Hi there.
In this case, I just want to talk about generally how if you want to improve as a chess player, there's
an argument for getting experience of different pawn structures.
I'd say that's divided into specific pawn configurations, which can arise from specific openings.
But for sure, the specific structural elements I've tried to outline in this section, you know, like
the double pawns, the pros and cons of double pawns, backward pawns, isolated pawns, hanging pawns,
the structural elements and certain key methods like, you know, undermining or pawn breaks, certain
key methods or the minority attack.
It's like these key methods that are given special names like mine to take these key methods are important
to know because the elements in particular will constitute so many different types of pawn configurations,
pawn structures, skeleton's formations.
Those are occasions when you hear pawn, scouten formation structure, all those acase, those particular
configurations.
If you know the elements, you've got a better idea of what's going on.
So, yeah, it's very, very important, at least in this introduction section, to know about the elements
and you can either do that, you can train on grandmaster games.
You want to do that.
It's good to have actual practical experience with the different elements of pawn structure as well
as perhaps specific pawn configurations.
Now, my arguments are sometimes a little bit unique.
If you play, for example, the London system, which I do recommend as a system, I recommend as a
system because it means you don't have to spend a lot of your time memorizing tons and tons of opening
theory, which seems to be a modern trends, because it seems like a conscientious thing to do.
But, you know, old school thinking is you actually try and understand things.
You don't just memorize facts like in history.
You don't just understand all the dates.
You understand the motivations, the empathy.
For what has happened in history, to avoid repeating the same mistakes in the future, a dynamic approach
to understanding is not necessarily just memorizing stuff.
And when we talk about using a system, you know, some strong players might think, oh, you shouldn't
be playing one system because it would, you know, stop with one as a chess player.
But my argument would play any systems is that it gives you more time to do literally on your own,
your training schedule.
You can spend more time on other weak links in your game.
You can spend more time on tactical training.
Tactics is a really major priority without a tactical understanding.
It's actually no good knowing the more sophisticated stuff because you fall flat on your face tactically
trying to implement anything, especially when you're playing against dynamic pull structures.
You need to be acutely aware of the threats the opponent is making at any stage of your implementation
of slightly improving the pool structure because they can blow you apart tactically.
So if you play a specific system of a specific pool structure all the time and just try and, you know,
play this kind of run the system with the triangle, which, by the way, I don't totally recommend
in my long term course, I show how the system is totally dynamic, depending on what the opponent does.
So even within the system, you know, a true martial system is not setting up a particular form information
all the time.
But even if you do this, yeah, the person is actually literally the time you can spend on other aspects
of chess.
You know, there's also endgames Capablanca was a big fan of learning the endgames.
First thing for beginners to start with the Angang first, then a bit of a mental game, then a bit
of the opening set, a little bit of a foundation, then revisit the in-game level, you know, level
up, then revisit the mental game there.
Well, that's what I'm trying to do in this course, essentially the level numbers.
So why do we need to know in principle?
A diversity of different structures, I would say the elements of the most essential before you look
at specific -- charges, there are pros and cons of each of the elements, and it's great to be acutely
aware of these trade offs that occur quite often.
A seemingly dodgy -- structure gives huge dynamic potential.
So if you're going to play with dynamic structures, you need speak from that point of view, a very
strong tactician sometimes, especially if you're mekaal tell you can play with backward pawns, but
only for example.
You know, Mikoto was playing the piano, they reached its heyday in 1960, and he was having huge success
with the moning, even though structurally it's a bit suspect the boloney, you know, it's got this
desex backward --.
And yet he won loads of games.
There are there are moments, tactical moments, if you're an extremely skilled tactician where you
can see all the positives with dynamic structure and you get fantastic combinations and tanks.
But if you're not Mikoto and you play with these slightly dicey, dodgy pawn structures controversial,
then you could just be punished without a fight.
Your your, you know, might not see any benefits.
So it's important to build your tactical foundations even before any talk of power structures.
I mean, that's one of my key points here, that if you're going to play the dynamic paunches, you
better be good, you know, tactically.
And we can actually use our openings to direct where we don't even have pawns, when we use gambits,
when we clearly when we clear the sense of when there's more peace activity, it makes the games more
tactical.
So even playing things like the Kings game, which one sounds, if it gives you a flair for the romantic
era of chess, for sacrifices for hand-to-hand combat on the chessboard, that's good training, very,
very good training for when you play the dynamic pawn structures.
So, yes, there's a tangible foundation and there's an elemental foundation of structures that you
should at least know the power structure elements, the pros and cons, in my view, like the back report,
I say, but you need to know the pros and cons of those.
And that's what this section does.
And you don't literally always have to play these things yourself, you're going to look at the world
champions, the champions, generally, the champions in your country, if you prefer.
You may have had more personal contact with your country's champion of your states.
You might have seen several or all the other United States grandmasters in later generations.
So you might there's a balance between, you know, the champions and the ones you've also maybe have
a personal connection or more personal interest.
Fine.
But you can get experience of different pool structures just by looking at most the games.
You don't always have to play these different paunches yourself.
And it's, you know, job, of course, is like this to draw your attention to key games with the examples.
So, yeah, and understanding of different pools is essential, but you don't need to necessarily throw
away your lunch system.
And if you follow an amazing course, my my answers and you'll get a variety of points in any case,
even with the London system, and you can still get lots of time for training other departments.
It's like having multiple departments, your opening department, Millgate and going to Poland.
And there's also other skills which relate like psychology.
You've got to be able to take losses, got to have a thick skin to do post-mortem on your losses.
Find out where you went wrong, come to come back better to truly put yourself beyond the fee in chess
is to have a thick skin because then it doesn't matter if you are actually technically defeated.
You as a chess playing entity will come back stronger the next time.
Stronger, stronger, stronger and even on your wins.
As Kasparov has highlighted, you find out improvements even in your wins because it's a battle out
there.
People to look at your wins and see, you know, is there a downside anyway?
You've got to iron out your weaknesses like Beth.
And in that face, she went over a wins.
That's the Kasparov, you know, behind the writing of the Queen's Gambit.
Netflix is something he emphasized, even your wins.
You want to find out and come back stronger next time.
But anyway, do you need to try out all these weird one for opening's just to get the constructors?
Not necessarily.
I think a tactical foundation comes before the more refined, you know, structural concerns.
So essentially, if you're especially playing a dynamic pawn structure, so you're playing with backward
pawns, backward, say, pawns, you know, hanging horns, whatever, you can leverage the dynamic
opportunities, which might only be small windows of opportunity.
And it's like in the only very small windows.
And on the other side of the coin, if you're structuralist, you want to try and reduce the opponent's
counterplay, but you still got to be totally aware at all times of what the opponent is tactically
fraternising.
So the tactical foundation is essential for you to be aware of the opponent's tactical threats and combinations
and just not let them exist on the board.
Or if they do, they're punishable.
So tactics is the foundation prior, in my view, to structural concerns.
But I hope this, you know, theoretical discussion as of views, so don't be too ashamed if you stick
to the same structure, you got a lot of the comments.
The master and psychology is a big part of human chess.
We must put ourselves beyond the feet in terms of the technical defeat.
So even if you lose, you come back stronger, stronger, stronger, stronger next time, OK, insulin's.