Learning to Play Chess (Blog)

[Iamsuperman]

"In chess you're only as good as your worst move, in mathematics you're as good as your best" - I forget who said that.

[Acting Like Godot]

I've decided to unilaterally appoint myself as Steve's chess coach.

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

I've also read up on opening moves. I liked learning the strategic and tactical significance of each possibility, such as control of the center and development of attack posture. Now I understand why 1. e4 is considered a strong opening.

1.e4 and 1.d4 are the most common first moves used by good players.

1.c4 and 1. Nf3 are also good. They regularly transpose into the same positions that might arise from 1.d4. However, they give some flexibility because you can disguise your intentions a little longer and avoid certain types of d4 positions that you prefer not to be in.

1.f4 is playable, known as Bird's Opening, but is considered an oddity. 1. b4 looks utterly strange, but is played often enough to have a name too. It is known as the Sokolsky Opening, or the Orang Utan.

---

Anyway, back to 1.e4.

For today's lesson, I will show you a strategic idea, rather than a tactical idea. (Tactics are what you've been concerned with so far. Strategy is something more long-term).

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bb5

This is known as the Ruy Lopez.

3.... a6
4. Bxc6

... and this is known as the Exchnage Variation.

4. .... dxc6

(At this stage, White can play 5.Nxe5 but this does not win a pawn, because Black can immediately respond with 5 ... Qd4 attacking both the knight and the e4 pawn, and therefore winning the e4 pawn back).

So instead White plays:

5. d4 exd4
6. Qxd4 Qxd4
7. Nxd4

Okay. Now here is the strategic idea I want to show you. Remove all the pieces (rooks, bishops, knights etc) from the board, and just leave the kings and the pawns where they are.

White wins. This is a given. I would beat Kasparov if we reached this position and I were White.

Why? Properly played, what will happen is that White's 4 pawns on the kingside will eventually break through against Black's three pawns on the kingside (and White gets a new queen). Meanwhile, Black's 4 pawns on the Queenside cannot break through against the 3 white pawns on the Queenside.

This is because of the doubled Black pawns on the c-file. The two pawns there are effectively one pawn in the endgame. So Black's 4 pawns on the Q-side cannot break through against White's 3 pawns on the Q-side.

This is the strategic idea for White, in the Exchange Variation of the Ruy Lopez. He cripples Black's pawn structure early in the game, on the 4th move, and seeks to reach the endgame as soon as possible, by exchanging off as many pieces as he can.

This may not happen for many, many, many moves. Maybe another 30 or 40 or 50 moves. But this is the strategic idea behind White's game.

What I am trying to show you here is the long-range strategic thinking in chess. (As opposed to the short tactical 2-move or 3-move tricks). Interesting or not, Steve?

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

My weakness is the end game. I need to learn how to achieve checkmate with different kinds of pieces.

Okay. First let's start with White King & Queen, vs Black King, on an otherwise empty chessboard.

There are quicker ways, and slower ways to do this, but for convenience, think of it this way. For a checkmate to be achieved:

1. the Black King must always be forced to the first/last ranks/files of the board;

2. the White King must be involved in the process. In other words, in the final checkmate position, the White King is always just two squares away from the Black King.

Now, you may not realise this, but the Queen is so powerful that just by moving the Queen alone, and without checking the Black King at all; and without moving your own W King at all, you can force the Black King to the first rank, last rank, a-file or h-file.

Try it.

(This is not the most efficient way to checkmate the King, but it's good for learning purposes - to understand how to cut off lines and squares that the Kign can escape to.).

Eg suppose the Black King is on e5 (middle of the board). And the White Queen is on h1 (right hand corner). And the White King is on a1 (left hand corner)

1. Qf3

(Notice that the Black King cannot cross to the left-hand side of the board anymore - that is, it cannot go to f6, f5 or f4)

1..... Ke6

2. Qf4

(Notice that if the Queen moves up one little square to f4, the K cannot cross the fourth rank and therefore cannot reach the third, second or first ranks).

2 ....Kd5

3. Qe3

(Now K cannot cross the e-file or the 3rd rank)

3. ... Kd6

4. Qe4

(Now K cannot cross the e-file or 4th rank.

4 .....Kd7

5. Qg6 (Now K cannot cross 6th rank)

5 ....... Ke7

6. Qc6 (K still cannot cross 6th rank and cannot go to d7),

6 .... Kf7

7. Qd6 (K still cannot cross 6th rank and now cannot get to e7).

7 ...... Ke8

8. Qc7 (K is now stuck on the back rank)

8 .... Kf8

9. Qd7 (by now you no doubt can see the "net" closing in on the B King)

9 ... Kg8

10. Qe7

Right now, the B King can only move back and forth between h8 and g8. Effectively, you used your Queen (and your Queen alone) to push the B King to a little corner.

Now, walk your White King all the way from a1 to f6. Then checkmate by moving your queen to g7.

[Bruce Achterberg]

I have several chess-related topics I want to mention, so I'll break them up into separate posts.

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Chess can be pretty unforgiving because if you make a mistake at the wrong time (which is very easy to do as a beginner), you could lose within the next couple moves. The most frustrating part for me as a beginner is making a dumb mistake because there was something I just didn't take enough time to notice. My brain doesn't immediately perceive a chessboard like an experienced player would. I have to think through every angle very consciously, and that takes a lot of time.

I love the premise behind chess, but as with most competitive games, it has far too much "if you make a mistake early on, you're probably going to lose" for my liking. This concept is called "slippery slope" in games. The opposite of slippery slope is "perpetual comeback" where the game gives a losing player a fair or event decent chance at making a comeback when he's losing. Usually it makes for better games.

Chess also requires you to look too far ahead and have too much knowledge for my liking. I prefer more fast paced games where you have to make a decision almost every second (sometimes more then that) based on the present situation, what you know about your opponent, and what you know about yourself.

For me, games are not only fun or relaxing, but also educational. They act as an objective mirror for me to see myself in; a world of concepts and ideas to explore; an interface between my mind and that of my opponent; the means to the end of continuous self improvement - a way to continuously test your limits, measure your performance, gain insights about yourself, and smash through your internal barriers.

Games that allow you to maximise the time spent in those highly educational, "mind game" moments between your opponent are great, but I try to steer clear of games that use silly mechanics that create a barrier to those moments.

A game I really love because of how forgiving it is with mistakes and how it maximises highly educational, fun, "mind game" moments is Street Fighter (a 2D fighting game). I personally prefer Street Fighter 2 Super Turbo, but I play Street Fighter Alpha 2 via an online client (called GGPO) that lets you play emulated fighting games online with very little latency.

To me, Street Fighter is the competitive game. Starcraft, Chess, Go, and Magic: The Gathering (a card game) all come close, but Street Fighter has certain qualities (which I won't go into) that make it a superior competitive game, IMO.

Another game you might like, Steve, is an online card game that you'll be able to play for free. It's called Kongai and was designed by (one of my favorite people), David Sirlin. The game is still in closed beta. Once I've played it, and if I think it's worthy of mention, I'll bring it up again with more info.

Street Fighter and Kongai, like Chess, are right up your alley, I think. All games aren't so much about what they appear to be with their graphics and are more about acting as an interface between the mind of your opponent, which is ultimately a larger interface for self improvement.

To share a nice quote about competitive gaming as it relates to enlightenment:

If I’ve learned anything from my Zen training, it is that Zen is anything but “a relaxing lean back experience”. The posture of Zen is one of balance; leaning neither forward nor backward—but if you had to err one way or the other it would be forward. Effective Zen requires “continuous attention”. Though the practice of seated Zen meditation demands that the practitioner not move, other Zen activities such as calligraphy, tea ceremony, or martial arts most definitely require movement.

For me, the games that most express Zen are competitive games such as Street Fighter or Go. While at low levels of play these games can excite the overly reactive or analytical mind, competition at the highest level is often characterized by a state of no-mind; pre-reacting to situations based on intuition, seeing the space between two thoughts. As for the “deeply disturbing” nature of Flow, it is not a detriment to its Zen-ness; it is in-fact an opportunity for the player to ponder one of the most central aspects of life and in doing so an opportunity for enlightenment.

Source: W. Thomas Grove portfolio

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

I'm not sure if it's better to just play fast and loose and deal with the mistakes I make or really try to think deeply about each move. If I take the time to really consider each move, a single game could take over an hour.

In my experience, while you can try really hard to consciously learn things from games, you'll probably be overwhelmed by the info. I did this when learning to play Street Fighter Alpha 2.

I find it better to just play lots of games, play to win, and eventually your start to habitualise common patterns. "Playing to learn" can, at times, be detrimental since you may think "oh, I want to undo that move since it wasn't good", when if you left the move, you might have found an opportunity to learn explore extreme “corner cases” that often don't come about, but are very important to know of, especially if you get one coming up in an important match (ie. tournament play). Granted, you probably won't compete in tournaments, but as you know, optimising your decisions based on the high level (ie. the best players; the most logical extreme) will make your decisions hold up much better.

FYI, exploring extreme “corner cases” is the opposite of playing to win, and involves mostly for playing for love of the game. You may not win doing this, but because you love the game so much, you don't care (which is why it's important to play a game you like; it can be difficult to do that). Interestingly, sometimes "not playing to win" can end up being "playing to win" in disguise, because you have the opportunity to learn things not available to you if you exclusively play to win.

[Bruce Achterberg]

Book recommendation

I'd like to recommend that you read David Sirlin's, book, Playing to Win. Sirlin is a professional game designer and national Street Fighter champion. It's an excellent, well-written book that basically teaches you how to win, specifically:

• what mindsets do/do not serve you
• a (brief and appropriate) re-telling of Sun Tzu's The Art of War as it applies to games
• an overview of common play styles you'll encounter in your opponents
• an analysis of top player to try identify the core traits of what makes the best player
• and much more.

The book is only 131 pages long, and is extremely well written and very concise. Sirlin really cares about clear thinking and good writing, and liberally takes lessons from Strunk and White's excellent, The Elements of Style. Admittedly this recommendation is bias, since I'm a big fan of Sirlin, but the book really is good. And best of all, it's available for free online!

If you'd rather read a physical copy, there's also a print version of the book available. There are also unofficial file copies available (ie. PDF, .txt, etc), but I wouldn't recommend them because the font quality is poor. The online version (that I linked to first) is the best version.

You won't be able to find reviews of it from Amazon because Sirlin sucks at marketing (and/or doesn't have time to market since he has a job, the poor guy ).

However, in addition to my glowing, over-enthusiastic fan-boy recommendation (), you can read a review of it by a competitive gamer in this forum post, and another by Clint Hocking, a professional game designer who designed and did script work for the first Splinter Cell game, in this blog post.

An awesome quote from Clint's review that resonates strongly with me:

"Playing to Win" is a great book. For Sirlin, games aren't just entertainment, they are opportunities for communal exploration of highly complex possibility-spaces, and platforms for serious self-reflection and improvement. The games he is interested in are the kinds of games that people play for decades, for centuries, without exhausting all of their secrets. I'd love to see more mainstream computer and videogames with a commitment to the kind of depth that Sirlin finds in competitive gaming. Maybe if we could prorate roayalties over generations...

Overall, I think chess will be an excellent fit for you since it makes use of what is probably one of your most powerful strengths -- your 1337 long-term projection/planning ability. Couple that with your Learner and Focus talent, and you're set.

Random, chess-related stuff you may like

According to this (really interesting) article about chess grandmasters from Scientific American where they talk about how "mental processes of chess grandmasters have revealed clues to how people become experts in other fields as well", it'll take you about 10 years and lots of playing to get really good at the game. Now I'm pretty sure that you don't intend to play it this seriously, and you probably like chess because it takes you away from a monitor/TV screen, but in terms of games, I'd say there are much more interesting ones available that let you more directly make use of your talents.

Interestingly, Street Fighter also "takes you away from a monitor" (sort of) if it's available at arcades that you can go to and vs people ("arcades" and "Street Fighter" are synonymous), but sadly those arcades (and people who go to them) are hard to find. Darn chess for being so simple, inexpensive, and enduring. Just a board and pieces, and you're set to play.

On an un-related note, I'll cap this post off with an interesting quote:

I heard somewhere (lost the source, sorry) that if every particle in the universe could somehow be used to compute one operation per second and that all the particles in the universe were used in a massively parallel computer that analyzed all possible positions in Chess, it would take longer than the current estimated age of the universe to finish. So yeah, pretty long.

Source: Sirlin.net — Your source of shocking insights on game design » Blog Archive » Checkers Solved

[fynyx]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

I don't have much of a chess brain yet, so using undo has been very helpful for me to try different lines to see how they play out. It allows me to learn a lot from a single game. It also helps me avoid having to abandon a game that might have turned out pretty interesting if not for a dumb mistake.

1) This would be similar to the intensive self-training common to single-player video games.

I spend almost all my time in this mode, trying to hone the requisite skills for that particular form of play.

I think Steve should assuredly continue in this way, until familiar past basic techniques, and entering intermediate skill level.

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

I don't use undo when playing against human players online (except for the friend last night who offered it), so if I make a dumb mistake, I just have to take the loss and move on. It's not as educational for me though when that happens. This morning I lost a game about 20 moves into it because I made a lame mistake. I was checkmated on the very next move and didn't even see it coming. That was too bad, since I'd have liked to have seen how that game might have played out if I hadn't made that mistake. Too late now.

2) The joy of playing against a human opponent lies more in savouring distinct flavours of the unexpected, than in merely drilling oneself.

I think learning is not as systematic, compared to being left alone to explore against the computer.
Again, that's why it seems better to be rather experienced enough personally, to next have fun playing against others.

Steve, are you able to save games you play direct with others?
You could then take time later to review your performance, much like the option available in various strategy video games, for scenario and multiplayer modes.

3) After all, since the machine (computer) has already entered into the tradition (International chess), might as well optimise its use.

As -munish- put it earlier, just before my initial comment in this thread:

Originally Posted by munish

Instead of pushing humans out of the game and turning it into a battle of machines, chess is evolving into a man-machine collaboration._S.P.

[Savage]

@ALG: Thanks for all the tips. Most of this I've already learned during the past 2 weeks. I studied a number of openings so far. I've played Ruy Lopez a few times, and the Sicilian defense comes up a lot too. I get stuck shortly after the opening though and don't really know what I'm trying to do except move my pieces out and hope to setup some attacks.

I also went and learned how to checkmate with the most common combos in the endgame, like a King and Rook against a King. I haven't gotten to use these techniques except against the computer though. I'm getting so dominated in the mid-game that I'm usually checkmated well before anyone can promote a pawn. Usually around the 10th move or so, I already find myself in a situation where I'm trapped into either losing material or giving the opponent a major positional advantage. There's obviously something I'm just not seeing there. By the time I can see the traps coming, it's usually too late for me to avoid them. I don't know if I'm just blundering with bad moves or if I'm just blind to being intentionally setup by my opponent.

My weakest part right now seems to be what I do after the first 4-5 opening moves. I haven't been able to figure out how to develop attacks and keep my pieces defended at the same time. Whenever I try to be aggressive and setup what seem like good attacks, I end up down material. Whenever I try to play more defensively, I end up getting boxed in and picked up.

While I appreciate the strategy of chess, my weakness seems to be short-term tactics. I can't execute my strategic goals even when I want to. I tell my soldiers what to do, and they just get themselves killed.

The friend I played with a couple nights ago told me I should study tactics, so I think that's what I'll look into next. I need to find a way to improve my mid-game play. That's where I'm really getting killed right now. By the time I've reached the endgame, the situation is already hopeless, and my more careful moves can only delay checkmate at best.

I've already learned a few basic tactics like forking and pinning, mainly because they're always being used against me, and I've been able to execute them a few times, but I know I still have a lot of patterns left to learn.

I suppose the biggest question mark for me right now is: What exactly should I be trying to do after the first 4-5 opening moves? When I look at the board at this point, I don't really know what I should be looking for. Sometimes I'll try to set a long-term goal like setting up for an attack f7, but I've never been able to execute these plans effectively. Meanwhile when I look at what my opponents are doing, I'm just amazed at how perfectly they seem to execute plans.

[Savage]

This site has some animated endgame tutorials:
Chessville - Instruction - Beginner - Basic Endgame Strategy - Intro

[Acting Like Godot]

By the way, Steve, I don't have a chess set anymore. When I tell you about moves, I'm just visualising the position in my head. It's a skill that all experienced chessplayers develop. I believe it helps in LOA visualisation too.

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

I get stuck shortly after the opening though and don't really know what I'm trying to do except move my pieces out and hope to setup some attacks.

Attacks? These can happen very early in the game. I'll show you a "sudden death":

1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 d6
3. Bc4 Bg4
4. Nc3 a6

Now you probably know enough to know that 4...a6 is a bad move. Doesn't develop any piece, doesn't control the centre, doesn't serve any purpose. However, what you probably haven't learned to see yet is how quickly Black can be punished for such an error.

5. Nxe5! Bxd1

Black thinks he's won a Queen.

6. Bxf7+ Ke7
7. Nd5 mate

[CannibalSmith]

Will Wright says he plays Go.

[fynyx]

Hello all,

1) This is my 3rd post here, in response to Steve's blog post.
I guess that my first 2 drew no response at all, even from the great man himself, because I was way too off-topic, for a narrowly defined games as (International) chess.

2) Still, in the spirit of diversity in gaming, I found 2 articles that expand on Gary Gygax's Dragonchess variant.
One of this even points to the earliest ancestor variants, Chaturanga and Shatranj, of what many chess players happily play today
(Yes, even the other popular Chinese variant was derived this way.)

Here are the article links, an editorial paying tribute to Gygax who just died, and quoting my earlier reply that led to this one:

1. from National Post:

The Post editorial board: The ultimate dungeon master - Full Comment

2. Dragonchess links:

Dragonchess - rules

More on Dragonchess

Originally Posted by fynyx

3) For years, I have been amused with variants of standard Western (International) chess.

There still is the Chinese variant, that I grew up with, very popular in my corner of the world.

My teenage love of Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game, yielded an early 3D version involving mythical creatures of sky, ground, and caverns below.
It was authored invented by the original creator Gary Gygax himself.

3) Thank you, Steve, for the fact that this thread has not only benefited just conventional chess players.

I appreciate Bruce Achterberg's link to David Sirlin's website, on playing to win.
Sirlin is yet another person who writes with clarity, energy and experience.

It is also with this gratitude for gaming insights received, that I mentioned above, the thought-provoking editorial on Gygax's legacy to gaming.

I excerpt Bruce's original reply:

Originally Posted by Bruce Achterberg

I'd like to recommend that you read David Sirlin's, book, Playing to Win. Sirlin is a professional game designer and national Street Fighter champion. It's an excellent, well-written book that basically teaches you how to win, ...

[Dan.Linehan]

Re: Midgame,

• Make sure your queen is fully out. Keep your knights in the middle of the board as much as possible.
• Make sure each piece you have in play is single or double protected by pawns through the game.

Start with those.

[nextlevelandbeyond]

My eight year old son has become a recent chess enthusiast. I enrolled him in afternoon chess classes and he loves it. He has also been teaching me and has a real gift at passing what he has learned to others. I have noticed in a short period of time that he puts more thought into things before he does them in both the game and life. It is fun to watch and NOW to play.

He has his first chess tournament on Tuesday and he is very excited.

[Savage]

I learned a lot in the past week and have definitely gotten better. Some of my online games have been going for more than a week, and two people have already commented that my play has improved significantly since I started. I've been assimilating a lot of chess info. The wikipedia chess pages have been especially helpful.

Chess is a lot more fun for me now because I can actually implement some of the tactics I learned. I'm recognizing more opportunities to gain pieces or position that I'd have never noticed a week ago.

It's quite a fascinating game. No two games are alike, so every time you play it's a different experience.

[oneday]

yeah exactly! thats why i loves to play chess. you have the potential to be extremely good. but your still going to loose.
-rumor

[andyoyo]

Steve where were you in the 1600s? Hah, just kidding. I'd love to play you in chess anytime. But if you're looking for strategy and focus, you should consider a Real Time Strategy online game, it adds some imagination to the mix. Another board game that is very hard to master is 'Go'. If you do take the route to 'study' openings, make sure to find the meaning behind each of them. Chess isn't a game you just memorize move sets and get good at.
You want to play a game tommorrow? Email Andyoyo@startwo.net

Edit: Btw Your Articles & writing have helped a lot. 14 hours of editing a book, you sir are insane. Make sure to say where I can buy the book though

[pero]

Hello, this is my first post on this forum. I'm a chess master and in the past played chess a lot, and for a few years of my life professionally (lived from it). I live in Croatia, a former socialistic Yugoslavia, from the east block, where the chess was popular, like in Russia. Now I don't play so often, I'm a developer and don't have a time.

Steve, if I may suggest some book, the one that helped a lot to me was an almost 100 years old book My System from Aron (or Aaron) Nimzowitsch. In my early development, after reading that little gem, the quality of my game skyrocketed.

Amazon link:
Amazon.com: My System (Chess Classics): Aron Nimzowitsch: Books

If you, or anyone else need some advice about chess, I'd be glad to help. I literally lived and dreamed chess part of my life.

Pero

[Berix]

Originally Posted by pero

I live in Croatia
Pero

Me too.
Pozdrav iz Rijeke.

[Acting Like Godot]

Nimzowitsch is Mr Pawn Structures himself. Steve, you said earlier you're not very sure what to do, after getting all your pieces out in the opening. Well, from Nimzowitsch, you will learn that middlegame strategy is heavily dictated by the structure of the pawns.

[pero]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Nimzowitsch is Mr Pawn Structures himself. Steve, you said earlier you're not very sure what to do, after getting all your pieces out in the opening. Well, from Nimzowitsch, you will learn that middlegame strategy is heavily dictated by the structure of the pawns.

Yes, Philidor said that the pawns are the soul of chess, and Acting Like Godot is on the right track. Begginning with pawns, pawn structures, and pawn endgames is the best way to ponder into the soul of chess, and to get a deeper understanding of the game. Everything else (midgames, openings) comes after. It is the mistake to begin studying the openings first.

Pero

[JustBe]

I am a big fan of Steve Pavlina's articles.

Learned a lot from it.
Most of all his productivity skills and insights.

And I find it too bad that now chess is coming up.

If I have any gifts and talents than it is in chess.

But I don't like that game anymore. And I don't develop my skillset anymore.. Although I know I have capabilities to become a master (at least fide master).

It's not real life.

And for me, it belongs to the catagory of reading news, reading too much email, forums etc.

I can imagine for people who have reached everything in life can enjoy spending some time with this.

But I believe for most of us it is a huge time waster.

Just my 2 cents.


Still a fan though (and donator!)

[pero]

Originally Posted by JustBe

I am a big fan of Steve Pavlina's articles.

Learned a lot from it.
Most of all his productivity skills and insights.

And I find it too bad that now chess is coming up.

If I have any gifts and talents than it is in chess.

But I don't like that game anymore. And I don't develop my skillset anymore.. Although I know I have capabilities to become a master (at least fide master).

It's not real life.

And for me, it belongs to the catagory of reading news, reading too much email, forums etc.

I can imagine for people who have reached everything in life can enjoy spending some time with this.

But I believe for most of us it is a huge time waster.

Just my 2 cents.


Still a fan though (and donator!)

JustBe, I agree with you. There are several reasons I (almost completely) stopped playing chess.

First, the chess community (masters and almost all pros, year after year playing chess and doing nothing else) is not healthy. Their vanity is very high, they are only able to talk about chess, and I stopped feeling good at tournaments. We often made fun that we are all autistic, and there is a grain of truth in it. Also, I had a feeling that I deteriorate intellectually and psychically.

Secondly, chess can turn into obsession, and be like a drug. It consumes all your time, and it's like an ocean and you can't see the end. All other aspects of life will hurt.

Thirdly, only a first few hundred players in the world can live from chess, and competition is high.

Now I play only for satisfaction, about hundred games a year, all blitz.

Maybe, chess was the choice in 60's, 70's, maybe 80's, but now in the fast-paced world, with every new game I feel guilt for not doing something else that is more important.

Everybody should estimate for themselves. I left the best years of my life in chess tournaments and am not sorry for that, but knowing what I now know (B.Tracy - zero-based thinking), I wouldn't do it again. Life is short.

Speaking about playing chess from beginning and being interested in this intellectual activity or game, and how far one can go in terms of strength, I had a friend (PhD in math) who had the fastest curve I saw. For a year he became a very strong player.

I wonder for how long would Steve endure. Maybe, he will become a strong chess player, but community will hurt.

Pero

[nextlevelandbeyond]

I posted before about my 8 year olds new found love of the game. He just earned a silver medal from his chess tournament this past Tuesday. He is so thrilled and I would love to keep in active in the game. Any suggestions?

He's so darn proud, I had to brag, after all the love of chess has to start somewhere...

[Gene]

Originally Posted by nextlevelandbeyond

I posted before about my 8 year olds new found love of the game. He just earned a silver medal from his chess tournament this past Tuesday. He is so thrilled and I would love to keep in active in the game. Any suggestions?

He's so darn proud, I had to brag, after all the love of chess has to start somewhere...

Congratulations to your eight year old on his joy in playing chess and in his award! It is nice to know of a child living in bliss and I assume at least one parent also living in a state of bliss as you watch the child blossom.