lichess.org
Donate

Good Positional Understanding, Bad Tactics, and give up too easy...

I know I have a good positional understanding... but I fail to control emotions sometimes saying things like 'I suck; I give up (and giving up for a few days)'...

I have horrible tactics I feel I lose all my games due to this... I miss nearly everything... Could this be the flaw holding me back? If someone has a good positional understanding should they be 1800 ish (I am pretty sure I can be 1900 ish) if they suck at tactics... like miss everything and get trapped tacticly...
I also suck at blitz because of this... I miss nearly everything vision wise but I see strategy and planning the easy part for me
I looked at a couple games and it seems to me the opposite, you prefer moves that attack to moves that improve your position. So maybe try to castle early and focus on not leaving pieces undefended. See how that works out for you.
Lots of folks go through an identical phase, but what you're saying is literally impossible. Positional understanding and strategy are inextricably linked to tactics.

Positional understanding and superiority typically culminates in a tactical victory. One of the most basic tenets of chess, going all the way back to Steinitz, is that tactics emerge not by chance but as the result of a strategic and positional superiority. So losing tactically is not only a failure of tactics but also of positional play!

So when people think of tactical world champions probably the last name to come to mind would be Petrosian, yet he had an incredible sense for the tactical opportunities for his opponents. His defensive and arguably passive style was enabled only by an incredibly deep grasp on the tactical nuance of the positions he was playing.

To answer your question, though - yes! Tactics alone can take you incredibly far in chess. And in any case as mentioned above it's impossible to truly begin to play positionally with a very advanced grasp on tactics in any case.

- "Ahhh... I have prepared this beautiful outpost and my bishops command a beautiful, even artistic, grasp on the squares. His light square complex is being actively kept under control by the ever watchful light bishop while my dark bishop is hampering any attempts at regaining control of these dark squares. And this square complex issue is holding back any attempts at opposing my dominance on the queen side files. This is undeniable beauty and artistry in action!"

- "Well, that is true sir. However, you just allowed a mate in 1."

- "Shit."
http://de.lichess.org/dRVb5RpB#21

Dropping pieces to a simple pattern like that is no tactical weakness, that is an oversight or a lack of concentration. And you have plenty of those in your games.

Dude, don't offer draw to a much better player except your position is overwhelming. Otherwise this is considered bad etiquette. You did it repeatedly, that is unpolite.

http://de.lichess.org/nA58OEAJ#12

Same here. e5, really? I refuse to believe that you don't see that taking back via dxe5 drops a piece. However, not having the immediate impulse of castling in this position hints at a lack of positional understanding.

Btw, let me suggest to never demand or accept takebacks. It would help you to focus if that takeback option is completely off the table.

http://de.lichess.org/8D9Iqxlf#24

d4-d5 hurts my eyes, closing the position in your opponent's favour. This is a pretty gross positional blunder.

http://de.lichess.org/6xMIdrRI#18

I already wondered what the bishop is doing on d2, but then a3 (instead of b3), allowing ...a4 and blocking the queenside. Again: basic positional mistake, once more in a kingsindian structure. Let's forget about the fact that a3 also drops a pawn and let me suggest to go for more open positions instead of these complicated positional/structural struggles.

http://de.lichess.org/XZidLSRt#52

Here you want to instantly double your rooks on the seventh, that should take you half a second max. But you were exclusively driven by your desire to trade things down instead of positional instinct.

Good game!

http://de.lichess.org/xby1uMME#26

Dropping a pawn in a simplistic way once again. Focus!

This seems to be a case where all you wanted is trade stuff and maybe get a draw against a much better opponent. Make the best moves instead.

http://de.lichess.org/SVYz7WNF#20

After going 11.g4?? you lost the right to pretend you have a "good positional understanding". No, you are not there yet.

---------------

Stop playing guys 500+ points better than you. Those are completely out of your league, and your play reflects on how intimidated you are. Play guys 100 or 200 points ahead, guys that are better than you but not out of reach.

And stop dropping pawns and pieces.
Yeah I decided to just give up chess, thanks for the answers though... No reason to play a game I am this bad at aha
You got decent advice here, dude. Why not try putting it to use rather than giving up? I disagree that you're "bad" at chess, but even if you are, there's no shame in playing a game you're bad at. Improvement is not out of reach.

If you're looking to farm some rating or just to play with someone at your skill level, you can play a few with me. I'm at a similar rating to you and play lower rated opponents, so you can probably nick a few points or at least have balanced games
I am terrible at chess in my opinion. If I do not play ill never be decent.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.