Daily Chess Puzzles

[Leo Gura]

Black will not win, but might tie. Or at least put up a good fight.

I don't see the point giving up by king taking rook.

Black's rook after taking bishop is well-positioned to steal a few easy white pawns.

Edited 11 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Joshe]

@Leo Gura What does black do next?

[Jannes]

10 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Black's rook after taking bishop is well-positioned to steal a few easy white pawns.

The bishop is protected by a pawn. 

[Leo Gura]

10 minutes ago, Joshe said:

@Leo Gura What does black do next?

Take the bishop.

[Leo Gura]

19 minutes ago, Jannes said:

The bishop is protected by a pawn. 

Not really. If that pawn takes rook, then king takes other rook and the e6 pawn is lost.

The bishop was keeping king from reaching e6 pawn. Eliminating it loses that pawn.

So pawn cannot take rook. Instead white needs to move his rook away from king. But where will white move his rook? Not so obvious.

Edited 11 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Jannes]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

No really. That pawn takes rook, then king takes other rook and the e6 pawn is lost.

No the King cant catch the e6 pawn.

Edited 11 hours ago by Jannes

[integral]

43 minutes ago, Joshe said:

They say once you reach 1800-2000, it becomes a real grind because tactics and basic opening theory no longer give you much advantage and at that point, you have to go even deeper into opening theory and end game, which would be a ton of work.

Thats true but not the whole story, the difference between 1600 -> 1800 -> 2000 -> 2200 -> 2400 -> 2600 -> 2800 -> 3000

Every 200 points is a huge mile stone. Statistically if people play each other with a 200 points gap they win the majority of the time. 200 points is massive.

Its unclear what a tone of work looks like and why these gaps happen.

Quote

🧠 From Chess.com World Cup statistical analysis

Data from tens of thousands of real rated games with rating differences puts the expected score of the higher-rated player around:

+150–200 Elo → ~73% score (actual results)

+200–250 Elo → ~73–76% score (observed vs expected)
— i.e., a player 200+ points higher scores roughly 73–76 points out of 100 games against the lower-rated opponent, close to Elo predictions in real life. Chess.com

This “score” includes wins + half-draws (so draws count as ½).
-ai

43 minutes ago, Joshe said:

I started playing when I was 13 but I keep coming and going from it. Never really studied beyond YT videos. Learned a few openings, principles, etc. I'm around 1550 rapid (10 min games). I'm pretty sure I could reach 2000 but not motivated enough to put in the time. What is your rating and how long have you been playing and how much study have you put in @integral?

I started playing when i was a child and reached master ish level at 15-16. But i hated opening because it was blind memorization that was not what i loved about chess, so this "limited me". On chess.com i hit in blitz 2200 rating peak in about 2 years of taking chess pretty seriously (ignoring openings). Then i switch to other things like software. Now with brain fog and health issues/age im not as good.

Edited 11 hours ago by integral

[Leo Gura]

7 minutes ago, Jannes said:

No the King cant catch the e6 pawn.

Yes he can.

E6 pawn can also be attacked by black rook.

Edited 11 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Jannes]

5 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Yes he can.

Oh yes he can. 

That leaves a 3 vs 2 Pawn endgame.

Edited 11 hours ago by Jannes

[Leo Gura]

1 minute ago, Jannes said:

Oh yes he can. 

That leaves a 4 vs 2 Pawn endgame though. 

Yeah, it's not good for black.

[integral]

Leo is right if black doesnt take the rook on h7 and instead takes the bishop, then the pawn can be stopped.

What i was talking about before was the line when black takes on h7.

Its important to see why taking on h7 losses.

But blacks desperate attempt by taking the bishop also losses because its a lost endgame 4 pawns vs 2 pawns. 

[Joshe]

2 minutes ago, integral said:

I started playing when i was a child and reached master ish level at 15-16. But i hated opening because it was blind memorization that was not what i loved about chess, so this "limited me". On chess.com i hit 2200 rating peak in about 2 years of taking chess pretty seriously (ignoring openings). Then i switch to other things like software. Now with brain fog and health issues/age im not as good.

Nice!

6 minutes ago, Jannes said:

No the King cant catch the e6 pawn.

Leo's attempt does stop the pawn but it turns into this:

[integral]

Puzzle 5

Black to move and win.

Edited 10 hours ago by integral

[Jannes]

@integral Black or white?

[Jannes]

32 minutes ago, Joshe said:

Nice!

Leo's attempt does stop the pawn but it turns into this:

Its an ugly structure for white. A double pawn and non of them are connected. Still I think it would end in a victory for white.

[AtmanIsBrahman]

2 hours ago, integral said:

The way the top players teach chess it nonsense.

They have absolutely no idea how they became so good.

The milestones they acheaved that seperates them from the average player takes massive insight to bridge. That they are not conscious of.

Uncorupting a mind is 100x harder then indoctrinating one. 

An interesting question is, can you apply consciousness work to chess? 
It seems like you can, but I think the reason the top players are good and unconscious of how they got good is because chess is just about building up experience. You get more and more patterns in your mental inventory, learn how to apply them through experience, and eventually get good. Some talent doesn't hurt either.
 

A chess master is someone with enormous experience in chess, and some talent.

Edited 10 hours ago by AtmanIsBrahman

[integral]

3 minutes ago, AtmanIsBrahman said:

An interesting question is, can you apply consciousness work to chess? 
It seems like you can, but I think the reason the top players are good and unconscious of how they got good is because chess is just about building up experience. You get more and more patterns in your mental inventory, learn how to apply them through experience, and eventually get good. Some talent doesn't hurt either.
A chess master is someone with enormous experience in chess, and some talent.

What about people who play for 10 years and never improve?

Edited 10 hours ago by integral

[AtmanIsBrahman]

1 minute ago, integral said:

What about people who play for 10 years and never improve?

They didn’t bother to learn the patterns and played on autopilot. 

[AtmanIsBrahman]

24 minutes ago, integral said:

Puzzle 5

Black to move and win.

I solved it but I'm not going to spoil it

[Joshe]

17 minutes ago, integral said:

What about people who play for 10 years and never improve?

My dad has been playing for 20 years as a hobby and still 900 because he refuses to learn and adhere to the basic principles. Thinks he above them. lol.