Thanks Dan. Just played a slow game on Lichess right after watching this video. Win in 26 moves. 0 inaccuracies, 0 mistakes, 0 blunders. I don't think it ever happened before. Big thank you!
Congrats! While I can't take too much credit, the idea of avoiding Hope Chess is one of those few epiphanies (Aha!) that can possibly have a dramatic effect on someone's playing strength in a relatively short amount of time.
The term «hope chess» was user by Larry D. Evans in a number of instructional columns in Chess Life and elsewhere. He user that term to describe «I go there and I hope he goes there»-thinking. The term he user for not watching out for the obvious was «hopeless chess». People who have read his articles may explain why they interpret the term differently.
Thanks for that interesting historical insight. I do not claim no one ever used the word "hope" when describing chess thinking. However, with regards to what I refer to as "Hope Chess" was formalized in the article "The Secrets to 'Real' Chess", which I wrote for the Skittles Room of the online magazine Chess Cafe in ~1999. I did not base the ideas in that article on what Larry wrote (I don't recall seeing them...), so any similarity or conflict would not be intentional. And yes, there is no official dictionary of chess so although I often get misquoted (or misunderstood) when others refer to "Dan Heisman says Hope Chess...", everyone is welcome to use the term as they feel appropriate.
@@danheismanchess Larry D. Evans (no relationship to the more famous late GM Larry Evans) did the chess world a great disservice by using 'hope chess' to mean 'I hope he goes there." You were first to use the term, and you use it describe a very important aspect of beginner chess, that of not looking at potential replies to a candidate move.
K - thanks. Yes, the first time I wrote about this (in 1999 in the Chess Cafe Skittles Room in my first web article called "The Secret of Real Chess") I got email from all over the world saying "This is amazing; I have been playing chess for 30 years and no one has ever told me this important stuff before!" :)
I think one of the reasons this is so insidious for many players is that they are told that all they have to do is not hang pieces. Unfortunately, not having hanging pieces doesnt mean that you can reply to all of your opponents threats.
Joe, thanks, glad to be of service. You can use my playlist "Basic Material" to find the videos that deal with more basic subjects (not too much pure beginner stuff though...)
Jack, thanks. Yes, some of my videos are more basic than others. But half of my books would be appropriate; for example, many the problems in Looking for Trouble and Is Your Move Safe? can both be difficult for players of any level.
Great video. I am a 1200 player and do this all the time. Totally agree this probably is one of the greatest improvement an amateur can do. BUT the video doesn't explain how to most efficiently stop playing hope chess (?) Now I have read your books and articles and now playing slow is the part of the answer, but I would really like to know the fastest way to improve in this area. I try to predict opponents response both in play and tactics, but progress is (too) slow....
Runaldinjo. Hmm. I think all my videos and articles on Hope Chess make it clear that by defining Hope Chess as NOT considering all the opponent's check, captures, and threats (at least the reasonable ones) on the next move to ensure you can meet them safely, that avoiding/stopping Hope Chess IS consistently considering all opponent checks, captures, & threats as replies to your candidate moves to see/ensure you can safely meet them next move. And yes, progress is always going to be slow; if chess were tic-tac-toe and much simpler, everyone could go from beginner to world class in a short time. We wouldn't want that :)
Agreed. This is my current situation AND it describes the end state/goal where I want to be. It's the path between those two points I would like to get some recommendations on. Is playing slow games and reminding yourself about this on every move until it is automatic the best way to improve here? Would studying end-games or doing tactics (slowly) while considering responses be a better/just as good way?
Thanks; opinions always welcome :) Even though I popularized "Hope Chess", everyone is welcome to use that term for other meanings than I intended. If that means some want to differentiate with "Hopeful" (or not), is up to them. I find it amusing that of all the contributions I have made to chess nomenclature, the one that has caught on most universally is Hope Chess, with meanings beyond my original intention :)
Somewhat. I am not talking about identifying and meeting threats from the opponent's previous move (that I cover in my book "Looking for Trouble"). It is possible opponents checks, captures, or threats (not just threats, as you suggest) on the next move (in response to your candidates) that need a safe reply on your next move. If you don't consistently check for that, that's Hope Chess.
On questions like this, just check with engine. If it says your move is good, it is :) I think in this case it transposes to the same lines I gave in the video.
Thanks. The more recent videos have more graphic thumbnails designed for me by a marketing firm. But what really helps any channel is publicity, especially via word-of-mouth. Obviously if say, GM Nakamura mentions a video on his popular stream, that kind of publicity is invaluable.
@@danheismanchess i promise if you had a thumbnail that grabbed attention (for example someone praying for a move to work with bright colors/glowing aura and big text etc. (you know what i mean) it would be so much more valuable than word of mouth. especially for yt algorithm. also a more appealing title for beginners and simpler english for the non-native market (india/russia etc). nonetheless ill still share this video because ur great! just trying to help
@@danheismanchess @danheismanchess incase u didnt understand what i meant for example look at gothamchess or annacramlings thumbnails. i promise its how they get atleast 60-70% of their views
Thanks, much appreciated. But I already paid one marketing firm to do my thumbnail; there's only so many resources I can spend for that. I still depend on word-of-mouth for much of the marketing. My videos are not currently monetized so I can't say that by spending more money I end up ahead.
But hoping is easier than thinking :p No, this was good advice someone recommended to me. I _do_ do this. I'll try stop! To me, I see hope chess as lazy chess. I do it because I get too lazy to think haha. It sounds dumb but you just gotta try hard, and sustain that effort throughout the game.
Yup, it only takes one bad move to lose a game so you have to do the work on each and every move (assuming you have a slow enough time control). One move where you don't look for your opponent's replies of checks, captures, and threats & next move you may be facing an unstoppable threat, and possibly game over.
Thanks for the note. As I frequently write, the first two dozen or so of the videos was made with a "normal" microphone, but then I switched to a professional mic I used for my Chess.com TV show. So if you didn't like the audio for Hope Chess, just search for a later one on the same subject and the audio should be better :)
Thanks for watching! Don't just hope - want a better chess thought process to improve? Check out th-cam.com/video/40rjYtAXuDQ/w-d-xo.html
Thanks Dan. Just played a slow game on Lichess right after watching this video. Win in 26 moves. 0 inaccuracies, 0 mistakes, 0 blunders. I don't think it ever happened before. Big thank you!
Congrats! While I can't take too much credit, the idea of avoiding Hope Chess is one of those few epiphanies (Aha!) that can possibly have a dramatic effect on someone's playing strength in a relatively short amount of time.
The term «hope chess» was user by Larry D. Evans in a number of instructional columns in Chess Life and elsewhere. He user that term to describe «I go there and I hope he goes there»-thinking. The term he user for not watching out for the obvious was «hopeless chess».
People who have read his articles may explain why they interpret the term differently.
Thanks for that interesting historical insight. I do not claim no one ever used the word "hope" when describing chess thinking. However, with regards to what I refer to as "Hope Chess" was formalized in the article "The Secrets to 'Real' Chess", which I wrote for the Skittles Room of the online magazine Chess Cafe in ~1999. I did not base the ideas in that article on what Larry wrote (I don't recall seeing them...), so any similarity or conflict would not be intentional. And yes, there is no official dictionary of chess so although I often get misquoted (or misunderstood) when others refer to "Dan Heisman says Hope Chess...", everyone is welcome to use the term as they feel appropriate.
@@danheismanchess Larry D. Evans (no relationship to the more famous late GM Larry Evans) did the chess world a great disservice by using 'hope chess' to mean 'I hope he goes there." You were first to use the term, and you use it describe a very important aspect of beginner chess, that of not looking at potential replies to a candidate move.
That is some amazing stuff.
You identified what is so obvious that nobody ever speak about it.
Thanks.
K - thanks. Yes, the first time I wrote about this (in 1999 in the Chess Cafe Skittles Room in my first web article called "The Secret of Real Chess") I got email from all over the world saying "This is amazing; I have been playing chess for 30 years and no one has ever told me this important stuff before!" :)
Great video Dan! Very enlightening, and yes, not taught in any books. Well done, and Best regards
Thanks! I "hope" you liked it and some of the other instructive videos on my channel :)
I think one of the reasons this is so insidious for many players is that they are told that all they have to do is not hang pieces.
Unfortunately, not having hanging pieces doesnt mean that you can reply to all of your opponents threats.
Yes, not have "loose" (hanging) pieces is a good first step but, as you point out, hardly sufficient to make a move safe.
Just found these videos and they're great. I'll be showing them all to my daughter who is getting into chess and is young enough to actually get good!
Joe, thanks, glad to be of service. You can use my playlist "Basic Material" to find the videos that deal with more basic subjects (not too much pure beginner stuff though...)
This video is really a hidden gem
Thanks, much appreciated. I depend on viewers like you to "pass the word" so it's not so hidden! :)
on 13.04 what happens if black plays gxf4 and after that theknight is hanging on f8 and the fork Ne3 is athreat?
I'm a stronger player (1800-2000) than your target audience, but use your instruction when I need to get "back to basics." I "hope" it helps.
Jack, thanks. Yes, some of my videos are more basic than others. But half of my books would be appropriate; for example, many the problems in Looking for Trouble and Is Your Move Safe? can both be difficult for players of any level.
good show coach
Thanks, much appreciated. If you can, pass the word about my channel th-cam.com/users/danheismanchess to your chess friends :)
Thank You for explaining it so simply.
You are welcome. Glad to be of service :)
Really good advice. I’m a newbie so it resonates.
Glad to be of service; if you are a "newbie" check out my Playlist "Basic Material" :)
Thanks for the great video.I want to improve my game more too.Im about 1600 and I still think I can get better.Keep up the good work.
Thanks, much appreciated.
Great video. I am a 1200 player and do this all the time. Totally agree this probably is one of the greatest improvement an amateur can do. BUT the video doesn't explain how to most efficiently stop playing hope chess (?) Now I have read your books and articles and now playing slow is the part of the answer, but I would really like to know the fastest way to improve in this area. I try to predict opponents response both in play and tactics, but progress is (too) slow....
Runaldinjo. Hmm. I think all my videos and articles on Hope Chess make it clear that by defining Hope Chess as NOT considering all the opponent's check, captures, and threats (at least the reasonable ones) on the next move to ensure you can meet them safely, that avoiding/stopping Hope Chess IS consistently considering all opponent checks, captures, & threats as replies to your candidate moves to see/ensure you can safely meet them next move. And yes, progress is always going to be slow; if chess were tic-tac-toe and much simpler, everyone could go from beginner to world class in a short time. We wouldn't want that :)
Agreed. This is my current situation AND it describes the end state/goal where I want to be. It's the path between those two points I would like to get some recommendations on. Is playing slow games and reminding yourself about this on every move until it is automatic the best way to improve here? Would studying end-games or doing tactics (slowly) while considering responses be a better/just as good way?
This video is more about the semantics between 'hope' and 'hopeful'
Thanks; opinions always welcome :) Even though I popularized "Hope Chess", everyone is welcome to use that term for other meanings than I intended. If that means some want to differentiate with "Hopeful" (or not), is up to them. I find it amusing that of all the contributions I have made to chess nomenclature, the one that has caught on most universally is Hope Chess, with meanings beyond my original intention :)
Thanks 🙏 Basically Hope Chess is a blunder when you miss the opponents threat in the next move . Right ?!
Somewhat. I am not talking about identifying and meeting threats from the opponent's previous move (that I cover in my book "Looking for Trouble"). It is possible opponents checks, captures, or threats (not just threats, as you suggest) on the next move (in response to your candidates) that need a safe reply on your next move. If you don't consistently check for that, that's Hope Chess.
24:21 is there anything wrong with Qe4+?
On questions like this, just check with engine. If it says your move is good, it is :) I think in this case it transposes to the same lines I gave in the video.
21:20 ooof
Thank you :) :)
this channel wouldve blown up if it had real thumbnails
Thanks. The more recent videos have more graphic thumbnails designed for me by a marketing firm. But what really helps any channel is publicity, especially via word-of-mouth. Obviously if say, GM Nakamura mentions a video on his popular stream, that kind of publicity is invaluable.
@@danheismanchess i promise if you had a thumbnail that grabbed attention (for example someone praying for a move to work with bright colors/glowing aura and big text etc. (you know what i mean) it would be so much more valuable than word of mouth. especially for yt algorithm. also a more appealing title for beginners and simpler english for the non-native market (india/russia etc). nonetheless ill still share this video because ur great! just trying to help
@@danheismanchess @danheismanchess incase u didnt understand what i meant for example look at gothamchess or annacramlings thumbnails. i promise its how they get atleast 60-70% of their views
Thanks, much appreciated. But I already paid one marketing firm to do my thumbnail; there's only so many resources I can spend for that. I still depend on word-of-mouth for much of the marketing. My videos are not currently monetized so I can't say that by spending more money I end up ahead.
Video starts at 9:40
But hoping is easier than thinking :p
No, this was good advice someone recommended to me. I _do_ do this. I'll try stop!
To me, I see hope chess as lazy chess. I do it because I get too lazy to think haha. It sounds dumb but you just gotta try hard, and sustain that effort throughout the game.
Yup, it only takes one bad move to lose a game so you have to do the work on each and every move (assuming you have a slow enough time control). One move where you don't look for your opponent's replies of checks, captures, and threats & next move you may be facing an unstoppable threat, and possibly game over.
Shame the audio makes this unmatchable for me!
Thanks for the note. As I frequently write, the first two dozen or so of the videos was made with a "normal" microphone, but then I switched to a professional mic I used for my Chess.com TV show. So if you didn't like the audio for Hope Chess, just search for a later one on the same subject and the audio should be better :)