Yasser Seirawan is just the best coach/teacher I can think of. He just enlightens the basics and Sensei/Hanshi/Doshi Terumasa Ogawa always says it is the basics that win the fight!!!
@@vernie7882 Fabio used a common expression in English. It means that you would have done anything to have a class like this. And that means: You really think that this is a great class. Hopefully that helps you out, Vernie.
I've been playn chess now for 30yrs and I'm just learning one thing I wish I understood when I was in school I guess it's never too late to learn bit I learned never ever be scared to win play chess and play ur best since I've buckled down and really studied videos and DVDs my rating has grown 300 points...
Yasser is a great coach and has great sense of humor i believe in the kings Indian attack he should play absolutely at 8 move the NF3 and if Nc7 simply can take the e6 squire from the knight with d5 it looks solid alternative line for me this variation still stands decently
Very enlightening, only annoyance is when he goes off-screen and uses his fingers to point to squares instead of using the mouse for his projector. Other than that very informative and will definitely improve my game.
+Cleverconure I probably used Houdini 1.5 when I posted my comment. It gives about 0.21 advantage to Black with 26 depth. To compare with stockfish DD, it gives 0.78 advantage to Black with 32 depth (stockfish usually gives higher advantage in different positions I've experienced). But anyway, it is an interesting idea to use in a tournament game
26:06 instead of marching the H pawn all the way up the board, why not just h3 followed by g4? It accomplishes the same restriction of the knight on e7, and the pawn on e6 still encloses the bishop on c8, rendering capture of g4 an extremely bad move with any piece. The rook on h1 would have an open file to work with and the bishop on f1 can then come to g2 with pressure on the castled king, after having gained space, neutralized black's threats, and opened the position.
Opening theory is so complicated these days. It is probably more useful to guide where to look for independent study and how to productively use a database for opening research. But maybe that wouldn't be appropriate for an "intermediate" class. To accurately answer a question about the Scotch Gambit, it helps to know you counter the Italian Game, as move orders and transpositions are crucial in constructing a repertoire with 1..e5. The 1.e4 e5 2.d4 discussion briefly touched upon this.
The peculiar thing about chess is that we are trying to "solve" it, which will destroy it, unless chess 960 becomes the standard some day. We are trying to memorize our way to victory. When players talk about an opening causing problems for them, well it is supposed to. It's a battle,
How to Play Chess I don't agree, I think our deep research of openings has only proven that early study of openings with computers was flawed, and most of the interesting novelties being unearthed today are found by humans and explored with computers, opening up new avenues and pathways that would never have been previously explored. Chess has always been about memory. Memory of theoretical endgames, memory of opening preparation, memory of tactical patterns and motifs, memory of structures and piece placement, chess is memory.
lollipophugo One problem with your argument is the case of two people who have never played chess before. They sit and play the game with no prior knowledge whatsoever. The player with the quickest mind in this case will most often win. Now take this idea into a game between GM's. Imagine these same two players each have equal skill-sets based on your idea of memorization. The player who wins will most often be the one who also won their first game. My point here is that chess still requires a creativity and quick-mindedness that memorization will not conquer until chess has been solved. And chess is still a very long way from being solved.
THEGLORYRISING two people who have never played chess before will play games littered with horrific blunders and the win goes to whoever blunders into mate or whichever player notices hanging pieces. I don't think there has ever been studies done related to whoever would win in this situation but "quickest mind" would also reinforce that the person who is able to assimilate errors and self correct the fastest would win. Creativity and quick mindedness is all very well but you aren't getting what I'm talking about with memorization. If I play a very unusual but good move in a game, there is an incredibly high chance that I have seen a similar move in an analogous position before (even if I can't consciously remember seeing the idea before). Whether this be an incredibly sharp sacrifice, or a subtle repositioning of a piece. The player who has absorbed the most patterns, ideas and chunks will have the largest library of tools. This is how a player develops "intuition", ie knowing which candidates to choose over others without really considering the others. GMs have been proven not to calculate more deeply than amateur players necessarily, but their calculation is more structured and they are able to prune their calculation trees more thoroughly (they can quickly identify where to cut off analysis of certain branches). This is all to do with memory. If you see a knight fork, it's because you know it. If you play for a lucena position, it's because you know it. Maybe a person will work these things out over the board, maybe they will chance upon the idea, but then no one would learn the endgame or study tactics because it is provable that doing these things, reinforcing these patterns, makes you a stronger player - more quickly able to recognise these patterns in a game with the clock ticking.
My point is that memorization is not ruining the game of chess, it's been an integral part of chess from its inception and over the entire course of its evolution, and every generation has thought they were approaching some kind of "draw death" of chess because they'd somehow uncovered too much knowledge, and I am merely suggesting that our horizons in chess are constantly broadening and that we should not be so arrogant as to assume we know everything about the game or are ruining it somehow, just because we've done deep study of the opening.
at 43:53 why does white play d4 instead of d3 since the bishop is already being tied down to the defense of g2 temporarily? It seems to create an unnecessary weakness...it's counter-intuitive consider that the whole point in my opinion of playing the king's gambit is to have open lines and attacking chances, but in light of the line you highlight it might be a playable alternative?
I'd like to see AlphaZero's response to the Scotch and so many other e4-e5 lines. All we've currently seen are a couple of Berlin's with the black pieces so we know it likes 1. ....e5 after 1.e4. I think we'll see the most sound solid e4-e5 lines for black from this unbiased self taught program.
These opening theories has turned chess into checkers. Not really but it has taken out the juices out of this so beautiful game. Only opening preparation. What a tragic situation for the lovers of this royal game.
It sounded like the first question was about the Scotch Gambit (4.Bc4 instead of 4.d4). 4...Bb4+!? was the reason for the decline of the Scotch...really?! I think 5.c3 Bc5 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.Bd3 Qh4 is often considered the main line. A funny trend played by a few top professionals recently is 4...Bc5 5.Nxc6 bxc6!? 6.Bd3 Qh4 which makes for an interesting comparison. Oddly, this makes the point that c3 is often a useful move in the 4...Bc5 Scotch by which 4...Bb4+ attempts an improved version.
+Kim Julian Qe6 check after Nc3? But then Ne2 and if queen does not project pawn again, the knight can then take it, I think that's just a waste of a move, although, the check does stop him from castling, the move seems fine, but I think there is long term problems for black with Qe6. Going through it now on my chess editor to see. After Qe6, Qd1 to Qe2 would force a queen trade and maybe white is better thereafter. Yeah, I mean, if Qe6 and then Ne2, knight can take the hanging pawn no matter what, even if queen projects knight takes because the other knight is protecting the knight so the queen can not take back, black would be down pawn and have nothing on the board right, apart from queen haha. White stands much better if Qe6, from what I can see. :) (If that's what you meant).
The Dardans Oh so now that you look and have acted like a dumbass, it's just a gr8 b8? Sure buddy. I'm sure everyone believes that. Interesting that you chose not to say that in the first place.
The Dardans I guess I'm the grammar police in this scenario, so I should at least continue with my job. " I was trying to be factical" 'Factical' is not a world. Then again, you weren't really trying to be anything, so perhaps that's consistent. "but facts work only with racional people.. " Never heard of that race of aliens. Unless you meant 'rational' people? "However there are two sides of my first answer.. Racional people would be cool with it, retards would make a troll out of themselfs trying to reply to it." You can't just accuse me of retardation when you have two elementary-school level errors 'racional', 'themselfs' in the same sentence lmfao
The Dardans "Any person with decent IQ can understand that racional is just a misspelling to Rational." Why thank you. That's exactly what I did. " Can you tell me how much Albanian language do you know ?" None whatsoever. I've spent more time invested in beginning to learn relevant languages, such as French and Japanese. I'm not sure why you would expect me to speak Albanian.
GM Seirawan when suggesting the move 4. ..Bb4 neglected to say that the most popular white next move in this variation is 7.Nf5!? which forces Black in a rather passive position something similar to a Maroczy bind when white has very good control of the d5 square. So it seems to me he is a little unprepared opening wise in some of his lectures.
Yasser is doing A LOT of humble-bragging in this vid. Lol. "I told ... play this." "Everybody thought ... was bad until I ... " "He said I was wrong, but then ... and .. started playing ... " Still a great guy, though.
Yasser Seirawan is just the best coach/teacher I can think of. He just enlightens the basics and Sensei/Hanshi/Doshi Terumasa Ogawa always says it is the basics that win the fight!!!
That KG mini lecture at the end was super cool! Ty Yasser!!!
8:38 "crazy move H4" lol. I just love Yasser's commentary. A great teacher.
Love this guy's teaching, wish I could thank him these lessons! :)
i would have died to have such chess classes! awesome
The fuck?
@@vernie7882 duck you
@@vernie7882 Fabio used a common expression in English. It means that you would have done anything to have a class like this. And that means: You really think that this is a great class. Hopefully that helps you out, Vernie.
I've been playn chess now for 30yrs and I'm just learning one thing I wish I understood when I was in school I guess it's never too late to learn bit I learned never ever be scared to win play chess and play ur best since I've buckled down and really studied videos and DVDs my rating has grown 300 points...
such a thorough presentation. seems like something one should watch a few times.
Perfect.. The first 3openings here i am currently learning.. Cheers Yasser!
you are an awesome coach!!
Yasser is a great coach and has great sense of humor i believe in the kings Indian attack he should play absolutely at 8 move the NF3 and if Nc7 simply can take the e6 squire from the knight with d5 it looks solid alternative line for me this variation still stands decently
Very enlightening, only annoyance is when he goes off-screen and uses his fingers to point to squares instead of using the mouse for his projector. Other than that very informative and will definitely improve my game.
Wish in my city there were lessons like that. Awesome content.
Thanks for great, relevant and interesting opening topics.
''Garry Kasparov did bad things to my averbackh'' hahaha I love it.
Rok Resnik Yeah, he has a tendency to do bad things to just about every opening his opponents throw at him. :)
Averbakh to the drawing board
Soothing voice, very relaxing. Open minded. Complex concepts explained.
these videos enlive chess in a world of computer games and HIGH pricy chess videos&softwares, thanks
What a good lecture!
39:30 .......very good point.....the golden rule of chess
What golden rule. There is nothing.
That 9.h4 in Mieses variation looks like a really interesting and dynamic idea. The engine also finds nothing wrong with the move.
+Lop Nezk What engine is it? And, what depth?
+Cleverconure I probably used Houdini 1.5 when I posted my comment. It gives about 0.21 advantage to Black with 26 depth. To compare with stockfish DD, it gives 0.78 advantage to Black with 32 depth (stockfish usually gives higher advantage in different positions I've experienced). But anyway, it is an interesting idea to use in a tournament game
26:06 instead of marching the H pawn all the way up the board, why not just h3 followed by g4? It accomplishes the same restriction of the knight on e7, and the pawn on e6 still encloses the bishop on c8, rendering capture of g4 an extremely bad move with any piece.
The rook on h1 would have an open file to work with and the bishop on f1 can then come to g2 with pressure on the castled king, after having gained space, neutralized black's threats, and opened the position.
Opening theory is so complicated these days. It is probably more useful to guide where to look for independent study and how to productively use a database for opening research. But maybe that wouldn't be appropriate for an "intermediate" class. To accurately answer a question about the Scotch Gambit, it helps to know you counter the Italian Game, as move orders and transpositions are crucial in constructing a repertoire with 1..e5. The 1.e4 e5 2.d4 discussion briefly touched upon this.
The peculiar thing about chess is that we are trying to "solve" it, which will destroy it, unless chess 960 becomes the standard some day. We are trying to memorize our way to victory. When players talk about an opening causing problems for them, well it is supposed to. It's a battle,
How to Play Chess However, Chess will not be solved for many years yet. (See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solving_chess).
How to Play Chess I don't agree, I think our deep research of openings has only proven that early study of openings with computers was flawed, and most of the interesting novelties being unearthed today are found by humans and explored with computers, opening up new avenues and pathways that would never have been previously explored. Chess has always been about memory. Memory of theoretical endgames, memory of opening preparation, memory of tactical patterns and motifs, memory of structures and piece placement, chess is memory.
lollipophugo
One problem with your argument is the case of two people who have never played chess before. They sit and play the game with no prior knowledge whatsoever. The player with the quickest mind in this case will most often win. Now take this idea into a game between GM's. Imagine these same two players each have equal skill-sets based on your idea of memorization. The player who wins will most often be the one who also won their first game.
My point here is that chess still requires a creativity and quick-mindedness that memorization will not conquer until chess has been solved. And chess is still a very long way from being solved.
THEGLORYRISING two people who have never played chess before will play games littered with horrific blunders and the win goes to whoever blunders into mate or whichever player notices hanging pieces. I don't think there has ever been studies done related to whoever would win in this situation but "quickest mind" would also reinforce that the person who is able to assimilate errors and self correct the fastest would win.
Creativity and quick mindedness is all very well but you aren't getting what I'm talking about with memorization. If I play a very unusual but good move in a game, there is an incredibly high chance that I have seen a similar move in an analogous position before (even if I can't consciously remember seeing the idea before). Whether this be an incredibly sharp sacrifice, or a subtle repositioning of a piece. The player who has absorbed the most patterns, ideas and chunks will have the largest library of tools. This is how a player develops "intuition", ie knowing which candidates to choose over others without really considering the others. GMs have been proven not to calculate more deeply than amateur players necessarily, but their calculation is more structured and they are able to prune their calculation trees more thoroughly (they can quickly identify where to cut off analysis of certain branches). This is all to do with memory.
If you see a knight fork, it's because you know it. If you play for a lucena position, it's because you know it. Maybe a person will work these things out over the board, maybe they will chance upon the idea, but then no one would learn the endgame or study tactics because it is provable that doing these things, reinforcing these patterns, makes you a stronger player - more quickly able to recognise these patterns in a game with the clock ticking.
My point is that memorization is not ruining the game of chess, it's been an integral part of chess from its inception and over the entire course of its evolution, and every generation has thought they were approaching some kind of "draw death" of chess because they'd somehow uncovered too much knowledge, and I am merely suggesting that our horizons in chess are constantly broadening and that we should not be so arrogant as to assume we know everything about the game or are ruining it somehow, just because we've done deep study of the opening.
i love this chess club. cheers from brazil
at 43:53 why does white play d4 instead of d3 since the bishop is already being tied down to the defense of g2 temporarily? It seems to create an unnecessary weakness...it's counter-intuitive consider that the whole point in my opinion of playing the king's gambit is to have open lines and attacking chances, but in light of the line you highlight it might be a playable alternative?
You’re the best Yasser.
I'd like to see AlphaZero's response to the Scotch and so many other e4-e5 lines. All we've currently seen are a couple of Berlin's with the black pieces so we know it likes 1. ....e5 after 1.e4. I think we'll see the most sound solid e4-e5 lines for black from this unbiased self taught program.
These opening theories has turned chess into checkers. Not really but it has taken out the juices out of this so beautiful game.
Only opening preparation. What a tragic situation for the lovers of this royal game.
wonderful teacher
12:36 "Move Nc3 sucks." Hahahahaha, good way to put it.
It sounded like the first question was about the Scotch Gambit (4.Bc4 instead of 4.d4).
4...Bb4+!? was the reason for the decline of the Scotch...really?! I think 5.c3 Bc5 6.Nxc6 bxc6 7.Bd3 Qh4 is often considered the main line. A funny trend played by a few top professionals recently is 4...Bc5 5.Nxc6 bxc6!? 6.Bd3 Qh4 which makes for an interesting comparison. Oddly, this makes the point that c3 is often a useful move in the 4...Bc5 Scotch by which 4...Bb4+ attempts an improved version.
Oh my god i'm totally playing Qh4 in that position so that the queen and king look like they're set up wrong. Hahahaha!
#1 Fan here... I am finishing these videos soon!!!
Yasser was completely bamboozled 32:50
would be much better if we can also hear the questions clearly
Haha, at 26:24 - "You're just doubling white's prawns"
+Andrew Macfarlane Always double your opponents prawns. It is a detrimental prawn structure.
Knight g3, seem's to be a well suited answer to black's d4 (24th minute lecture time).
Please do early c3 variation in sicilian defense for black
Nikola Kuzmic go for Nf6 line. It's sharper and your strongest opportunity to get countetplay without sacficing d5 c5 pawn.
5:40 sorry for my ignorance but I was wondering if Qe6+ would work or not?
+Kim Julian Qe6 check after Nc3? But then Ne2 and if queen does not project pawn again, the knight can then take it, I think that's just a waste of a move, although, the check does stop him from castling, the move seems fine, but I think there is long term problems for black with Qe6. Going through it now on my chess editor to see.
After Qe6, Qd1 to Qe2 would force a queen trade and maybe white is better thereafter. Yeah, I mean, if Qe6 and then Ne2, knight can take the hanging pawn no matter what, even if queen projects knight takes because the other knight is protecting the knight so the queen can not take back, black would be down pawn and have nothing on the board right, apart from queen haha.
White stands much better if Qe6, from what I can see. :) (If that's what you meant).
Can anyone tell me how to activate pieces in the Advance Caro-Kann as black please? 😅
good coch my teacher of chess
Mr Seirawan, in your King's gambit, after black plays16) Na5, the white queen plays a4, and black loses his knight
GM YASSER got me kilt.
41:09 g5! Push em baby!!
nish this is intermediate class....... not beginners :D
Mr. Yasser Seirawan are you aware that Yogoslavia doesn't exist anymore ?
+The Dardans Are you aware that Yogoslavia never existed?
There's no need for edit..
It's a nice bait for stupid people trying to show off .. The scene is yours, go show people how stupid you are.
The Dardans Oh so now that you look and have acted like a dumbass, it's just a gr8 b8? Sure buddy. I'm sure everyone believes that. Interesting that you chose not to say that in the first place.
The Dardans I guess I'm the grammar police in this scenario, so I should at least continue with my job.
" I was trying to be factical"
'Factical' is not a world. Then again, you weren't really trying to be anything, so perhaps that's consistent.
"but facts work only with racional people.. "
Never heard of that race of aliens. Unless you meant 'rational' people?
"However there are two sides of my first answer.. Racional people would be cool with it, retards would make a troll out of themselfs trying to reply to it."
You can't just accuse me of retardation when you have two elementary-school level errors 'racional', 'themselfs' in the same sentence lmfao
The Dardans "Any person with decent IQ can understand that racional is just a misspelling to Rational."
Why thank you. That's exactly what I did.
" Can you tell me how much Albanian language do you know ?"
None whatsoever. I've spent more time invested in beginning to learn relevant languages, such as French and Japanese. I'm not sure why you would expect me to speak Albanian.
GM Seirawan when suggesting the move 4. ..Bb4 neglected to say that the most popular white next move in this variation is 7.Nf5!? which forces Black in a rather passive position something similar to a Maroczy bind when white has very good control of the d5 square. So it seems to me he is a little unprepared opening wise in some of his lectures.
10:00 bookmarked
Kramnik beat Vachier-Legrave in 22 moves with this Scotch today!
Please give him a chance to acting or modeling
Yasser is doing A LOT of humble-bragging in this vid. Lol.
"I told ... play this."
"Everybody thought ... was bad until I ... "
"He said I was wrong, but then ... and .. started playing ... "
Still a great guy, though.
What a self indulgent egotistical load of nonsense
GM Yasser is a good ACTOR not able to teach chess for beginners . unlike