Hi there.
And this lecture, I want to give you a winning tips, disclaimer or slight warning label, if you're
too focused on winning, it's like you want those golden eggs and sometimes you might not even care
about the golden goose, which is you your improvements, your understanding of the game.
If you want to win, you can pick just super weak opponents all the time, much weaker than yourself.
Opponents have just started playing chess, you know very well at the lowest possible ratings you can
win.
If you really want the taste of winning, that might be important.
Start off with but later, you know, you should be always trying to strive for players slightly stronger
than you if you want a growth and learning perspective on the game to actually improve.
So winning can be achieved by finding terrible opponents and actually by also playing in terrible ways
against them.
You know, just just playing, for example, to win on time only and forget about the position.
So they could actually be winning on the ball.
But you just win on time so you can actually find terrible opponents on the fastest time trails and
just get your token wins on time, but you're not really improving your chance.
And really, chess is a journey of improvement.
And you not only find about find out about chess, you find out about yourself as well as your own strengths
and weaknesses.
There's a balance between the golden goose, which is you and your understanding of the game and the
golden eggs.
If you just want to win for wins sake, then, yeah, just just win games on time.
Just find terrible opponents.
But you know what?
That's not what Magnus Carlson did.
Or rather grandmasters Magnus Carlsen as soon as he could, he stayed away from gentlewoman's which
he knew he could win.
He went into the more like strong senior tournaments as soon as possible.
His emphasis was actually on finding the strongest possible opponents and his game emphasis was on playing
the best possible, you know, games on the most serious tournaments in the over the board world.
It wasn't about winning a ton of game, meaningless games, you know, relatively meaningless games
online or online.
Chess is fun and entertainment, I have to say.
But yeah.
So if you want winning tips, there's this disclaimer that's a win.
Sometimes the act of winning just to put something on a piece of paper is something, you know, actually
in other aspects of life, people get these degrees.
And all I've actually done sometimes is look up the past papers of the year before and even before that.
They haven't actually gone through all the books on the syllabus.
They've just got enough to pass the exams.
And that works for a lot of people.
That's what a lot of people need.
But when it comes to a real job, you know, are they actually as good as as the claims made?
You know, sometimes you do actually have to have an intrinsic and passionate understanding of a subject.
It's not all about putting ink on a paper to show or claim that you're great, that you want X number
of games.
And even if people say, oh, you lost so many games, oh, you're you're rubbish.
You're crap from the French.
You know what, maybe you lost those games because you're experimenting with different openings, maybe
you wanted to play wild gambits to improve your tactical ability.
So you might often want to sacrifice those external results which serve either to impress others or
cause you maybe to be criticized.
That's fine, but take control of it, take control of your results.
If you want to win strings of games, play the weakest possible opponents.
If you don't want to risk losing, then don't play in the extreme.
As Anatoly Karpov said, you know, don't play if you don't want to risk losing.
If you don't want to risk not losing when you do play, then yeah, find the weakest possible opponents.
But that is not going to be good for your golden goose if you really want to be a great player and really
enjoy the game.
In fact, which for me is a great priority to really enjoy any most games understand what's going on
in the world of chess, then seeking out slightly stronger opposition, you see.
Got that balance between you're getting some results, but you're getting good challenges, long way.
That's the general recommendation.
If you're more ambitious, you might want to, you know.
All the time plays significantly, you know, the strongest possible opposition possible, so the winning
emphasis in a way, is a little bit of an unhealthy emphasis for your learning perspective, does that
trade off between the golden goose and the laying of eggs?
You've got to look after the goose.
You can't just go after the eggs at the expense of the goose.
So, yeah, think about the only Magnus Carlsen.
He sought out the strongest possible opponents.
He sacrificed his potential for winning strings of junior twins, et cetera, to play the strongest
possible opponents.
And later, you know, he soon became world chess champion, a pretty young age.
And you know, the same with Bobby Fischer.
You know, Bobby Fischer, you know, maybe played in one or two genius homes, but then played in the
adult senior US championships.
And on every occasion they actually won those US championships.
So, you know, and he's sought to play internationally in international performance.
And he was an early candidate for the world title, you know, Candlelights series.
So, yeah, sometimes you just want to actually just improve your game and not be concerned about those
results and what they look like to other people.
It's about you and what you're learning and your learning plan.
Take control of it.
You might want to play those systems and people might mock you.
Why aren't you playing with trendy stuff?
Well, maybe you want to spend your time training yourself tactically to be a tactical monster, as
you've been doing like maybe a few puzzles each day and trying to 100 percent accuracy.
And you don't want to bring reams of trendy in theory.
You just you've just got your systems or you play your gambits and you don't mind actually losing as
long as you're learning as much as possible from each game.
So the winning emphasis and the winning tips.
A strong disclaimer, do you want to progress as a great chess player or not, or do you just want to
win for wins sake?
Just think about that's something to think about.
Winning on paper sounds really good.
It's really great to impress other people.
Are you out to impress other people with things on bits of paper or do you actually want a genuine understanding?
I'll give you an example.
A personal example.
So, you know, Microsoft had this certification program once and actually, you know, the more multiple
choice tests you could actually prepare using certain companies like her.
And it was easier to do multiple choice.
And there's one exam to complete my jigsaw.
And I felt it like free time.
But you know what?
It gave me the most benefit for creating, you know, chess school knowledge.
And it gave me the most benefit.
So sometimes you actually get the most benefit from where you didn't get a piece of paper.
This external emphasis is like the emphasis on just the golden eggs for gold next week.
Sometimes you really want the golden goose, even if you don't win on that occasion, it's in the future
you're building yourself up.
For a future where you will be winning consistently, but to get there.
Think about that trade off between the goose and the golden eggs, OK?
That's how much.