Having been immersed in correspondence chess for almost a year now, I had begun to take notice of my performance. While before I wouldn’t mind being floored by other players, now I take notice of that. For one, if I have to lose, I want to lose because my opponent has a better strategy, and not because I didn’t see that I placed my queen in harm’s way without being forced to do so. And because of that, I had begun to take notice of areas or factors that I believe affects my game (performance-wise, rating as a byproduct only), along with the quirks of human nature as it shows in this game. Think of this series of articles as some sort of self-therapy, where hopefully if you see yourself in a similar situation, be of help to you too. Your comments and contributions are highly appreciated.
For this article, let’s consider the Number of Games
With quite a number of correspondence chess sites allowing one to play a considerable number of games even for non-paying members, it may not take long before one is actually playing quite a large number of games simultaneously in several sites (for example, my combined number of open games in two sites currently are already above fifty). Usually the number of concurrent games grows unnoticed, especially when the sites offers tournament formats, where several games can be added at once. The feeling of adding one more tournament can be inexplicably satisfying. On the other hand, one takes in more and more games consciously, because of a perception that all is well and manageable.
Two factors add to the pressure brought about by the increased number of games. One, the games have time limits, and one is only able to play so much games before quality suffers. The second has to do with enthusiasm (and possibly addiction) to the game. I suppose it is not unusual to find players who upon logging online, would actually make moves on all their games, no matter how many they may be, and sometimes even make more than one move if the opponent on the other end happens to be online also.
In both aspects, quality of game maybe sacrificed, as there are limits to the available time one has, as well as to the level of concentration and clarity of mind to process each and every position of the board in each game.
So, what is one to do with this aspect of the game? The ideal answer is to be able to assess the optimum number of games one should be playing. By optimum means that one is able to devote enough time and concentration on each game, and without eating too much into the game’s timebank. The more practical approach is to increase the number of games being played slowly, so that one can get a general feeling of how increased number of games affects one’s performance.
Of course, work and other activities may reduce the amount of time we may be able to give to the games. In such instances, holidays could be a very effective tool to provide us with that buffer time, or simply to get us back on track if we happen to take on more games than we can handle.
Finally, when all else fails, we are faced with the inevitability of letting go of some games as lost, suffer the rating drop, and move along wiser, hopefully.
For this article, let’s consider the Number of Games
With quite a number of correspondence chess sites allowing one to play a considerable number of games even for non-paying members, it may not take long before one is actually playing quite a large number of games simultaneously in several sites (for example, my combined number of open games in two sites currently are already above fifty). Usually the number of concurrent games grows unnoticed, especially when the sites offers tournament formats, where several games can be added at once. The feeling of adding one more tournament can be inexplicably satisfying. On the other hand, one takes in more and more games consciously, because of a perception that all is well and manageable.
Two factors add to the pressure brought about by the increased number of games. One, the games have time limits, and one is only able to play so much games before quality suffers. The second has to do with enthusiasm (and possibly addiction) to the game. I suppose it is not unusual to find players who upon logging online, would actually make moves on all their games, no matter how many they may be, and sometimes even make more than one move if the opponent on the other end happens to be online also.
In both aspects, quality of game maybe sacrificed, as there are limits to the available time one has, as well as to the level of concentration and clarity of mind to process each and every position of the board in each game.
So, what is one to do with this aspect of the game? The ideal answer is to be able to assess the optimum number of games one should be playing. By optimum means that one is able to devote enough time and concentration on each game, and without eating too much into the game’s timebank. The more practical approach is to increase the number of games being played slowly, so that one can get a general feeling of how increased number of games affects one’s performance.
Of course, work and other activities may reduce the amount of time we may be able to give to the games. In such instances, holidays could be a very effective tool to provide us with that buffer time, or simply to get us back on track if we happen to take on more games than we can handle.
Finally, when all else fails, we are faced with the inevitability of letting go of some games as lost, suffer the rating drop, and move along wiser, hopefully.
Part 2 here
No comments:
Post a Comment