambit Publications : thorough & up to date (also available on chessable)
2. Yuri Averbakh & Nikolai Kopayev Comprehensive Chess Endings Volume 5 Pergamon Press (1980’s was my edition- now out of print) But presently available via Ishi Press 2013
3. Dvoretzky’s Endgame Manual: Mark Dvoretzky (& revised by Karsten Muller) 5th Ed. Russell Enterprises 2020 Advanced material.

4.Pal Benko Endgame Laboratory Ishi press 2007 (Collected Magazine Articles from the authors Chess life contributions in the 1980’s)

C. Software:

1.Total Chess Endings GM Alexander Panchenko: Extremely good value for money by comparison to other available sofware and you have the advantage and convenience of drill exercises to practice with.

2.Chessbase has a comprehensive set of Endgame DVD’s from Lamprecht and Muller

D. Finally : Do not despair and enjoy the Quest whatever it brngs !

---
Tags: endgame, strategy, rook-endgame
---


# Question
Title: How does Chess.com calculate puzzle rating?
How does chess.com calculate puzzle rating? I am curious because today, I managed to gain rating while incorrectly solving a puzzle. Could someone help me out? (Also on puzzles that are already rated, not just pending)

# Answer
> 3 votes
According to Chess.com's How do Puzzle ratings work? you can get +1 point for getting ***pending puzzles*** incorrect as they have not yet received an established rating.

> "About 5% of the puzzles you run into will be new puzzles that have not yet been rated. You will never lose points for getting one of these Pending puzzles wrong!"

As for how they calculate the Puzzle ratings, these are similar to the playing ratings with a few key differences:

* **Correctly solving a puzzle always increases your puzzle rating** whereas a win against a much lower rated player may not increase your rating. Solving the lowest rated puzzle will at least give you 1 point.
* A new puzzle receives a rating based on the puzzle ratings of those able to solve it. However, after a set amount of time the rating is locked and will not change. Chess.com does have a means to correct the locked rating up or down if needed.

For puzzles with multiple moves, there is a "partial credit" scoring system where you can till receive a net increase in puzzle rating for getting a few moves right even if you missed some at the end of the sequence.

---
Tags: rating, puzzles, chess.com
---


# Question
Title: Very fast chess games-tournaments between engines
I am wondering if there are chess games or tournaments between engines, with a very small duration, like 10-5 seconds or 10-10 seconds (every game). If not, would it not be interesting?

# Answer
> 8 votes
At those timescales, communication between computers becomes a problem. For instance, it takes more than a millisecond (10-3 s) for me to ping my router. Even if you install a sort of timekeeper program on the computer itself, CPU clocks aren't reliable on such small timescales.

Instead, it might be more interesting to run them on slower hardware.

# Answer
> 3 votes
You overestimate how fast computers are. At 10-10 seconds, you are close to the single machine instruction timescale. That is, "how much is 2+2?", not "evaluate a chess position", let alone play an entire game. At 10-5 you could do a pretty shallow evaluation. It would be an interesting programming exercise but in terms of chessplay quality I'm not sure it would mean much. My guess is that for a game between engines to be somewhat meaningful it would need to take several orders of magnitude longer than that.

Throwing more CPUs or GPUs at the problem, you can greatly increase computing capacity, but I don't think that would help you play such fast games due to communication overhead and other factors. One thing you can do, however, is play many games in parallel. You could have a match on a supercomputer where two engines play thousands of games at the same time, and see which engine wins more. The entire match could be over in seconds of "wall clock time".

# Answer
> 2 votes
For ultra-low timescales the computers would at best have time for a 1 ply search. So you'd be figuring out the best "shallow search" evaluation function. Possibly bullet players would be interested in the parameters of such a search function because I suspect they differ from search functions designed to perform well for deep searches.

# Answer
> 2 votes
No. The computer-vs-computer tournaments are usually several seconds per move.

Humans can't even watch games that are any faster than that anyway.

And if you want to watch very strong matches (why not, right? who wants to watch noob chess?) then computers need at least that much time.

You could have something decent with 1E-2 moves, but again, there's little interest.

---

Speed matches are interesting between humans because an hour-long game is a long to play and watch.

But computers play bullet chess anyway; there's no incentive to make it even faster.

# Answer
> 0 votes
**Little blitzer** is the perfect solution. But in this case, you can't see the live tournament games, but you can save and replay them after pgn file generated. It only takes few seconds to complete a game of 100 moves. But using the little blitzer is little tricky and you will it difficult.

---
Tags: engines, tournament, time-control, time-management
---


# Question
Title: I am looking the author of specific position
Who is the author of this study?

```
[FEN "q7/8/8/6R1/7R/k7/P7/6K1 w - - 0 1"]

```

# Answer
This seems to be a correction of study by Luigi Centurini that was published in Schachzeitung, vol. 8, i. 10 (Oct., 1853), p. 333: "White moves, but can only draw." The original setting was:

```
[FEN "q7/8/8/8/8/8/6RR/k6K w - - 0 1"]

```

(Note that a very closely related study with the same material but with a 'White wins' stipulation appears on p. 332.)

According to Harold van der Heijden's chess study database, which probably incorporates the Arves source cited by another poster it was corrected (M. Garcia & M. Campioli in Estudios Artisticos de Ajedrez - XVII-21 2015), but I have not seen that correction myself.

(Note: That other post seems to have gone away as I was adding this reply? Pity -- the alternate source it gave would have been useful, as it may have been the original publication.)

(Added: after getting a link to the www.arves.org web site cited in the deleted post I find that the web page did not provide any more useful source information, but seems to be a selection from van der Heijden's database, release V. The front page I thought could have been the original publication was from a book on rook endgames published in 1853.)

Added: The author, then, would be Garcia & Campioli, after Centurini, or some similar writing. Centurini didn't author the position, but neither did Garcia & Campioli create it independently of Centurini.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: study, identify-this
---


# Question
Title: How to exclude games played by someone with pgn-extract
I am trying to filter out games played by one specific player out of a large pgn file, currently my tags file looks like this:

```
WhiteElo >= "2500"
WhiteElo <= "2600"
BlackElo >= "2500"
BlackElo <= "2600"
TimeControl >= "180"
Player <> "BOT-RENAMED"

```

But the resulting file does include "BOT-RENAMED", am I doing anything wrong?

Alternatively, can we exclude games where the lichess tag `WhiteTitle` or `BlackTitle` are "BOT"?

# Answer
The relational operators are intended to be used with numeric values. However, it would make sense to allow \<\> to be applied to non-numeric tags.

You can get around this limitation in your particular case by making two passes over the games. On the first pass, select on the basis of all the tags apart from the Player one. Then make a second pass where you just match the BOT-RENAMED player. If on this second pass you also use the -n option then pgn-extract will save all the non-matched games (i.e., those not by BOT-RENAMED) to a separate file. That file should then contain the ones you want overall.
> 4 votes

---
Tags: pgn-extract
---


# Question
Title: Can Magnus change his mind about his decision to not play in the 2024 Candidates tournament?
Magnus Carlsen has publicly announced that he will not play in the 2024 Candidates tournament. Can he change his mind at all? Is there a deadline to decide whether or not to play in the Candidates? If so, when is the deadline?

# Answer
> 3 votes
After the FIDE world on 16th August 2023 in Baku, Azerbaijan, Magnus announced that he would not compete for the world title:

> "Under the current format there is absolutely no chance. I think everybody should operate under the assumption that I will not play at the Candidates and that everybody else who is in the semifinals is qualified for the Candidates,"

While he has continued to play chess at the highest levels, he has not contested the world championship title since winning against Nepomniachtchi in November 2021, that and his announcement of 16th August 2023 make it highly improbable he will change his mind.

The pathways to contest the world title match are as given by FIDE here and in addition a helpful page here

The deadline in practice would equate to the date when the full lineup of the Candidates 2024 tournament is announced.But, Magnus could still in theory join in on the candidates Tournament in Toronto, Canada in April 2024 and after that when there are pathways open to him for example by way of contingency (with players dropping out) and as mentioned in the comments by virtue of having the highest Elo rating of all FIDE professionals.

However, this by no means a realistic prospect.

---
Tags: carlsen, candidates
---


# Question
Title: In a side line of the Italian Game: Classical Variation, Giuoco Pianissimo, why is blacks a point ahead here?
In this position, which seems very similar on both sides (with even a bit more center control from white because the pawns are higher up), the engine thinks black is up a whole point (-1.1 according to SF 14 NNUE Depth 22) and I was wondering if there was anything I was missing explaining that?  FEN: r1bqk2r/ppp1nppp/1b1p1n2/3Pp3/2B1P3/2P2N2/PP1N1PPP/R1BQK2R b KQkq - 2 8

EDIT: it's -0.78 for Stockfish 16 at Depth 35 EDIT2: The sequence of moves to get there was:

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Nf6 4. d3 Bc5 5. c3 d6 6. d4 Bb6 7. d5 Ne7 8. Nbd2

# Answer
> 2 votes
You don't say who has the move, but after trying to reconstruct the early moves I think it is White. I would certainly rather have Black, although I am not quite sure by how much, and I'm not just going to quote any engine moves, but I will attempt to reason things out. Whites "space advantage" does not mean much. The White pieces are not well placed to develop the typical Q-side initiative with c4, b4 and c5, whereas Black is well placed to develop the typical K-side initiative with ..0-0,..N-g6,..N-h5,..f5,..Q-f6, and their pieces are not cramped. As Black I would know what I wanted to do, and would not find it hard. As White I would probably start with Nf1, because I don't see what else to do with it, and then play Be3 to exchange off the strong Black Bishop. I would be playing to equalize. The position is not in fact "similar for both sides". There are many asymmetries, and they mostly favor Black.

ADDED My reconstruction went 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.c3 d6 5.d4 Bb6 6.d5 Ne7 7.Nbd2 Nf6 with White to move. If Black has the move, my inner caveman calls out for 8..Ng4 9.0-0 f5 and is very happy. However, this is a matter of style and 8..c6, forcing 9.dxc6 bxc6 is also extremely good for Black. Counting the square controlled by pawns is of limited value if no pieces actually want to go there. In either sequence I would question d5. It opens the line of Blacks Bishop, releases the pressure against e5, drives Black Knight where it wants to go, and has no serious cramping effect.

---
Tags: opening
---


# Question
Title: Humanlike chess engine that isn't a neural network
I am currently trying to make a chess engine that tries to make the most human moves instead of the best ones.

Now, I am aware of Maia Chess, which I believe is a neural network chess engine that attempts to emulate human-like play. However, I am more interested in chess engines that do not apply machine learning at all, (such as Stockfish with NNUE off). There are some reasons as to why I want to do this, but it's mainly curiosity, I suppose.

Basically, I want to code a static evaluation function that tries to evaluate the most human move using certain heuristics that are useful to predict human-like behavior and especially human error. I couldn't find any research that resembled this topic.

I already have an idea to use the complexity of a chess position (calculated in page 4 of research paper) to predict the likelihood of a mistake (the more complex the position, the likelier a mistake will occur), but it wouldn't be able to obtain exactly *what* blunder is played.

**Basically, what heuristics would be helpful in determining the most human move in a position?**

# Answer
That would be a fun goal.

Last year we have a discussion on "Ideal Chess Engine for Kids (for Practice)" in talkchess.

I tried to make some of its requirements in my engine CDrill. For testing, you can download this engine at https://sites.google.com/view/cdrill/download. There is sinful and decent option on this uci engine.

I also launch this engine in lichess as CDroid bot.

This is its description.

```
Cdroid uses an alpha-beta algorithm without using neural net,
programmed to play 90% suboptimal and 10% best moves. Out of
the suboptimal moves, 80% are dubious, 15% are bad and 5% are
blunder moves. As the king safety, mobility, pawn structure and
threat evaluations get bad the engine error increases. Only plays
bullet, blitz and rapid games against humans. Approximate rating
is CCRL Blitz 900.

```

The algorithm is complicated but it is fun. I normally do a full search but in multipv mode. I query the evaluation on king safety, etc. if engine side is bad I will select bad moves meaning not the top 1 move from its search. There are some conditions of when to move the top 1, top 2, etc. move from multipv search.
> 3 votes

# Answer
The best way to make a engine to make human moves is if you program it to have a small depth (5-6 sounds good)for middlegame and big depth for endgame(10-12) That way you will give your engine a rating of about 2900.But humans are also able to recognize patterns(open files,critical squares etc) and evaluate some positions better than they actually are(space advantage,opponent's counterplay is limited and requires you to brute analyze positions for many minutes to find it,opponent must find unique moves to survive in a position).
> 2 votes

# Answer
I've got a quick idea here, so it might be complete garbage. What if we blend the traced evaluation with a static evaluation in shallower levels? Instead of only using the static evaluation score from the deepest node, we could also try including another static evaluation at depth 3 or 4. This could make the engine act more "greedy" and make moves that are only good in the short term. For example this triggers that the engine will attack the enemy more often, even though the move is worse. I belive this trait, is quite human so it could work.

Here is an example (Start at 4th node):

Note: Dont change the score at the deepest node if its mate score as this will give wrong checkmate depths (Eninge will still see Checkmates -\> so wont blunder checkmate), also keep in mind other edge cases like transposition table.

Further ideas:

1. Instead of doing this process at 4 ply, one could do it with a random probabilty at 3, 4 or 5 ply.
2. Try diffrent functions than the mean-function between both evaluations but again random probabilties
3. Finetuning the probabilties to get good results (In this example taking the mean seems a bit extreme, also the probabilty for doing this at a 4th node should also be quite low, to prevent the engine to just evaluate like with less ply).

I will test this out in my engine and share my results. However im quite busy so it may take a while. If anyone is testing this out, please share youre results.
> 2 votes

---
Tags: engines, programming, computer-chess
---


# Question
Title: Is it possible to get free personal chess coaching?
I am a young 1300 fide rated chess player and in my surrounding it's difficult to find a good chess coach. I play 1-3 fide rated tournaments every year and I see improvements every time. But I thought that I could double this improvement rate if I can find the perfect chess mentor for me.

I am a student and don't have a proper idea about how to balance my studies and chess. Hence I decided to find someone who could help me and went to chatgpt for help. It said that on this website I can find someone who will be willing to help me to get better at handling chess and studies and also help me get better at chess just because they want to help me.

I hope to find that person soon.

# Answer
This site isn't a brokerage for free personal chess coaching. This is a QA site, where you can ask chess-related questions.

That means, that if you have a position that you don't understand, are looking for training materials (e.g. books, video courses, ...) on certain chess topics, or have any other question that will improve your game, we're happy to help. This is how we can help your chess development.

If you're looking for affordable personal trainers that meet with you online (or in person), I recommend you to check trainers registered on lichess and chess.com.

You can find affordable trainers online, especially ones from non-western countries with lower wages. The price will be higher if you only speak English, German, Dutch or another language spoken predominantly in rich countires. You can find very affordable trainers (5-15$/h) from middle and south america if you're willing to take your lessons in Spanish, for example. Of course, stronger and more experienced coaches will be more expensive.

If you're not willing to spend any money, it's unlikely that you'll find a coach with a decent playing strength. In this case, you have plenty of options to learn chess for free. There are countless free lessons that you can watch on YouTube, as well as complete chess courses that are free, e.g. on ChessFactor.
> 7 votes

# Answer
This is not the place for free personal chess coaching. If you are serious about improving your chess but not serious enough to pay a coach then your best bet is to join a local chess club and play over the board on a weekly basis. Such clubs will often provide free coaching to juniors like yourself. That will almost certainly be in groups but you may get lucky.

I would add that I don't think anybody is going to want to give free chess lessons to somebody who identifies as a Chess GM.
> 3 votes

# Answer
I’m rated 2000 rapid on chess.com if you need help improving I got you bro free of charge message me on chess.com my user name is -bishopiscoming
> 0 votes

---
Tags: learning, training, development, coach
---


# Question
Title: Opening name change of one game at Chess.com
Here are the first few moves of a game that I played at chess.com and the name of the openings is shown by the system:

1. c4 **(English Opening)** c5 **(English Opening; Symmetrical Variation)**
2. Nc3 Nc6 **(English Opening; Symmetrical, Two Knights Variation)**
3. g3 **(English Opening; Symmetrical, Two Knights, Fianchetto Variation)** Nf6
4. Bg2 **(English Opening; Angelo-Indian Defense)** g6 **(English Opening; Symmetrical, Two Knights, Fianchetto Variation)**
5. e4 Bg7 **(English Opening; Fianchetto, Ultra-Symmetrical, Botinivik System)**
6. d3 **(English Opening; Fianchetto, Ultra-Symmetrical Line)** O-O **(English Opening, Angelo-Indian, Queen's Knight Variation)**
7. Nge2 **(Sicilian Defence, Staunton-Cochrane System)** d6
8. O-O **(English Opening; Fianchetto, Ultra-Symmetrical, Botinivik System)**

Why did the name of the opening of this game change back and forth so many times in the first few moves? I am particularly amazed that we entered Sicilian Defence at move 7 and came back to English at move 8.

# Answer
> 2 votes
Before a sufficient number of moves is played, the exact name of the opening cannot be determined. And the key term to answer your question is :

> ... is a sequence of moves that results in a position that may also be reached by another, more common sequence of moves. Transpositions are particularly common in the opening, where a given position may be reached by different sequences of moves (Wiki on chess transpositions).

So, `c4` at move 1 is commonly referred as the *English opening* family; however, certain Sicilian (and other ones!) defense positions can be reached from it (soundly or unsoundly — is a different question). Moreover, in many cases there is no established convention on how to call a position (especially when amateur players play the opening); hence, some choice is made by a website interface, and it might be that another website can make a different choice for the same position.

---
Tags: opening, online-chess, sicilian-defense, terminology, english-opening
---


# Question
Title: What openings fit the tastes of a positional player?
I am a very positional player, but, I cannot find good openings that suit my tastes. What are the lists of openings that result in strategic / positional positions?

# Answer
You can go with ruy lopez with white and sicillian defence caro-kann for black, these openings have a positional taste in them, in the opening phase your main objective is to prepare your pieces for the middle game and you have to think about the positional impact of each move of both you and your opponent.
> 1 votes

---
Tags: opening, positional-play, style
---


# Question
Title: How good is Ding Liren in xiangqi (Chinese chess)?
Just wonder, what is the level of Ding Liren in Chinese chess (xiangqi)?

# Answer
According to wikipedia he was Chinese champion in Chinese Chess: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese\_Chess\_Championship
> -4 votes

---
Tags: xiangqi, ding
---


title: Ecological footprint of chess

text:
# Question
Title: Ecological footprint of chess
Chess must be a very "green" sport, the resource demand is minimal. But then, lately online chess is in vogue, and servers eat amps.

Any estimation how much energy online chess is consuming worldwide?

Side note: I created a tag "society" for "Chess and Society" issues, for lack of a better idea.

# Answer
> 4 votes
I am going to preface this by saying *I'm somewhat reluctant to "answer" this* as there **there is no way this can be definitively answered**. We can however make some reasonable assumptions off some known points and look at the two biggest online providers, Lichess and Chess.com.

Figures as of 2023:

* Lichess has ~5,000,000 games a day
* Chess.com ~10,000,000 games a day

To provide these services:

* Lichess has approximately 35 servers
* Chess.com appears to be partially cloud based and scales horizontally.
    + however we can semi-reasonably just double the known lichess infrastructure. 70.

**105 servers**

Servers similar/same to the ones being utilised by lichess and chess.com generally 1900 - 2100 kwH annually ,

2000 * 105 = **210000kwH/year**

Each kwH generates approximately 300grams of CO2 emissions.

so 210,000 * 0.300 = **63,000/year \>\> 63 Tonnes/year** of CO2 emissions. This is 0.0042

This Means 15,000,000 Games a Day \>\> 172kg of CO2 emissions per Day **0.0115 Grams of CO2 Per Game.**

What needs to be understood is that there is a 2 way transaction that is occurring. There is a provider , but generally each game requires 2 users.

We have no way of reasonably calculating the users usage / consumption and kwH , so the best we can reasonably do is use the figures we ball parked from the providers. So for 2 users and a provider

**((3\*172) * 365.22 ) = 188469 \>\> 188.5 Tonnes of CO2**

188.5 Tonnes for 5.5 Billion Games

Again; this can't be definitively answered. This is only something to get thoughts happening.

Points of Consideration:

* Carbon emissions are based of US emissions per kwH, countries such as Australia that uses coal as a primary power producer, would be higher.
* As previously states this is factoring in the Users. This is going to be the significant factor and at this point in time I cant see an adequate way to tackle this problem without significant data dumps from providers. Generally speaking however, user will use more kwH/game than the providers generally speaking. So these figures could potentially be interpreted as a "starting" point.
* Only looking at Chess.com and Lichess, which doesnt factor in all the other chess providers, the power consumption etc which occurs in OTB tournaments. -This is only looking at the power estimates per game and not other factors such as general power consumption for lighting heating etc.
* Most larger data centres have cost saving mechanisms for things like power. They generally live in big long buildings with a lot of roof area...ripe for solar panels.
* Most Server Hosting companies provide "eco-power" models where you may pay fractionally more for "green power".

**All units are either universal or metric, eg Tonnes is the metric tonne of 1000kg**

---
Tags: online-chess, statistics, mathematics, society, environment
---


# Question
Title: London system move order nuances Qb6 without Nc6
In the London system, playing early Nd2 is recommended to react against Qb6. For example if we take this move order

```
       [FEN ""]
       1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 Nf6 3. e3 c5 4. c3 Nc6 5. Nd2 Qb6 6. Qb3 c4 7. Qc2 g6 {[%draw arrow,c8,f5,red]} 8. e4

```

White has managed to stop the **Bf5** and at the same time managed to break open the center

Now if we look at this move order

```
       [FEN ""]
       1. d4 d5 2. Bf4 Nf6 3. e3 c5 4. c3 Qb6 5. Qb3 c4 6. Qc2 g6 {[%draw arrow,c8,f5,red]}

```

Now notice that black didn't include **Nc6** so white is 1 tempo short of breaking with **e4**. Black will manage to chase the Queen with **Bf5** (possible to c1?) and will complete the development as usual.

So how should I react when the Queen comes out early as above? Am I left with no choice but to play with the queen on c1

# Answer
I think White reacted well when the Black Queen came out. As mentioned by koedem, playing Nf3 earlier, specifically 4.Nf3 in both variations, might make sense.

From Black's perspective, 4..Nc6 and 4..Qb6 are equally good. The only move I do not like is 6..c4 in the first variation. 6..g6 or 6..e6 seem stronger.
> 1 votes

# Answer
When White is force to play Qc1 he simply develops with Nf3, Be2, h3 and the Bf5 is in trouble after g4. White can play g4 because the black Queen is on the queenside, I guess.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: opening, theory, 1.d4, london-system, transpositions
---


# Question
Title: how to download pgn of a chess.com game by game ID programmatically
Every chess.com game has a **game ID**. For example **https://www.chess.com/game/live/2485075845** **`2485075845`** is the game ID. When you go to this URL it is possible to download the PGN by clicking the share button.
Is there a way to do this programmatically (say using Python) so I can pass in the game ID and download it directly using a Python script
I noticed that **https://www.chess.com/callback/live/game/2485075845** gives all the data that is related to the game but the `moveList` is showing in some kind of hashed format which I have no idea how to decode.

Appreciate if anyone can help with this.

**EDIT**
managed to achieve what I wanted by using Hauptideal's answer. For anyone interested here is the code for downloading games of a tournament. Might have edge cases though. Also some rare cases the API fails to fetch a user's games which is a downside.

# Answer
It is possible to download games from chess.com, otherwise services like Opening Tree would not work.

Chess.com has published it's data API.

It includes endpoints for downloading games in PGN format.

You can access this API programmatically, including Python. It is possible that you have to download multiple games from a player in a batch and then filter the game you're interested in (e.g, using the game URL/game ID, see data format below).

The data format for games that are returned by this API is

```
    {
  "white": { // details of the white-piece player:
    "username": "string", // the username
    "rating": 1492, // the player's rating after the game finished
    "result": "string", // see "Game results codes" section
    "@id": "string" // URL of this player's profile
  },
  "black": { // details of the black-piece player:
    "username": "string", // the username
    "rating": 1942, // the player's rating after the game finished
    "result": "string", // see "Game results codes" section
    "@id": "string" // URL of this player's profile
  },
  "accuracies": { // player's accuracies, if they were previously calculated
    "white": float,
    "black": float
  },
  "url": "string", // URL of this game
  "fen": "string", // final FEN
  "pgn": "string", // final PGN
  "start_time": 1254438881, // timestamp of the game start (Daily Chess only)
  "end_time": 1254670734, // timestamp of the game end
  "time_control": "string", // PGN-compliant time control
  "rules": "string", // game variant information (e.g., "chess960")
  "eco": "string", //URL pointing to ECO opening (if available),
  "tournament": "string", //URL pointing to tournament (if available),
  "match": "string", //URL pointing to team match (if available)
}

```
> 3 votes

---
Tags: software, programming, pgn, python, chess.com
---


# Question
Title: Most imbalanced (but equal) chess position?
I recently found this beautiful position, Position 11 where White sacrifices a bunch of material and then there are a bunch of crazy variations that all end in draws. For example this variation which leads to an extremely imbalanced position:

```
[FEN "r1b3k1/p2p1nP1/2pqr1Rp/1p2p2P/2B1PnQ1/1P6/P1PP4/1K4R1 w - - 0 1"]

1. Rxh6 Nxh6 2. Qg5 Nf7 3. Qd8+ Nxd8 4. h6 Qd4 5. h7+ Kf7 6. g8=Q+ Ke7 7. h8=Q Kd6 {This is the super imbalanced but drawn position I'm interested in.} (7. Rg7+ {This is the first move that's not forced.} Kd6)

```

So my question is are there any even more imbalanced but still equal positions?

# Answer
> 1 votes
This (relatively well-known) position is very imbalanced by most definitions, but should be equal in the sense that 32-piece tablebases will say this is drawn. In real life both humans and engines are likely to win and lose games from here, which is why it was played in the TCEC Season 14, game 85.\*

```
[FEN ""]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. f3 O-O 6. Be3 e5 7. d5 Nh5 8. Qd2 Qh4+ 9. g3 Nxg3 10. Qf2 Nxf1 11. Qxh4 Nxe3 12. Ke2 Nxc4

```

Black sacrifices a queen for two bishops, two pawns, better pawn structure, and better king safety.

\*At least, they used to win and lose games from here. These days Stockfish 16 evaluates the position at +0.7 (d = 33), which is not especially high, so there's a good chance it will draw the position against itself - which is the basis for me saying 32-piece tablebases will say it's drawn.

# Answer
> 1 votes
I think this game should satify the requirement. This is opening of the game from round 06-05 between Giri Anish and Carlsen Magnus from the Meltwater Champions Chess Tour Finals 2021 on Chess.com.

```
[FEN ""]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 e6 4. O-O Nge7 5. d4 cxd4 6. Nxd4 Qb6 7. Be3 Nxd4 8.a4 Nxb5 9. Bxb6 axb6 10.Nd2 Nd6 *

```

Black gave up his queen for a knight and two bishops, a value of 9 for both players in theory. The Stockfish gives a score of +1.09 for this position, a slight advantage for white.

# Answer
> 0 votes
This is (one from the set of) the most materially imbalanced position that is possible in chess. Black is up 102 points of material (all 8 pawns have promoted), yet it's an equal position with White to move.

```
[FEN "k7/b1K1n3/1P1n3r/8/2b4q/8/2qr1q2/q1qqqqq1 w - - 0 1"]

```

White has multiple moves. The only drawing move for White is to sacrifice the last material that he got, in order to end up in a position down 103 points of material - but stalemated.

---
Tags: analysis, problems
---


# Question
Title: Can't understand where is my fault in this game
I played with white. I suspect that not having control in the center might be the problem. Is that true or is there something else?

The game GIF: https://lichess1.org/game/export/gif/qtKvS9zz.gif

The game URL: https://lichess.org/qtKvS9zz/white#40

```
[Event "Rated Blitz game"]
[Site "https://lichess.org/qtKvS9zz"]
[Date "2023.11.06"]
[White "GamalOthman93"]
[Black "alHajjj"]
[Result "0-1"]
[UTCDate "2023.11.06"]
[UTCTime "18:34:54"]
[WhiteElo "1158"]
[BlackElo "1156"]
[WhiteRatingDiff "-6"]
[BlackRatingDiff "+6"]
[Variant "Standard"]
[TimeControl "300+3"]
[ECO "B06"]
[Opening "Modern Defense: Standard Defense"]
[Termination "Normal"]
[Annotator "lichess.org"]
[FEN ""]

1. e4 d6 2. d4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 { B06 Modern Defense: Standard Defense } 4. d5?! { (0.72 → 0.11) Inaccuracy. Nf3 was best. } (4. Nf3 Nf6 5. Be3 O-O 6. Qd2 c6 7. a4 d5 8. e5 Ne4) 4... Nf6 5. Bb5+?! { (0.12 → -0.77) Inaccuracy. Be2 was best. } (5. Be2 O-O 6. Nf3 c6 7. O-O b5 8. dxc6 b4 9. Nd5 Nxc6) 5... c6 6. dxc6 bxc6 7. Ba4?? { (-0.59 → -2.57) Blunder. Bc4 was best. } (7. Bc4 Qa5 8. Bd2 Ba6 9. Bd3 Qb6 10. Rb1 Nbd7 11. Qe2 Nc5) 7... O-O?! { (-2.57 → -1.91) Inaccuracy. Qa5 was best. } (7... Qa5 8. f3 Nxe4 9. fxe4 Bxc3+ 10. bxc3 Qxa4 11. Qd4 Qxd4 12. cxd4) 8. Qf3 Bb7?! { (-1.86 → -1.22) Inaccuracy. d5 was best. } (8... d5 9. exd5 cxd5 10. Bb3 Bg4 11. Qg3 d4 12. Nce2 Bf5 13. Qh4 d3 14. cxd3 Nc6 15. d4) 9. Bg5?! { (-1.22 → -1.97) Inaccuracy. Nge2 was best. } (9. Nge2 Nbd7 10. O-O d5 11. Be3 Ne5 12. Qh3 Nc4 13. Bh6 dxe4 14. Bb3 Nd6 15. Bxg7 Kxg7) 9... Qc7 10. O-O-O h6 11. Be3?! { (-1.31 → -2.02) Inaccuracy. Bxf6 was best. } (11. Bxf6) 11... Nbd7 12. Nge2 Ne5 13. Qh3 Bc8 14. Qh4 g5 15. Qg3? { (-2.90 → -5.56) Mistake. Bxg5 was best. } (15. Bxg5 hxg5 16. Qxg5 Qb6 17. f4 Qe3+ 18. Kb1 Nxe4 19. Nxe4 Qxe4 20. Nc3 Qg6 21. Qxe7 Nc4) 15... Nh5 16. Qxg5 hxg5 17. Bxg5 f6 18. Bf4 Nxf4 19. Nxf4 Bh6 20. g3 Bg4 { White resigns. } 0-1

```

# Answer
> 1 votes
It is not clear what sort of advice you would most benefit from, but what strikes me most about your game is that you had no idea where your pieces belonged. In all openings, the object is to bring your pieces as quickly as possible to their best possible squares. The best possible squares are usually determined by what your opponent does and here your opponent showed their hand early by opting for a Pirc-Modern set up with a K-side fianchetto and d6. Against this there are various well-established "systems", meaning harmonious arrangements of the pieces that coordinate nicely against the oppenents chosen formation.

Among these (a) a classical QP configuration with c4, d4, e4, Nc3, Be3, Qc2,(b) an Austrian formation with d4, e4, f4, Nc3, Nf3, Bd3, and several others. You tried correctly to get your pieces out quickly but put them on bad squares, where they had little chance to combine. Bb5+ was pointless, just improving Blacks center. Retreating to a4 left it isolated. Qf3 had no purpose. You seemed to be planning to castle on the Q-side, where you had given your opponent an open file. You needed to castle K-side and prepare for that by developing your KN. After all that, I was not surprised that you got your Q trapped!

The recommended books will serve you well, but try to read them with the understanding that I stress. Development is firstly knowing where your pieces belong, and secondly getting them there.

# Answer
> 1 votes
The early game wasn't too accurate but the problem doesn't really come from there. You placed your queen on f3 way too early and without a clear purpose, then by putting your bishop on e3 and knight on e2 you made a trap for your own queen.

You could have got a reasoanble position by going Nf3 instead of Qf3 and then castle on the kingside

# Answer
> 0 votes
No. The problem is you started attacking too early. You then got your queen trapped due to a lack of tactical understanding. I reccomend reading 'how to reassess your chess' by jeremy silman to improve strategy. Also read the art of attack by vladmir vukovic for tacktics and attack.

# Answer
> 0 votes
Your game was an attempt and a considerable battle, however, there were several inaccuracies and errors in the game.

During the start of the game, move No. 4 was an error as per my vision. You pushed a pawn, trying to gain space, however, you underestimated the fianchettoed kingside Bishop, which holds great power.

In the opening, you must aim to develop as much pieces as possible, and the strategic space-gaining ideas usually come in the middlegame.

Secondly,

> Do not give checks, unless necessary is a rule that you violated in the game. I see no value of the check in the 5th move.

Overall, there are several mistakes and improving your positional chess should help you get better.

# Answer
> 0 votes
# Follow the opening principles and calculate!!

The root of your downfall is that you don't **follow the opening principles**. You need to learn and apply them. It took you 12 moves to clear your back rank, and you did so in the wrong order. After learning the opening principles, always choose the move that is the most 'efficient', i.e. allow you to fullfill the most principles at once. Place the pieces on their most active squares.

The other reason you lost, is that you didn't correctly consider your opponent's best response to your move (i.e. calculating/ looking ahead).

Both are the most typical beginner's mistakes, and they're very easy to fix!

**Move 4**: violation of opening principles: Moving a pawn (twice) instead of developing a piece. This is a *loss of a valuable tempo*. Also, you weakened your center and activated your opponent's bishop.

**Move 5**: calculation mistake. the check is a one-mover. You didn't consider Black's response, that forced you to move the piece again. Always think about what your opponent can do in reply, before moving the piece. This tremendously helped your opponent, because it allowed him to dismantle your center (even with tempo..).

**Move 7**: not only allowing Black tactical possibilities, but also simply violating the principle of controlling the center / active piece placement.

**Move 8**: Violation of the principle to not to get out your queen too early. You should have prioritized the development of your minor pieces, e.g. playing Nf3 instead. In the end, your queen even got trapped.

**Moves 15/16**: calculation mistakes. You could have gotten two pawns for a bishop, instead you gave a queen for two pawns. Even on move 16, when you couldn't save the queen, you could've gotten more material for it than 2 pawns.

---
Tags: opening, strategy, middlegame, pawn-structure, center
---


title: Arena Automatic Analysis Output

text:
# Question
Title: Arena Automatic Analysis Output
I am using the Automatic Analysis function of Arena Chess. A great way to analyze many positions without human interaction. Arena produces an log-file with the result of an analysis. In the first line of a new position being analyzed there are three numbers, the middle one is a puzzle for me. Here an example output:

```
 1 - 0 1
    Avoid move:
    Best move (SF16): Ng1-f3
    Not found in: 00:00
     1/1    00:00.001            247    247k    +0.02   1.Nf3

```

In the first row, the leftmost 1 refers to the position count, the last number 1 is the move number, what is the 0 in the middle? The number in the middle is not always 0, other values are often seen too.

# Answer
I found the answer. It is the Halfmove clock; the number of halfmoves since the last capture or pawn advance, used for the fifty-move rule.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: arena
---


title: Only Rook endgame!

text:
# Question
Title: Only Rook endgame!
Is it possible to win (black or white) in this position?

```
[fen "2k5/5R2/8/4K3/r7/8/8/8 w - - 0 1"]

```

# Answer
> Is it possible to win (black or white) in this position?

Of course it is. Both black and white have mating material. They each have a rook but a victory for either of them would require the opponent to blunder. For instance if white were to play Rc7 blundering the rook then black can force checkmate and if black were to play Re4 white could take and again force checkmate.

Either player could also inexplicably resign which would also end the game in favour of the opponent.

However with reasonable play by both sides it is a draw.
> 12 votes

# Answer
At best play it is a draw, though it is possible for either white or black to win because both of them have a rook. Though, for either side to win, the other side would have to blunder or, obviously, resign.
> 0 votes

---
Tags: endgame, puzzles, rooks, rook-endgame
---


# Question
Title: Exchanging pieces when up...not this time!
```
[FEN "8/ppk3pr/2n5/8/8/P7/1P1RK1R1/8 w - - 1 1"]

1. Kf3 Nd8 2. Rg6 Nf7 3. Kf4 Rh4+ 4. Kg3 Rh7 5. Rd5 a6 6. Rf5 Nd6 7. Rc5+ Kb6 8. Rd5 1-0

```

Played recently. I concluded that simply ganging up on the g7 pawn would risk that Black might just jettison it and K and N will run into my queenside before I can defend it properly, whereas with both rooks on the board I can quickly pester Black on both wings, maybe combined with a few mate hints. I.e., counterexample to "trade pieces when up". In the actual game I squeezed him with the defense of the g7 pawn first, then he promptly hung his knight into a pin vindicating me, but Black was 300 Elo lower than me.

**What do the engines say about this position?**

(Yes, I can simply feed it into LiChess, but since Black has so many moves, I have too much "forward split".)

# Answer
> 1 votes
I pasted this into lichess, and just following the engine's (SF16) main line for 5 moves with depth \> 30 and three variations, I got this:

```
[FEN "8/ppk3pr/2n5/8/8/P7/1P1RK1R1/8 w - - 0 1"]

1. Kd1 a6 2. Kc2 g6 3. Rxg6 Ne5 4. Rg3 Rf7 5. Rdg2 Nc6 6. Rg7

```

Black is lost, and the engine doesn't seem to care about the pawn and offers it quite quickly. However, the engine wants to trade rooks as White in this position and avoid that as Black. All best moves for Black according to the engine prevent the rook trade. Against almost all other moves, the engine wants to trade the rooks with White (e.g. after 5 ..Nc6).

So even in this position, it seems to be a good idea to trade material when up. However, as Black is lost anyways, it was certainly OK to decide against trading rooks and win in another fashion.

---
Tags: endgame, trading, exchange
---


title: Best Repetoire Building Tools

text:
# Question
Title: Best Repetoire Building Tools
I want to build an opening repertoire manually. what are the computer tools to do that?

# Answer
> 2 votes
It depends on what you mean with "best".

### ChessBase

The objectively best tool, and the tool that nearly all professionals use, is ChessBase with the Mega Database (highest-quality and most comprehensive chess database that exists) and a strong engine (often, they use cloud engines, e.g. from Chessify, so that they can reach high depth get impressions from what different engines think (e.g. SF vs LC0). It has many advanced functions that assist you in creating, for example automated novelty mining. ChessBase is not only one of the best, but also one of the most expensive tools out there, asking for hundreds of dollars if you want the complete package.

### Lichess Studies

I think that you are not so much interested in the "best", but in the "most suitable" tool for your needs. If you are not a master-level player (which I assume, otherwise you'd not ask and know ChessBase and other tools already), then the ***free* lichess opening explorer** (click on the book icon) is most likely the most suitable tool for your needs, especially if you are intending to create an online-chess repertoire. Unlike ChessBase, it doesn't provide any automated tools and functions to create a repertoire or mine novelties, but a database and a strong engine should be sufficient to create a repertoire manually.

You can organize and save your repertoire in a lichess study (which is somewhat an online PGN file), where you can have multiple chapters, one for each line you want to analyze. The only drawback is the chapter limit, but when a lichess study is full, you can just create another one. The lichess DB is frequently checked and referenced in newer Chessable courses, so it's actively used by authors to check how well their lines work in practise online.

Chess.com also has similar features as lichess for creating a repertoire, but I don't see why one would need to pay for it when lichess provides the same service for free.

### SCID + free DB (e.g. CaissaBase)

If both good options from above are not suitable for you (because you need offline **and** free solutions), the best is probably to use a free Chess Database software (e.g. SCID or SCID vs PC), add StockFish16 as an engine and look for a free PGN base that you can download online to estimate the success rates of the moves. Note however, that there exist no completely satisfactory free chess databases (and that very large databases such as a download of the lichess database are pretty much infeasible, especially for free software). One of the best that is available for free is certainly the CaissaBase.

SCID allows you to create chess databases (that you can later export as PGN, if you need them anywhere else) and analyze your moves with an engine and against an offline database. You can also let the engine analyse a position and write the best variations to the file. If no other options are available to you or you only care about the computer analysis and less about the database moves, I would go with this.

# Answer
> 1 votes
I use Chess Openings Wizard in a way I can improve my opening knowledge. My method:

1. Enter the right moves (your personal choice) in Chess Openigs Wizard.
2. Do the drill-excercises to learn the moves by heart.
3. Play a game (5 minutes or longer) and always check if you used your own opening repertoire. If not, drill again. If your opponent played moves that were not in your repertoire in CO Wizard you can find the best answer with the built-in chess engine.
4. In this way you are constantly improving!

---
Tags: opening, analysis, learning, software
---