A quick note about the chessboards: Unfortunately, Substack is currently having trouble processing Lichess study embeds, which means I can’t include the interactive boards directly in my articles as I normally would. I didn’t want this to delay the article, so for now I’ve included diagrams and links to the corresponding Lichess studies instead.

As soon as the embeds are working again, I’ll update the article so you can explore the positions directly here. Thanks for your understanding!

“Who is the strongest player you have ever beaten?” - I hear the question so often.

Well, two players come to mind. One was an actual win, but today I’d like to tell you about the other one: a game that ended in a draw. I’ll share the win another day.

But now that November is right around the corner and I’ll reach the ripe old age of 30, I’d like to revisit a little story from my childhood: the day I drew against Judit Polgar. It might not have been a win, but I hope it still qualifies as one of my “best wins.” :)

One thing I've always really liked about chess is that you can play against anyone: adults or children, hobby players or professionals, women or men.

Having an older brother and open-minded parents meant I also grew up with things that little girls weren’t always encouraged or expected to enjoy. Playful wrestling, boyish games and toys were all part of my childhood, and I felt a little special for that. Chess fit naturally into this picture, too. It wasn’t the sort of activity girls were usually encouraged to pursue, and I was sometimes steered towards other interests instead by other adults. Perhaps that’s also why the idea of showing the world that I could be just as smart as, or even smarter than a boy appealed to me so much.

And even in the game, I’ve mostly been an attacking player, as a close friend once put it, “Fruzsi would throw even the garbage bin at her opponents”. I didn't care if the board was on fire or who my opponent was. I wanted to win.

I had been told multiple times that I was unlike other female players because I didn’t play girly chess (this sounds so messed up now), and that my playing style was similar to Judit’s. Some even went so far as to say that I’d be the next Judit Polgar. At the time, all this felt flattering.

So it probably comes as no surprise that the Polgar sisters, especially Judit, were my childhood idols. It was empowering to know that there were other (Hungarian!) women who, despite the challenges, had proved themselves in the male-dominated chess world. It also made the sexist comments easier to dismiss when someone couldn’t keep one to themselves.

The Polgar sisters have always inspired me, made me want to become better, and I’ve always considered it an honour to play against any of them. However, it wasn't until years later, at the Polgar Chess Festival, that I finally got the opportunity to do so.

If I remember correctly, the participants had to sign up a few hours before the simul, and one of the organizers would pull their names from a bag to make the selection random. There were so many people hoping to play that getting picked was difficult, and accordingly, I wasn't selected.

I knew the chances were low, but I was still quite disappointed. So I went on my way with my mom, searching for another program that was available at the Chess Festival. By some miracle, however, one of the organizers whom I knew let me know that a participant had to withdraw, and asked me if I’d like to play. My eyes immediately lit up, and needless to say, I accepted the offer.

Everything happened so fast after I sat down at the table that I hadn't even fully processed what was happening. After a short speech by someone important, she began her walk, greeting everyone with a smile and making her first move.

At the time, with a FIDE rating of around 1900, I didn't think I'd be a match for her, so I didn't have much faith in the result. My main goal was to last longer than most of the other 30 players and put up a good fight so I could say I'd done my best. However, as the game progressed, I slowly began losing touch with my surroundings, until nothing else existed except Judit, the chessboard, and me.

Play through the variations here

Up until this point, I don’t think I made too many conscious decisions, I was relying more on intuition. Of course, I did calculate and follow some principles, but I mostly played what seemed right. I only realized during a later analysis that my h5 Bishop was in more danger than I’d perceived. After a few hiccups in the opening, though, I suddenly started feeling comfortable. Way too comfortable.

Do you know that feeling when you notice you’ve blundered, your adrenaline floods your bloodstream, and it feels as though someone has cranked up the heater? Someone should tell my body that it shouldn't react to blunders as though a T-rex has just entered the building. But since no one was kind enough to do so, that’s what went through my body and mind after playing 23. …b5??.

Play through the variations here

The number of active boards steadily dwindled as player after player resigned. Some stayed at the table slightly longer, lost in thought or laughing at their mistakes. Others discussed the game with bystanders, adding to the general noise.

With fewer games to attend to, Judit returned to my board more quickly, leaving me less time to think between her visits. But! She also started spending considerably more time there at this stage, which definitely made me a little smug.

Look at me in this position, not so bad after all, right? I began to realize that I was no longer fighting to survive. I was even up a pawn, an outside passer nonetheless, so Judit should be the one who's more worried!

I just wish little Fruzsi had focused more on that golden pawn than on fearing for her f7 one…

Play through the variations here

By this point in the simul, I could count on two hands the number of players still in the game. The pressure to make decisions quickly was mounting, as she got back to our position in a shorter time.

A few spectators, along with GM Pal Benko, gathered around my board to investigate the position. I don't remember noticing him during the game; my mom was the one who excitedly told me about it afterward. I felt proud, of course, but also somewhat embarrassed about my chess. It's not every day that such a great player watches you play. :)

Play through the variations here

After shaking hands with Judit, the next thing I saw was my mom flying towards me with a huge smile on her face. After landing, she shook my shoulders, saying, “You drew her, you drew her!” The other adult with us, an IM friend, told me jokingly that he couldn't believe “we'd really fought until only two Kings”.

I didn't get a chance to speak with Judit beyond asking for a photo, which is a bit sad, but also expected. All the sisters were surrounded by organizers and special guests.

Looking back, even if I could speak with her, I wouldn't have been able to say anything coherent. I was still processing the result, and I was also very shy at that age. So most likely I’d have just smiled and nodded politely, and let my IM friend do the talking.

In comparison, last year at the Global Chess Festival, when I represented and “provided my hand” for the Chessable Improvers Community (they told me their moves in an online call, and I played them on the board), I even found the courage to initiate some playful banter with her which she gladly engaged in.

I’ve definitely played better games in my life: games where I was more accurate, understood more about chess, and didn’t benefit from the fact that my stronger opponent was busy playing a simul. But this still remains one of my favourite achievements, simply because of what it meant to me as a child to meet and play against my role model. To even draw with her.

With hindsight, I realize what an invaluable experience it was. It gave me confidence and showed me what I was capable of, even when the sun didn’t shine and I struggled to believe in myself.

Surely this has to be an easy win. Just push the pawn, promote it to a Queen, collect the point and go watch Netflix. Right? Well, not quite.

Despite how simple this endgame looks, it’s one of the most theoretical endgames, with a bunch of things to remember. Unlucky for you, dear reader, it’s also one of the most important endgames you should learn very early in your career. But I also have good news for you: once you understand a few fundamental ideas, you’ll be able not only to recognize winning positions and defend drawn ones, but also to learn some useful principles that will help you make better decisions in other pawn endgames as well. So you won’t study only a single position that might or might not happen in your games. :)

We have a long article ahead of us, so let’s get started!

First of all, let me ask you a question: is this position winning or a draw? Take some time before you answer. We’ll discuss the answer soon. :)

I‘ve also created a LICHESS STUDY to accompany this article, with positions to help you practice the ideas. I recommend going through the chapters as you read.

The King goes first

Pay attention here! This is probably one of the most common mistakes one can make in this endgame.

When I played this endgame against less experienced players, many of them confidently marched their pawn toward promotion without a second thought. Then, when it reached the 7th rank, they happily gave me a check, only to be confused about why their pawn couldn’t go through.

I think you’ll understand better if I let the pieces speak for themselves. :)

It all went wrong when White pushed the pawn before their King even had the chance to roll out the red carpet for their small friend by controlling the squares in front of it. After that, there was no chance to kick Black’s King out of the way.

If you were paying attention, you might also have noticed that the position at move 9 is the same as the one I asked you a question about.

Zugzwang

We chess players have such a nice Eng…ahem, German word for this: zugzwang.

In chess, you make a move, then I play, then you, then me, then you, then me again… and so on. Nothing could be more fair. But in a world where one of us could say, “I pass”, instead of making a move, many positions would have a different result, and probably zugzwang wouldn’t even exist.

And that’s what this term is about: zugzwang is a situation where having to make a move comes with a disadvantage. Maybe you’d much rather pass your turn, but you don’t get to choose. You have to move, and whatever you do, you make your position worse.

The first position I showed you is a typical zugzwang, so the answer to my question depends on whose turn it is. :) Black? It’s winning for White since Black is forced to play Kd7 and allow the pawn to pass.

White? It’s a draw because they’re obliged to make a move and will either stalemate Black or abandon the pawn.

However, by this point, there wasn’t much to do anyway. Everything was ruined right at the start. If the King had led the way instead of the pawn, like we discussed earlier, this disaster could have been avoided. Simple? Hmm, maybe not quite yet.

White sent their Majesty first, yet, here they are. Stuck. Great.

Opposition

If you’ve already studied your fair share of endgames, you probably saw this one coming. If not, let me explain. And if you have, let’s see if I can actually tell you something new about it. :)

I remember when I was a child, our chess coach would make us play King vs. King from their starting positions. The first player to reach the other side of the board won. The point was to make us realize how crucial opposition is, whether we were attacking or defending. Although, I can’t say we got to this clear conclusion by ourselves, haha.

There’re a few definitions and different types of opposition, but I don’t want to overwhelm you with all of them just yet, so we’ll focus only on two: direct and distant opposition.

I think the easiest way to recognize it on the board is when the two Kings face each other on the same file (or rank) and same color (with an odd number of squares between them). For this to work best, there shouldn’t be any pieces in between and it helps if you’re in an endgame. :)

It’s a special situation because when their Majesties are in direct opposition, there’s a little “three-square wall” between them. Neither King can step to a square next to the other (according to the latest FIDE rules :)).

Distant opposition is pretty much the same, but the Kings have more squares in between them. It can be useful because it lets one of them control the other King’s approach from several squares away, eventually creating a direct opposition.

Whether it’s direct or distant, whoever was the last to step into it often has the opposition, and the other must give it up. Which can often be tragic for their result.

Imagine it like the ring in The Lord of the Rings: it’s precioussss. Everyone wants it, but for different reasons.

The attacker wants the opposition because, when the defending King has to step aside, they can advance into enemy territory. Little by little, they can shoo the defender away from the squares they want to reach.

The defender, on the other hand, wants to hold the opposition to stop the attacking King from intruding. If they succeed, their opponent will reluctantly agree to a draw.

This little manoeuvre is so important that, depending on who has or can take the opposition, you can often tell whether the position can be won or drawn!

So based on what I said earlier, clearly this has to be winning for White, if Black is to move, they have to give up opposition. It’s a draw if White to play, for the same reasons. Or not?

Key squares

At this point, I swear we chess players love to name everything. What on Earth are the key squares and why are they important?

If the attacking King manages to get these squares, they’ll definitely secure the win (if they play well :)), regardless of who has the opposition at the moment.

I don’t want to give you a headache, so I’ll leave the complicated written explanations of exactly where these squares are to the books on the subject. I’d rather show you:

They depend on the pawn’s exact location. As you can see, as soon as the pawn crosses the half of the board, there are three extra key squares. The key squares work the same way for every pawn (in this endgame!), except for the Rook pawns (a and h).

These squares are special because if there’s at least one rank between your pawn and your King, you can regain the opposition with a little trick, even if you don’t currently have it! Can you guess which? :)

You can push the pawn one square ahead, and suddenly it’s the defender that needs to step out of the opposition. This is another good reason why your King should go first: the more squares there are between your pieces, the more waiting moves you have.

But what about those extra squares once the pawn has crossed the halfway line? We can no longer use the pawn as a waiting move, so why are those squares still useful? The reason is that once our opponent’s King reaches the edge of the board, its legal moves will be seriously limited, and we’ll be able to force it away by putting the defender in zugzwang.

Promoting the pawn

Now that you know the most important concepts, let’s see what this endgame looks like in the big picture:

Extras

Whew, that was a lot to remember! But if you’re still here with me, hungry for more knowledge, there are a few more things worth knowing.

Everything we’ve discussed so far applies to most pawns, but we have a needy pawn and a clear troublemaker.

The Knight pawns (b- and g-pawns)

These pawns work much like their more central siblings. They have their key squares, they need their King to support them, and opposition is still precious. However, they’re a bit needier for attention, and they can misbehave if you don’t give them special care.

When your pawn reaches the fifth rank, it’s tempting to think that you’re through the worst, and nothing can stop you from promotion. But if you are careless, you might accidentally leave the defending King with no legal moves, since we’re all too close to the side of the board.

Don’t rush the pawn forward without checking what happens next, because you might end up with a stalemate instead of a Queen. If necessary, give your opponent a little breathing room by moving your King toward the edge of the board.

The Rook pawns (a and h pawns)

Ah yes, the usual troublemakers. They might have gotten offended that we put them on the side, as they’re always different in endgames either in a good or bad way.

They have only one neighbouring file, which means we have just two files to work with if we don’t want to stray too far from the pawn. The attacker would need a z-file or an i-file to get around the defender properly. However, if they attempt something similar, their opponent will call the arbiter.

But not all is lost, there is one way to win if the Kings are close:

Otherwise, if the defending King is already peacefully resting under the pawn, or if the attacker can’t gain control of the defender’s key squares, only the pawnless side will go home happy.

That was probably too much information. I hope your head isn’t spinning too much.

Now that you've learned the secrets, don’t forget to check out the LICHESS STUDY to test your understanding and explore a few more positions. Maybe you’ll even acquire the superpower of knowing at a glance which pawn endgames are won or drawn.

Of course, these principles are only part of the story. In more complicated positions, you'll still need to calculate accurately to put these principles to good use. Practice will definitely be needed, as understanding chess concepts and actually being able to apply them in a game are two very different things. And I wouldn’t want to have your unfortunate result on my conscience. :)

If you’re looking for more personalized help with your chess, you can find information about my coaching HERE.

Until next time, may all your pawns promote and your opponents never swindle you into a stalemate. :)

Not against me, though.

Once I sat down, I adjusted the little people that would fight a long battle for me that day. Filling out the scoresheet was a little challenge, as always. I ace it when it comes to my name and event, but somehow the date and round always test my memory. This time, my opponent’s identity was another little mystery. In Hungarian Team Championships, this information is usually not revealed until the last moment. I had narrowed it down to three or four possibilities, but I still had no idea who would eventually sit across from me. The guessing game ended when they arrived.

“Oh hi Fruzsi! Long time no see, how are you doing? It’s been ages!”

“Hey! Right, it’s been a while. I’m doing good, thanks. What about you?”

“I’m fine too! Do you remember we used to play in the same tournaments as kids? Do you still play chess regularly?”

“Haha, I remember! Yes, I still do. How about you?”

“Ah, me? No, not at all. I only play in these team events. I completely forgot how to play chess. I’m sure you’ll have an easy game and beat me.”

Hmm, interesting. I usually take these kinds of comments with a grain of salt. Trying to be kind, I said:

“Nice of you to say, but you’re a good player! I don’t think it’ll be an easy game. :)”

“No, I really mean it! You’re so much better, I’m just an amateur. You’ll win.”

Alright then. I supposed there wasn’t much point in continuing to convince this person otherwise, so I let it go. But I was genuinely curious whether their actions on the board would match their words.

“You may start the clock! Good luck!” — said the arbiter, cutting our chitchat short.

We locked eyes, exchanged a firm handshake, and made the first move.

My opponent respectfully resigned by offering a handshake. After the match, nothing was said, so we gathered our things and went on with our day.

Although this particular story started before the clocks were running, distractions can occur during a game as well, whether we play online or offline.

The problem is when we start trying to make sense of these things in the middle of the game — the very time when our attention is supposed to be on chess.

Why did they look surprised? Why are they playing so quickly? Did they prepare something? Are they trying to trick me or annoy me?”

Truth be told, we probably have no idea. Maybe they’re having a bad day. Maybe they take ages on a move because their partner is lashing out at them right now for not taking out the trash earlier. Maybe they really are staring at you to unsettle you. Maybe they aren’t doing anything consciously at all, just trying to play a game in a way that feels right for them at the moment.

As long as we’re busy with these thoughts, we are not concentrating on our position. That’s exactly how we can end up blundering a Queen or missing a winning combination.

One thing I’ve realized over the years is that it’s perfectly fine not to know. Not every mystery needs to be solved, especially in the middle of a chess game.

During a game, most of us already have multiple useful and useless things competing for attention: candidate moves, what to eat for lunch, the clock, our opponent’s ideas, Randomchuk got on our nerves at work again, previous mistakes, the result we want, and so on. It’s often already hard not to wander off mentally. We don’t need to add decoding our opponent’s intentions to that list as well.

When I feel myself getting distracted by anything while playing, I gently try to bring my focus back to chess with related questions. It could be anything from “Which opening line am I expecting?” or “How would I evaluate this position?” to “What are some possible tactics here?” or “What was my opponent’s threat?” or even “What was my plan again?”.

Anything that takes you back to the actual position could work, even if you have already gone through these thoughts earlier. The point is simply to redirect your attention from whatever happened back to the game in front of you and give your brain something more useful to work on.

This way, even if your opponent was attempting to fool you, they wouldn’t succeed. And if they weren’t, then you didn’t fool yourself either. :)

So was my opponent that morning genuinely being modest, trying to trick me, or simply making conversation? Maybe they didn’t even think twice about what they were saying. No idea. But you know what? It was completely irrelevant to the game. I didn’t have to know. The board gave me all the information I needed.

Have you ever had an opponent who consciously or unconsciously tried to influence you before the game? How did it affect you? How did it affect your result?

If you’re looking for more personalized help with your chess, you can find information about my coaching HERE. :)

This is probably where knowing more about positional chess starts to get even more important. It’s no longer enough that you can confidently notice a hanging Queen, because those are not too frequent anymore. You have to learn more about plan-making, how to notice weak pawns and squares, how to be quick enough to exploit them, and a million other small, nuanced tricks. Besides, it also helps if you manage to not make too many unnecessary weaknesses in your own position, giving your opponent a plan idea free of charge. :)

And while all of this might sound a little abstract, these small positional decisions happen in our games all the time. Sometimes, a single pawn move is enough to give the opponent a very clear idea of what to do next.

Some time ago, I had a game that serves as an interesting example of this concept. Despite it being a blitz match, I think it has a couple of important positional lessons you can take with you from it. :) Let me show you!

The opening was pretty normal up until this point. My opponent, rated ~2400 in blitz, had just played 8.e2-e4, which I found surprising during the game. The move itself, at first glance, looks alright: it’s forcing and it controls the center. However, there’s something fundamentally wrong with this choice. Before proceeding with the article, stop here for a second and try to find the problem!

Pawns are very stubborn, once you move them, they refuse to go back, so you really want to be sure that you need their help. If you push them carelessly, you might later regret the weaknesses they create, if you even notice the source of the trouble. Because that’s the tricky part. The origins of the issues are not always apparent.

But what counts as a weakness anyway? Very often, these are squares or pawns that another pawn can no longer protect. These little people are essential when it comes to controlling the board. On the other hand, pieces are usually less efficient in the defense, because they don’t want to dedicate their lives to babysitting weaknesses, rather, they want to build a career, and attack. :)

Here, with 8.e4, White created a few weaknesses: d2, d3 and d4. The d2 is a typical example of a backward pawn and, in my experience, one of the hardest weaknesses for most people to notice. The poor fellow is in a one-sided relationship with the e-pawn, it can happily support e4 whenever it’s needed, while the other couldn’t care less. After all, the d-pawn will have a hard time ever making it to d5. It isn’t a priority at the moment, but a potential target for later.

The d3 and d4 squares are a bit more vulnerable, as it is very easy to occupy them: the c5 pawn and the g7 Bishop are already looking at them, and the d8 Queen and the d5 Knight will soon examine them closely too. In contrast, my opponent can never permanently protect them, and ideally, they’d also prefer to spend their time doing something more productive in my territory. (Note that the f3 square falls under the same description as d3 and d4, but there's an important difference: it enjoys the protection of multiple White pieces and it’s out of my reach currently.)

To an inexperienced eye, these might not seem like a lot to work with. What can we do with them anyway? Well, I hear complaints about not finding plans all the time. Just look at the pawns and the squares your opponent left behind! Let’s see how. :)

So how could White have saved this? It’s very hard to say. After 8.e4, the position wasn’t fully lost, it was only better for Black. The problem is that once the pawn was pushed, it immediately gave me something to work with, something to attack, an idea. I didn’t have to invent anything, basically, my opponent created a plan for me.

What did White get in exchange? Difficulty to finish the development and constant need to defend. Practically speaking, it was extremely hard to get out of it, while for Black the moves weren't challenging to find at all. We could say that one negligent pawn move set the course of the game.

I think the most important lesson is to pay attention whenever your opponent moves a pawn (and before you push one!). The squares it used to control can be just as significant (or even more), as the ones it newly attacked. Ask yourself: which pawns or squares became harder to defend by another pawn? Can you actually make use of those weaknesses?

Of course, not every pawn move creates a disaster. Sometimes you have a very good reason to make the move, and sometimes a weakness is simply not exploitable. But the more you get used to looking for these things, the more you’ll start noticing the small positional opportunities that become increasingly important as you improve.

No, these small gifts are not a hung Rook, nor are they a King-attack accompanied by fireworks like they used to be. But they are presents given by your opponent regardless. A weak square here, an isolated pawn there, and a badly placed piece somewhere else. Once you learn how to turn them into a plan, I hope you’ll appreciate them just as much. :)

And if you’d like more personalized help with your chess, you can find more information about my coaching HERE. :)

You lost 728 rating points. FIDE considers taking your title, even if you don’t have one, because you played so badly.

Now you are upset, because you know you could have done better.

I totally get you. I’ve been playing chess for more than 20 years, so I’ve been through all of the above. During my career, I’ve noticed that sometimes we get so busy licking our wounds that we make things worse than they have to be.

Frustration is part of the game. Unfortunately or not, we cannot get rid of it. But I think learning how to deal with this feeling is one of the most underrated and most important skills in chess (and life).

Accept the mistakes

Easier said than done, thank you Fruzsi. You’re right, I agree. I’m not perfect at this. I questioned myself through tears about why I keep playing in tournaments after they had gone horribly. Not even that long ago.

But does being this harsh with ourselves help? I don’t think so. That’s why in this article we’ll talk about how to take poor performance seriously without taking it personally. However, for that we’ll need to make peace with our mistakes, so that we can look at them honestly without destroying ourselves. So, let me tell you what helps me make it easier.

Knowing that no one is immune to mistakes

You will always have bad times with chess. It doesn’t matter if you are 500, 1400, 2100 or 2700 rated, this rule applies. We suffer at every level, just maybe a bit differently.

But you know what? If someone who dedicated their entire life to chess, someone who likely studies chess 10–12 hours a day, can play so poorly that they resign after 15 moves, mess up +5 positions, and miss obvious tactics, then so can we!

You will always have bad tournaments, even when the stars are supposed to align for you. But not only you. Have you heard of Magnus Carlsen? Yes? :) Well, for instance, he finished 9th out of 10 with only 4/9 at Norway Chess in 2017. He had already been the World Champion for years by that time, yet he didn’t perform well against players he normally beats.

Everyone will lose rating points periodically, maybe even plateau for a while. Good news: there is light at the end of the tunnel. One of my favourite examples is Radjabov’s story.

In 2012, he peaked at 2793 and he was world number 4 at the time. Pretty good, right? Then things went badly wrong, because by 2016, his rating had fallen to 2696, which is almost 100 points lower than before! Fun fact: as a GM, it’s even harder to win or lose huge amounts of rating points than at lower levels, so it’s a pretty big deal. (Luckily, he managed to climb back. :))

I already hear some of you think: “alright, but 2696 is already high enough, I’d kill for that”. Let’s say you get there now. You might be ecstatic for a while, but eventually the magic will fade, and you’ll get back to the same annoyance of not being able to reach a higher number. I imagine professionals feel upset about the setbacks just like we do.

“But they can afford these slips, they’re already good”.

I’ll sound very cheesy, but these strong players likely made more mistakes than you and me combined throughout their whole career, even when they weren’t successful yet. Still, they became great despite continuing to have failures. Why not us, then?

“Setbacks and losses are both inevitable and essential if you're going to improve and become a good, even great, competitor.“ - Garry Kasparov

Remembering my own comebacks

Before I fall into a deep hole of self-pity after a horrible chess experience, I like to remind myself that something similar has happened before, and that I managed to stand up again.

One of my worst tournaments happened 3 years ago, in 2023. I went there with the hope to gain some FIDE rating, so I could have the chance to participate in the 2024 Budapest Olympiad. Guess what? I ended up losing 60 rating points against opponents rated 200–400 Elo lower than me, making it 100% certain that the dream was crushed. Needless to say that was a huge punch in the stomach.

I got annoyed with myself, and after I went home I did my best to find out what I was missing, and where I needed to improve. Sadly, there was too little time to make it to the Olympiad, but I finally got back above 2100, while consistently scoring half or whole points against 2200-2300+ rated players in multiple events. I count that as a win. :)

I’d like to think that if I hadn’t gotten that big slap, I likely wouldn’t have realized how much more I needed to take my own chess seriously. If it was a neutral or slightly positive/negative result, I’d have kept swimming in lukewarm waters.

Regardless of your level, you likely have your own success stories as well. That tournament where you recovered after a terrible start? Or that game where you were completely lost, yet you won? The time when you plateaued for a while, then you had a big jump? The game where you (almost) took down a stronger opponent? These are all proof that you’ve done it before.

“My own philosophy is simple: every time I lose, I remind myself, ‘This is not the first, nor the last time.’ Somehow, this works like magic.” - GM Vasif Durarbayli

Talking to myself

It’s so easy to turn our bad performance into a verdict: “I played horribly, I’m so untalented” or “Dudevic Randomski started only last year, but they’re already better than me”. There’s really no point in saying these things other than to hurt yourself. But I know it’s easy to get into this spiral. At times, I also have similar ugly thoughts, but I try not to let them take over me.

Instead, when disaster strikes, I imagine that a friend or a student is going through what I’m going through, and I try to offer them comfort. I use the same words with myself, and if my tantruming side attempts to disagree, I play devil’s advocate and argue against her. :)

“Okay, I know you’re upset about this blunder. It really stings. But the game is not over yet, there is still hope. Imagine how proud you will be if you save this position. Let’s see how we can make the most out of it.”

The first few times I used this method, it wasn’t easy. It took some time, and it was more of a “fake it ’til you make it” process. You might feel the same way, but I believe if you keep practicing a kinder inner voice, eventually, it should become easier.

If you’d like to take some of these ideas further in your own games, I also offer one-on-one chess coaching. You can find more information HERE. :)

But there’s an important distinction: being kind to yourself doesn’t mean pretending you played well...

Acceptance doesn’t mean ignorance

Now that you hopefully feel better about your own flaws, there are a few more things I need to tell you. Feeling upset about our poor performance can actually be good. It can help us move forward. So why did I spend so many words on seemingly trying to convince you otherwise?

Because, on the other hand, beating yourself up could backfire. If you can’t manage your emotions, you might resign too early, or you might not be able to turn a bad start into a good or okay tournament. If you learn to accept your mistakes, you’ll have an easier job recovering from them and actually fixing them.

I find it crucial to be forgiving with ourselves in chess. It can make us more resilient, and in the long run, resilience will make us better players. Maybe the game isn’t as lost or bad as you thought, and after all, your opponent isn’t Stockfish 18 either. :)

“Now that I don't give up so easily after my blunders, I realized I'm not the only one who sucks.” - My student, Damiano

However, like we’d say in Hungarian, “don’t fall over the other side of the horse”. Accepting that you’ll make mistakes doesn’t mean you have to be completely chill about them. I don’t want you to say, “I messed up, but it doesn’t bother me”. Don’t become a chess monk.

I think it’s healthy to be frustrated. However, during a game, you don’t really have time to ruminate on it. The important moment is the one between realizing what happened and deciding how to respond to it. Pay attention there. Take a deep breath. You can acknowledge what happened, but then return your attention to chess. The psychological and technical analysis can wait until the game or tournament is over.

Once it’s over, you can let the steam out. Be angry. Be sad. But try not to let yourself go deeper into the spiral, and try to practice a calmer response (maybe even while you play, if you need it!). When the next game starts, don’t waste your energy on thinking about the past.

But also don’t fall into the ‘It was just a dumb blunder’ trap. I hear this so often, but we learn nothing from it. Instead, I want you to ask yourself a few questions about your performance, so you can understand what went wrong (and well!) and what you possibly need to change.

“What did I do wrong?” Blundered? Underestimated the opponent? Didn’t understand the position?

“Why did I do it?” Not focused enough? Bad time management? Being too emotional?

“How can I avoid making it again?” Improving calculation? Learning theoretical endgames? Sleeping more before rounds?

“Is there a recurring pattern in my mistakes?” If you notice a pattern, that should be your biggest priority.

Our personality can also play a huge role in our chess, both in good and bad ways. For example, I tend to be indecisive in my life outside of chess, too. I know where it comes from and I’ve already worked a lot on it, which also helped me in my chess. Sometimes, the things we need to work on as chess players aren’t really chess problems at all. :)

When you look inside yourself, be serious about your answers.

Personally, this analysis excites me sometimes. I picture how much better I’ll be once I fix those problems, how much better my games will be, and how much stronger the opponents I’ll be able to face will be!

“Imagine playing at exactly the same level you do now, but without making any mistakes. You wouldn’t know what you needed to improve, and you’d be stuck at that level forever. So how could you become better then?” - My former coach, FM Erno Dede

So the next time you blunder a mate, lose 33 rating points, or end up last in a tournament, try to remember this.

You are not the first person to play badly, and you definitely won’t be the last. We all struggle with this game, no matter our level. It hurts, and it will often hurt. Feeling disappointed is fine, but don’t dwell on it. Once the dust settles, look at what happened with a little curiosity instead of contempt.

Maybe you find something to fix. Maybe you notice a pattern. And maybe, by learning from your mistakes, you’ll come back stronger.

After all, a bad game is only a bad game. A bad tournament is only a bad tournament. They don’t get to decide what kind of chess player you are. Keep going! :)

Do you remember these steps and the color codes? If not, or you haven’t read the previous article yet, I’d recommend reading it first, because otherwise this analysis might not make so much sense.

I played the following game during a Twitch stream against a player in the same rating range mentioned earlier. You might not find the game brilliant, or particularly exciting, but many games we play don’t contain spectacular sacrifices or great attacks. That’s just how real life is, and that’s fine. I’ll show you how the thinking process helped me decide what deserves my attention, what I can ignore momentarily, and what I should do next.

During the analysis, I won’t color every piece, only when I think it’s necessary. Just like I’d do in my own games, I’ll always check out the moves that were made and the potential effects and changes they might have on other pieces. You may notice that I sometimes highlight a yellow piece and then remove the coloring a few moves later. This is intentional. I want to notice every piece that could potentially become relevant, but once I've checked that it cannot currently be exploited, I can take it off my mental list.

How can you decide if a vulnerable piece is irrelevant? You can ask yourself how likely it is that you or your opponent could exploit them within a reasonable time. It’s sometimes unclear though. At times we see ghosts and overprotect something; at other times, we disregard a vulnerable piece and blunder it. We all make a lot of mistakes in this, even at higher levels.

This method wasn’t meant to solve chess. My whole idea was to make you more mindful about your decisions by making the scanning process more manageable, and to help you notice vulnerable pieces, recognize what is urgent, and avoid overlooking things that could cost you material. And hopefully, by becoming more aware of these things, you'll blunder less often.

In the game I’m also not looking for the best engine lines. Honestly, I don’t care much about them here. I want to show you sensible moves that you could realistically find too with the color system and some basic principles.

Now that the opening officially ended, the next chapter is the middle game. Here it’s even more true that our main goal is to either checkmate or win material, everything else will be decoration for that.

I will slowly start letting your hand go with the extra explanations. I will still be thinking about the same things, but I will only express them if I find it necessary.

Hey, you! Instead of sitting so comfortably in the back seat, go through the mental list now! What would be your plan as Black?

STOP. Your turn! So far, we've seen positions where the weaknesses were relatively easy to identify. But what happens when there aren't any immediate threats, and our own King starts making us uncomfortable? I invite you to go through our mental to-do list, and try to come up with an idea for Black.

This time, we had to prioritize King safety before worrying about the opponent's vulnerable pieces. But once the Queens are off the board, our priorities change again.

In endgames, checkmate is often less likely to happen, at least with a similar material-count. So instead, we focus on creating passed pawns to promote, and of course, winning material is still on the table.

So what should we do in this seemingly less complicated position?

I think it’s really interesting to see how the thinking method in the “Board Vision First, Strategy Later” article was applied in this game.

Whether you are only paying attention to the red pieces, or both red and yellow pieces, the colors are basically a tool that makes the scanning part more manageable.

The colors also help you understand your and your opponent’s threats better. The red tags let you know what the immediate material-winning (or checkmating) possibilities are on the board. Don’t capture these blindly though, you will still need to calculate a bit. These are the things you very likely need to fix or exploit first before even thinking about strategy. If you can be up a piece, your strategic skills will matter less. :) You can also leave your own pieces red, but you have to be absolutely sure they will be okay if you don’t deal with them right away.

The yellow tags are a bit different in the sense that you don’t necessarily need to do anything with them, nor do they all require the same attention from you. BUT! It still helps you a lot if you spot them all (or at least most of them). There is more danger in not noticing them at all than in seeing them and deciding they aren’t that important. They can be used, for example, to improve a piece with a tempo (when attacking them), attack several of them at the same time (it can be hard to protect them all) or even to make a plan related to them, as happened in the game.

If there is nothing urgent to solve, that’s usually when strategy comes into the picture. Principles and strategic knowledge can help you with your decisions when the color system is not enough. The line is a bit blurry, because ideally you want to be aware of both strategy and the emergency events, and combine the two. But that can be overwhelming. So, first try to identify what deserves your attention before trying to understand the deeper positional elements.

Also, your opponent’s move can make your original plan irrelevant, or create a new or even better target(s). Keep your eyes open for these changes, don’t force a plan that no longer works.

Talk to yourself about these changes during the game (not out loud, if you are in OTB :)). I find it much easier to remember if I make a conscious effort. Also, concentration is crucial. If you don’t give your full focus to the game you’re playing, then you’re gambling, and no method will significantly help you.

In the future, I plan to show you how to navigate in more eventful positions with more red and yellow pieces present, since this game didn’t give us much opportunity to talk about those. So if you found this thinking method useful and would like to see more educational content like this, I’d love you to follow along! :)

Subscribe now

If you’d like more personalized help with your chess, you can find more information about my coaching HERE. :)

An example: “Don’t castle too early, so your opponent will not know where you will put your King”. True? Absolutely. What will happen if a beginner player follows this advice? In my experience, disaster. Or another one: “Exchange pieces if you don’t have enough space”. Again true, but if you’re less experienced, first you should probably notice that your Queen is hanging.

An issue with so much information is that there are a lot of things to pay attention to and think about in chess, and if you try to do all of them at once, you’ll just get overwhelmed. That’s why I believe that if you are below a certain rating, you shouldn’t consume a lot of content intended for higher-level audiences.

This article is mostly aimed at players roughly below 1200 rapid Chess.com rating / 1500 rapid Lichess rating, and anyone who has accumulated lots of advice but whose board vision and basic threat-awareness haven't caught up with that knowledge yet.

So what should you focus on instead?

I think it’s much more useful to concentrate on a few things really, really well than to worry about every advanced concept you come across. Your games will not be decided by a good Knight outplaying a bad Bishop, nor by suffocating your opponent when they play too passively. They’ll be decided because someone forgot a piece was hanging, or that a vulnerable piece required more care.

Once you get past this level, you can gradually start adding more advanced concepts to your thinking process. However, until that, let’s pretend that material is “everything.” Of course it isn’t. You can see strong players sacrifice material for activity and for other alien positional nonsense, but the difference is that they know why that is fine (or not, and mess up as well :)).

I have seen surprisingly many players tell me they gave a pawn, because “it’s just a pawn” and they “didn’t want to pause their plan to defend it”. Or sacrificing for a “better attack” or a “better center”. No. With extra material one’s life is so much easier, so first you need to learn how to get free pawns and pieces, and just as importantly, how not to lose your own.

What are the vulnerable pieces?

Vulnerability is a bit complicated, because what will be vulnerable for a lower-rated person is not necessarily weak for a master, and vice versa, but we still need to identify them to the best of our ability.

Before we begin with the thinking method, we need to discuss what makes a piece vulnerable. I like to use markers during a game:

• I mark a piece with red, when it has either more attackers than defenders or it’s attacked by a less valuable piece. These are the first things you need to look at, as they can lead to winning or losing material if you are not careful.

• There are also yellow pieces, meaning they have the same number of attackers as defenders. This doesn’t necessarily mean they are certainly secure at the moment. They appear safe (no checkmate or material loss) and solid, but they can become a problem any time, maybe even in this exact moment! Even if not, keep an eye on them until they are vulnerable.

• Lastly, a piece is green, if it’s completely safe: it has more defenders than attackers, and it isn’t attacked by a less valuable piece. These don’t require immediate attention, and you don’t need to spend too much mental energy on them, nor do you need to actively search for them and identify them all.

These are guidelines rather than pure definitions; it’s all about whether you can lose or win material. You still need to consider if the pieces can really capture each other.

Vulnerability is dynamic though, these colors aren’t permanent, they change as the position changes. The board doesn't stay the same, so your priorities shouldn't either. The colors are there to help you reassess after every move, not to provide a fixed plan for the entire game. To avoid misunderstandings, these also don’t mean “good” or “bad”, instead they are information. They represent attention priority, letting you know what you should likely take/attack or defend/move away or keep in mind.

Let’s see these positions. To not make you more confused, I didn’t highlight everything with colors, only a few examples.

In the first position, White’s b2 and c4 pawns are yellow, because even though they aren’t attacked by anything at the moment, they aren’t defended either. Black’s c5 pawn is vulnerable (yellow), because despite being defended by b6, it’s also attacked by the e3 Lady. I colored the Queen yellow, because high-value pieces always deserve a little extra attention (if something attacks them, their number of defenders won’t matter).

They’re fine for now, but they’re worth remembering. Why? Imagine you play this position as Black, and say, yeah, c5 is no problem at all. In your mind it will go into an “all good” box, and you will likely never look at it again. A few moves later, you want push the b-pawn to b5, and check out if the move is safe. Great, the pawn on b5 is ok, so you play it. Then at your worst surprise, White takes the c5 pawn for free, and you just can’t understand how you missed that. You did, because you didn’t think it was important to remember your possible problem pieces. :)

Back to the examples. The c3 Knight is green, because it’s defended by two (b2 and Qe3), attacked by one (Bg7). The c6 Bishy is green too, because it has zero attackers, and one defender. Until that changes, don’t worry about them.

Now let’s examine the second position. White’s last move was Nc3-d5. What changed?

White attacked the Queen with the Knight, making it red, which deserves the attention first. Unfortunately, White missed that the b2 pawn was unprotected, and by moving the Horsie to d5, it got exposed to the g7 Bishop, making it red. Now that could be a painful material loss (after Black deals with her Majesty on c7). Notice how a move doesn’t affect only the piece you move with.

White’s c4 and Black’s c5 pawns are still possibly weak. Nothing happened to them now, but we don’t forget them. The c6 Bishop is still safe, and so is the Knight on d5 (it can be captured, but it’s simply an equal trade, so we don’t care much).

The thinking method

1) No matter whose turn it is, scan the board.

Look at the whole board. The real action isn’t where you think it is, it’s happening on all 64 squares, all the time. Be aware of the material count at all times. Even the small ones. Pawn lives matter too, many a little makes a mickle.

Keep a mental list of the potential problems (red and yellow pieces) of each side, again at all times. Don’t forget these, and watch out for changes. Your King? Their King? Your pieces and pawns and theirs? Found something? Great, keep them in mind until they change. It will be much easier to know what you and your opponent should be doing with this information, as these colored pieces can become potential targets for either side. However, not all of them deserve the same level of attention. This is something you need to understand based on the position.

2) Your opponent made a move. What changed?

This contains two smaller steps.

• Start with your rival’s ideas, so you don’t get too absorbed in your plan. Questions that can help: “Why did they play it?”, “What are they threatening?” or “What would they do next if they got another move?”. Really try to think like them here, and like you genuinely tried to find the best idea for them. Recall the vulnerable pieces you identified earlier. Can/did your opponent attack them with a forcing move (checks, captures, threats)?

• Now you look for your side. What would you be threatening if your opponent wasn’t doing anything? Which of their pieces are exposed? Can you attack them with a forcing move?

Don’t calculate more than 3 moves ahead for now. You’ll likely just get lost, miss what’s happening on the board, or waste unnecessary time. Also, you mostly need to do it when there are forcing moves on the board, otherwise not really.

3) Comparison

Now that you have the information, which side has the stronger threat? Whose plan is more dangerous? Your opponent is about to checkmate you and you can only attack a weak Pony? You will need to defend first. You can fork their King and Queen, while they can only take your pawn next? We don’t have to care about that. :)

By “more dangerous”, I mean concrete moves that lead to checkmate or material loss. “Scary” shouldn’t impress you. If you don’t see an actual threat, assume it’s not there (great life advice too). There is a chance you will be wrong, but that’s fine. High-level players are not always right about their opponent’s ideas either. You need to learn to trust yourself, you’ll be more successful this way.

In both positions Black’s last move was Qa5-g5. In the first one, it might look spooky, but I don’t see how I will get checkmated, therefore I am not scared, I will not defend yet. In the second one, I am concerned, because I could get mated on g2. Now that’s a real threat, I need to act.

... Wait, but what if nothing is happening?

If neither side has anything serious, don’t worry. Improve your position: bring your pieces toward the center, put your worst piece to a better square, and so on. Be patient and wait for a mistake. You need to become comfortable with not always knowing what to do. Titled players don’t know the right ideas all the time either.

At these levels, your opponent will likely make a mistake or blunder sooner or later. If you consistently protect your pieces, notice your opponent’s threats, and take the opportunities they give you, you’ll improve much faster than someone trying to play like a grandmaster. Board vision first, strategy later. :)

4) Safety check

You found a move you want to play, awesome! Don’t play it yet. Visualize the piece in its new spot and look for changes that will follow. Does this move make anything red or yellow? Does your opponent have any forcing moves that can exploit these? If yes, reconsider the move. If no, but it created a new vulnerable piece, don’t just put it into a “no problem” box in your head. Add it to your mental list instead. You may not have to deal with it immediately, but you’ll want to remember it until the position changes.

Also, it’s better not to leave too many pieces yellow or red. If you are about to make a move that is technically safe, but it leaves something exposed, maybe reassess your choice. You don’t want to end up having to remember 5-6 vulnerable pieces for a long while, because the more there are, the more tactical possibilities can exist on the board. Slow down in such cases. One different sequence that you didn’t calculate, and these can easily become red and hang. Is it really necessary to keep so many things in mind? Complication is not always better.

Even if you find an answer after the first few questions, still go through the entire list. You need to see the whole picture before deciding what to play. Just like in life, you cannot make a good decision if you don’t understand what’s happening, or what’s at stake. :)

Also, notice how these steps are built on each other. If you immediately start looking for your move, you might completely miss a hanging piece. If you only focus on your opponent’s plan, you might miss that you could have taken their Rook for free. In this thinking order, you dramatically reduce the chance of blundering, while still giving yourself opportunities to attack.

You are right, this is tiring and takes a long time at first, but you’ll become much faster as your board vision improves. If remembering every red and yellow piece feels overwhelming, start smaller. Focus on the pieces and the King first, worry less about the pawns. Or if that’s still too much, pay attention only to the red ones. As your board vision improves, gradually include more.

One way to internalize this thinking process and speed up your improvement is to solve loads of easy tactical patterns such as forks, pins, skewers, etc. Play slow games, so you have time to implement this thinking method, and go through this list every move. Analyze both your own blunders and your opponent’s after the game. Dive into positions with many defenders and attackers, and practice seeing which side benefits materially from the exchange! Eventually you will realize it no longer takes conscious effort anymore.

Let’s finish with a small exercise. Pretend this is one of your own rapid games. White’s last move was Qe1-h4. Before looking for a move, go through the previous thinking method, only then find a move.

Keep reading only after you’ve thought about it for at least 3 minutes.

By the way, in my next article, I will take a real game and apply this exact thinking process move by move. If you enjoyed this post and would like to see how it works in practice, don’t forget to subscribe! :)

Subscribe now

Solution

Scan the board
Material is equal. At first glance, neither side has an immediate emergency (red tags). White’s yellow pieces: Ng1, f3 pawn, Kc2. Black only has one: the b7 pawn (hard to access, but still :)).

What changed?
White played Qe1-h4, they are not trying to do anything dangerous, so now I can focus on my own opportunities.
First I turn to the most valuable one: the White King. I don’t see a direct checkmate, so I am not yet convinced about the attack on his Majesty. Maybe I will later, but what about the other vulnerable pieces? Do I have any forcing moves related to them? Nxf3 and Bxg1. I pick one that seems the best to me: Bxg1, Rxg1, Nxf3 fork! Oh, that looks promising!

I still need to see the other forcing line. What if I start with Nxf3 instead? Nxf3, Nxf3, Qxe4+, Rd3! defends both the check and the Knight on f3. Less promising. It’s okay if you started with this line first, not even advanced players calculate the best line first sometimes (before calculating, you can’t know what’s right). This had to be analyzed too, since it’s forcing, and could have been better than the Bxg1 line.

As you can see, yellow doesn’t mean safe, but worth spotting or remembering. Sometimes nothing happens to them for a long time or at all (like the b7 pawn). Other times, one of them can suddenly become the center of a tactical sequence like the f3 pawn and g1 Knight. That’s exactly why we search for them, and keep track of them.

Comparison
White doesn’t have anything concrete, while we can win at least a piece. That’s an easy comparison then. :)

Safety check
You didn’t forget about this part, right? :) We want to play Bxg1. We took a Knight, so White really needs a strong forcing move as a reply. Do they have anything? No. Okay, so we are good to go.

Did you notice that I didn’t find this tactic because I magically “saw” it? (If I did, it would be thanks to the endless easy tactics that I have solved during my life... :)). I found it because I knew where to look. The thinking process narrowed my search.

I hope this thinking method makes your games feel a bit less overwhelming. If you try it in your next games, let me know in the comments how it went. I’d also love to hear if there are parts of the process you found difficult or questions you’d like me to cover in future articles.

If you’d like more personalized help with your chess, you can find information about my coaching HERE. :)

“Until you are at least a high Class A player: Your first name is ‘Tactics’, your middle name is ‘Tactics’, and your last name is ‘Tactics’” - Ken Smith

Some time ago, I read an article claiming that the internet is full of advice like “just solve puzzles and you will become better” and how that is not true. The author had spent a long time doing tactics without seeing much improvement and concluded that chess requires far more than tactics practice.

I understand why they reached that conclusion. I've seen many players struggle with the exact same thing. To some extent it’s true, but in reality, the correct tactical training can give a huge boost.

Why harder isn't always better

Just to simplify things, I will divide puzzles into ‘easy’ and ‘hard’. Easy tactics are the ones that you can spot quite easily, less than a minute or two. Hard puzzles are where you usually have to spend long minutes to find the solution. These are the ones that you likely find when you click on the average “(Solve) Puzzles” on any chess website or application.

I noticed more difficult puzzles are praised by most players. These are the ones that “challenge you”, that will “help you raise your rating”. After a certain level, yes. These are excellent if you want to improve your calculation and your visualization, which are important skills, but if you don’t see threats and hanging pieces in one move, then it is useless to calculate even 3 moves ahead. So, until you see the board without bigger issues and you are familiar with most patterns, they shouldn't make up most of your training.

But how can easy puzzles be useful?

Regardless of rating, they can be valuable for anyone. How?

First of all, up until 1200-1400 chess.com/1500-1700 Lichess rapid rating, people mostly lose by blundering pieces in one or two moves, or miss it when their opponent does it. Strategy matters far more on higher levels, when your rivals no longer blunder that much anymore.

“But Fruzsi, how do I make a plan? That’s important too, not just tactics”. Yes and no. You can find the perfect plan, but if you blunder your Queen in 2 moves, then it was all for nothing. On the other hand, even if you are unsure of what your plan should be, but you play an okay and safe move, and you watch out for your opponent’s blunders, you will be much more successful on the long run.

This is where easy puzzles come into the picture. They will help you learn the main motifs in chess, will strengthen your board vision, leading to fewer blunders. Also, during a match you shouldn’t spend all your time and energy unnecessarily on finding a simple fork or a pin, when you should focus on things like plan making, strategy, and so on. Practice the patterns beforehand, so you can notice them far faster in your games.

To improve your pattern recognition, do hundreds (or thousands, if you have the time :)) of easy tactics for each tactical motif (like; mate in 1-2, skewers, annihilation, discovered attacks, etc.). It might sound like a lot, but since they are simple they won’t take that long, and you can do them whenever you have a couple of minutes free or when you’re too tired to do something more demanding. I have ~2400 blitz rating, but even I jumped up 100-200 points in the past few years partially thanks to going through easy tactics with my students.

Another time when they could come in handy (even for high-level players) is when you are about to play a chess game. Your brain is probably not in ‘chess mode’ yet when you sit down to play after a long day. By solving them you won’t only get some confidence boost but you will also warm your mind up for the battle!

Also, if the majority of the games you play are blitz and bullet, then doing these will especially help you. In these time controls, you simply won't have time to calculate very much.

Whose job is it to find the best continuation for your opponent?

Yours and the opponent’s. Yes, you read that well; both of yours :) In order to become a good chess player, in most cases you will have to calculate and find the best moves for your opponent as well.

“Isn’t it their job to find the best move for them? I do my business, they do theirs.”

Nope. If you are not aware of your rival’s possible best responses, then your calculation will be shallow. I remember the good old times, when my coach would send my homework back to me, because even if I found the right move/idea, I didn’t find the best defense for my opponent, and I had to spend even more time on the position…

If you can’t stop this bad habit, work through tactic books where you will be forced to do this!

Puzzles are not like games!

Another huge mistake I see is that certain chess players treat the online puzzles like they were games that they had to play out against the computer. Most sites even reward you for speed, but go against the temptation. Before making a move, try to calculate everything out until you are sure of your solution. Why? Because this is how you can properly practice calculation and visualization. If you can see almost perfectly until 2-3 moves, you are already better than most players, let alone being able to see even further.

This can be tiring, but it’s worth the time and effort. Remember: your goal is to get stronger, not finding the solution quickly, nor increasing your puzzle rating. It’s better to solve 3 puzzles slowly and correctly than 10 carelessly. High puzzle rating is fancy, but unfortunately it means close to nothing.

Don’t draw arrows, you are not Hikaru

Talking about mistakes… you are not the kind of person who is drawing arrows in positions to calculate better, right? Don’t listen to the dark side, you don’t want to develop lazy habits. When you play over the board, there will be no arrows to help you, nor when you are short on time.

‘But Hikaru does it too!’

Yes, but not for himself, for YOU, so you can understand better what he is thinking. Don’t send your visualization skills to retirement this way!

The absolute worst mistake: not doing puzzles at all

“Puzzles are pointless. Why would you solve positions that will never occur in my games?”

The position won’t happen, that’s true. But the patterns will appear, and you will also need to practice how to calculate and visualize, so once you have to do it in your game you will be much quicker and more accurate.

I would even go so far to say that tactics are the muscles in chess, you always have to train with them to be in shape. A couple of puzzles a day will keep the blunders away!

Just kidding. You will always blunder, everyone blunders, we are only human. But it does matter how often; every second move? Once in every game? Twice in every 50 games? There is a difference :)

Where to find good puzzles?

I might sound like a grandma, but nowadays everything is digitalized, and I think there was some beauty in studying from physical books, because they really taught us valuable habits. They taught us patience; you couldn’t just play whatever you wanted when you got annoyed with a position. Very often the tactic was only from White’s perspective, even if you had to find the solution for Black. We had to be able to see the right moves also from the opponent’s perspective (if you are up for a challenge, try to flip the board when you do tactics online, and search for the solution for the other side!).

There are many great resources on the topic, here are some of my favourites:

• CT-ART is one of the best collections ever, it’s mostly based on old classics.

• As a child I did my fair share of exercises from Maxim Blokh books.

• I also liked 1001 Chess Exercises for Beginners.

• For advanced players, The Woodpecker Method looked like an interesting way to further level up one’s skills.

• I love the wide selection of ChessMood’s Tactic Ninja and Mating Matador courses (they have other great materials too, and if you decide to subscribe to them, you can get 20% off with my LINK)

• If you prefer practicing for free, Lichess also has a good database of themed puzzles. If you hover over Puzzles > Puzzle themes and scroll down to Motifs/Advanced/Mates/Mate themes. You can also set the difficulty level to “Easiest (-600)” for pattern training, in which case you don’t need them to be rated.

I also made a video on YouTube about the topic, please feel free to check it out and subscribe! :)

Don't give up on tactical training just because it hasn’t helped you yet. Your pattern recognition and tactical vision won’t develop overnight, so you need to keep practicing patiently and thoughtfully. One day you'll start spotting combinations that used to feel invisible.

Now, before go and get your puzzle training done, let me know in the comments what book, application, website or method helped you the most in this matter!

If you’re looking for more personalized help with your chess, you can find information about my coaching HERE. :)

Here is one of my favourite mate-in-two exercises from Susan Polgar's 200 Checkmates book, White to play and mate in 2! Can you find it?

In serious tournaments there is usually a very strict rule: if you’re more than 15 minutes late, you will lose. When I sat down at the board and started the clocks, my opponent was still nowhere to be seen. I think arriving on time and giving yourself a few minutes to “get in the mood” is a really underrated element of tournament play. It helps you get your thoughts straight and start focusing on the game before you even begin. I can’t say I’m completely innocent when it comes to this either, I struggle with time management even off the board. Whenever this happens, I like to spend a few minutes to recover from the rush and get into the right mindset before I make my first move.

After my rival arrived in a hurry, we shook hands, and they quickly answered 1.e4 with c5.

Let’s stop scrolling, and let’s look at this position for a moment! What do you think was wrong with this seemingly natural move (Qc7) that gets out of the pin?

Likely to catch up for the few lost minutes after being late, my opponent blitzed out their first few moves (after each move we got 30 seconds). If you catch yourself doing that, remember to slow down, no one is chasing you. It might seem like a good idea or completely harmless, but it can cost you the whole point. Things can go wrong in the opening.

Let’s do a quick evaluation. Equal material, both Kings are in the middle, but mine can still hide easily. My pieces are developed, I almost finished with the opening stage, and can start attacking almost immediately. Black still needs a couple of moves to bring out their army and has to spend several more moves fixing their issues. But don’t be mistaken, this is only a temporary advantage, as given enough moves, all these issues will be solved.

How would you continue after g5? Taking on g5 with the Knight seems tempting, but do you think it’s worth it? Let’s find out!

Although my play was not 100% perfect, and my opponent gave me a few opportunities, I think we can still draw a few important conclusions from this game:

1. Poor development is a temporary disadvantage, which means that with enough time (moves) it can be resolved. You will need to be quick.

2. Look for active moves that keep improving your position (if you can, try doing it almost every move), so you can further delay or limit their improvement and get an even stronger attack!

3. Open the position with pawn breaks and pawn exchanges if their King is stuck in the middle! You need open lines, ranks or diagonals so you can bring your pieces into the attack more easily.

4. Try to avoid exchanging Queens if the enemy King is exposed! Otherwise you will not be able to take advantage of their situation.

5. Don’t sacrifice unless you clearly understand the compensation you’re getting! Many players fall into the trap of sacrificing to make the position even more exciting or “beautiful”, but be careful. Sometimes these sacrifices just make your job harder, and you can easily lose your initiative. A boring but solid win is far better than a flashy, “brilliant” game that you almost won but ultimately lost.

6. Don’t be upset if you can’t give an early mate. In positions like these, checkmate is actually quite rare, and that’s perfectly fine. What matters is that you win enough material or get so ahead in your plan that they can no longer catch up.

Have you ever had a game where your opponent fell behind in development, but you weren’t sure how to punish it? Or maybe you managed to convert it successfully? What principles helped you the most? I’d love to hear about it in the comments!

If you're looking for more personalized help with your chess, you can find information about my coaching HERE. :)

In my first post, I’d like to tell you more about myself and my chess career, so you can get to know the person behind my future articles a little better (and I hope to get to know you better too along the way!).

As a little child, I often saw my family members play a strange board game against each other, and I couldn’t resist placing my little head on the chessboard to examine what was going on. Unfortunately, my parents thought this game was not for children, so they sent me away. This went on for quite some time, until one day in kindergarten, a kind lady came and introduced chess to us, and explained how each piece moves.

Following that, I went home proudly, convinced that I finally knew how to play *that game*, and that my parents would have no choice but to accept my challenge. Eventually, after a couple of eye rolls, my father gave in, and, as expected, he won our match while reading the newspaper and watching TV.

It wasn’t until I was 8 years old that I went to my first competition. My mother came home one day and excitedly told me that a small (rapid) chess tournament was being organized in the central park of our town, asking if I wanted to play. Of course I did! :)

After some consideration, my mom realized that since I’d be playing against adults, I needed to be a bit more prepared than I was. So she taught me a nice little trick: the Scholar’s Mate. Imagining how cool I’d be with my unbeatable new weapon, I sat down for the first round. You can probably guess how successful I was, naturally, no one fell for my early checkmate attack. However, one man (my first coach-to-be) told my mom that he saw “the fire in my eyes” and that he would like to teach me more about chess, if I wanted to as well. This is where my chess journey began.

From then on, I had weekly coaching sessions and attended blitz, rapid, or classical tournaments in the region or around the country almost every month. It didn’t matter whether they were for girls or boys, children or adults, which certainly made me a stronger player, especially since I was often facing stronger opponents.

Since school wasn’t too hard for me, my teachers allowed me to miss classes and were genuinely supportive about my extracurricular interest. Unfortunately, I can’t say the same about most of my peers. Chess was definitely not the coolest activity back then, especially if you combined it with good grades. Nevertheless, I found good, lifelong friends at tournaments. I still look back fondly on chess camps and competitions where we had tons of fun, while playing chess or other games or staying up late discussing life, even though the adults had ordered us to sleep long before.

These friends helped me stay motivated even during harder, uninspiring days, especially since these were the only times I could see them, and because as they were progressing, I had to keep up with them.

As I climbed the rating ladder, I often won or finished on the podium at the National Youth Championships, qualifying for the Youth European Union-, Youth European-, and Youth World Chess Championships. Sadly, I didn’t have the chance to represent my country at the latter, but I did win silver and bronze medals at the Youth European Union Championship and finished 6th (tied for 3rd) at the Youth European Rapid Championship.

Before high school, due to some difficult personal events in my life that affected my performance and confidence, I was left without proper guidance, working with teachers only on and off. This changed after a couple of months, when my school’s team was preparing for the National Team Student Championship, and another player’s coach, FM Ernő Dede, came to help us.

After we won the gold medal at the competition, he took me under his wing, helping me regain my motivation and love for the game. Soon, I was back on track with my chess improvement. This period was probably the most fruitful of my chess career, as not long after getting a new coach, I earned a Woman International Master norm and a Woman Grandmaster norm, and went from approximately 2050 rating points to 2266 in a short time.

Ernő was not only a coach to me, but also a mentor; someone I could talk to about almost anything, shepherding me through both chess and life. Thanks to him, I was given multiple opportunities, acquired new skills, traveled, and learned more about the world, all of which helped me grow both as a player and as a person.

Ernő also gave me a little push to teach chess. On one occasion, he organized a chess camp for his students and ordered me to teach them one morning. I reluctantly accepted after a couple of “I can’t do this!” — “Yes, you can” exchanges. I ended up enjoying it so much that later on, I even accompanied a few of those students to the National Team Student Championship as a team captain, when I was too old to participate as a player.

As the graduation exam was approaching, I found myself at a point in my life where I had to decide whether to pursue chess or become a doctor, as my teachers and family were insisting. Chess is an amazing game, but making a living solely from playing is brutal, and the amount of sacrifice one has to put into it may never pay off. The world is far too big and interesting to focus exclusively on one subject, giving up everything else (at least for me).

After realizing that neither of these paths was truly for me, I ended up submitting my application to psychology school, with sport psychology in mind as a possible direction. This way, I could continue studying and playing chess without fully abandoning either.

I had a promising start at university, as I was invited to a chess camp with the members of the Olympic Women’s Team, which piqued my motivation for a while. At the same time, being exposed to a completely new environment after flying out of the nest, missing my chess friends as they began their young adult lives, and my favorite coach, Ernő, falling seriously ill (he sadly passed away a few years later) caused that motivation to gradually fade.

Things might have been different if I had found someone new to learn from, but due to a terrible experience with a former teacher, I was less keen on doing so. On top of that, going on Erasmus to Italy and dealing with performance anxiety in tournaments only added to this process. After all, chess is far more enjoyable when you play it for fun, without constantly worrying about results, ratings and prizes. :)

The first time I coached professionally was during my higher education years, when I got the chance to teach chess to groups of little children in a kindergarten and in an elementary school, later individually as well, both offline and online. It definitely had its funny moments, except for when I was mistaken for an eighth grader in the elementary school at the age of 20, or when a 7-year-old wanted to bite me. However, once I went on the previously mentioned Erasmus and later moved to Greece, I had to look for other prospects.

Years passed, COVID struck the world, and a year later I decided to give chess streaming on Twitch a try. I didn’t have too much hope for it, considering that I’m an introvert and it was far beyond my comfort zone, especially since I was also much shyer at the time. Yet, I ended up enjoying it, talking and getting to know my audience really cheered me up while I was trying to finish my thesis and exams at university, in the Work and Organizational Psychology department, which I had continued with after my Bachelor’s degree.

Once I graduated, I realized coaching was what I wanted to do, but this time with adult improvers. I completely fell in love with this profession; I love getting to know people from different countries and learning more about them and their cultures, joking around during lessons, and, most importantly, seeing them grow their understanding of this game. :)

As for my chess career, it turns out the tables have turned. As a child, I enjoyed playing and sort of hated studying, but now I am more fond of learning than actually participating in tourneys or games. I still do these from time to time, and I even set some goals for myself (like finally earning the WIM title), but I take part in them less frequently.

Looking back, chess has never been just a game for me. It shaped who I am, tested my limits, and offered refuge when it was needed. Even though its role in my life has changed through the years, thanks to chess I met some of the most important people in my life, and it also gave me some of the most beautiful memories.

Through this blog, I’d like to share not only practical advice about chess improvement and psychology, but also the thoughts, struggles, and lessons that come with this journey. My main goal is to help you improve as a player, but also to feel more at ease with the ups and downs that come with this frustrating yet amazing game.

If any of this resonates with you and you’d like to follow along, don’t forget to subscribe! :)