This is a summary of the video that I have just written for myself as I have watched it. Thanks very much to you Andras for spelling out in no uncertain terms exactly how we should be analyzing our own games: FIRST PASS. This is your initial analysis. Go through the game without any engine assistance at all. Play through the moves and where you think there may have been a valid alternative move, stop, calculate and then make notes. You must write exact lines, coupled with your evaluation of those lines. The evaluation, even if it’s incorrect, should be concise and based on the lines and variations that you calculated and your interpretation of the position at the end of those lines. It shouldn’t be based on thoughts, feelings and stories or anything fluffy. SECOND PASS. This is where you refine your initial analysis. You keep the moves covered, you play through the game again, keeping the moves and the evaluation number covered up but leaving the evaluation bar on the side of the board visible. Whenever you get to a point where the evaluation bar goes up or down by a significant margin, look at your analysis notes and see if you have stopped and calculated a line and how you evaluated the outcome. If not, this is the time to start looking at that position again in depth. Why don’t you have a line calculated at that point? Try to work out what you missed and why, again without any help from the engine, but make a note of the move number so that you can return to this point in the game on the third pass. THIRD PASS. Go through the game one last time with the aid of the engine so that you’re able to see the lines that it’s calculating and the evaluation that it’s giving to each of them. This is where you compare your refined analysis from the second pass with the output of the engine and attempt to learn what you can from it. You must be the one that comes up with the content, with the evaluation and with the learning, at least initially. If you don’t then you’re just wasting your time. ======= Here's another massive hint and this comes from stuff I've learned by watching Andras and attempting to put it into practice: The level of analysis outlined above of just one of your games gives you an idea of how much thought you should be putting in when you actually play the game in the first place. That level of thought is only possible if you have enough time on each move to practice your thought process and your calculation/visualization. This is why Rapid, Blitz and especially Bullet won't help you as much as you like to think they do.
This video is an absolute masterpiece. Post game analysis is the best tool for chess players who seek to improve their game and taking notes without engine is just awesome work.
I watched the whole video, I can’t believe nobody explained this to me in my years of playing chess! Thanks for being the one with quality content, thinking about the player. I love these videos
This is an excellent video on how to use the engine’s analysis in my opinion. As someone in the 1600 lichess range who was guilty of this I will do better and learn better.
I've discovered your channel after I saw you in a video with Eric. Man, you surely deserve more viewers, I wish your channel grows quickly. And thank you for this video!
Very instructive, thanks. One little trick I use when I don't understand an engine recommendation is following it up with a waiting move, then watching the plan starting to unfold (it should work to understand why 7...a5 is the suggested move in the Petrosian variation of the KID, for example).
This is a couple of years old, but I've just now discovered it. Awesome ideas! Analyze without the engine, and then analyze with just the eval bar to provide a sanity check. Whenever the eval bar disagrees with what you thought, try hard to figure out why. Only then, as a last resort, if you get stumped, peek at the engine's lines. The idea of using just the eval bar is something I never considered. I just tried this process out on one of my games, and I think it's going to help me enormously. Thanks!
yeah I’m definitely going to start doing this, Playing a game and then moving on immediately really is a bad habit of mine which I plan to correct because Of this video
We always got the advice to look for yourself first. Of course back in the day you already knew computers were not that strong, so you'd only use it for short term tactics you would have missed. I've used the engine in various ways, sometimes in the ''proper'' way, maybe sometimes too much. Even when analyzing I'd still ask the questions. Often I would not agree with a move played or the suggestion of the engine, so then I'd build a huge tree of variations to figure the problem out. Back in the day I could still ''push for my move'' until the engine could sometimes finally see my move was better! I have not seen that lately.
This is a great video! I know I should analyse my games manually, but the allure of the engine at my fingertips makes me cave into temptation. I do try to find out the “why” behind why the engine recommends a line, but like you’ve said it’s like interpreting coded messages. And as a 500 rated player, it’s probably more difficult. I think I’ve gotten a little bit better than a few months ago, but the frequency of my mistakes is a dead giveaway that I’m not paying attention to the causes of them. Time to start the hard work of analysing my games myself!
Maybe it's useful to mention that on lichess if you want to look at the moves without computer analysis you can import the game into a study (from the Study button in the analysis menu), which strips the game of previous serverside analysis, and if you need it back later you can request a serverside analysis of the study chapter itself. As for the video, it's spot-on, I'll try to adopt some of these ideas to hopefully better understand the variations the engine gives. For my games, I can't really analyze immediately after each game, and I can't afford coaching, so I play games one day of the week and put everything in a lichess study for later analysis when I have time. My process is that I go through each game without an engine, first looking in the database to see where I first left theory, and then I analyze each game without an engine and try to write down some main takeaways from it - recurring tactical oversights, failures to follow or find a plan, going passive instead of proactive, flaws in calculation. Only after do I do the serverside analysis mostly to check tactical shots I might have missed. Outside tactics engine eval feels very nebulous, I can't really manage to tell plans or motifs from just a few objective continuations, especially when the lines given are completely different from the way I or my opponent would play - maybe the exception being endgames, where playing the computer seems instructive, because then you can very objectively see the consequences of a move or line.
The Kb1/Rd2 comparison thing at around 17:00 in the video I do literally always as a 1600 (with the engine's aid tho), but I never really analyze full games myself (or only with eval bar) just because I'm lazy af... I will start with that beginning with my next game.. thx so much for the video!!!! :D
Amazing! Every one of your videos is a revelation!! I speak as an old guy who has played seriously for more than 50 years and I am still less than 2000 OTB. Please keep up the good work and thank you.
I find analysing my own games hard, and there's a very strong tempation to believe that having my mistakes pointed out to me by the computer is a good proxy for learning, as you pointed out in this video. Oftentimes for me when I'm watching chess streamers analyse their mistakes they so quickly and easily point out their wrong moves, even during the game, which has helped me form the opinion that analysis should be natural and easy - none of us have witnessed the countless hours you have all put in to develop the game sense and pattern recognition to make it seem like it is that easy. I used to save all of my long games from each month into a study and perform analysis on them, which I've fallen out of habit of doing. I will try from now on to do that again and perform the analysis manually.
This is a really hard one , because the main difference between great players vs low ratred ones is that the former know where to look for mistakes (and will find them fast), the weaker ones will not find their mistakes and especially unlikely to find the correct refutation. In fact, good players usually know when the game is still on, where they went wrong!
As a 2200 lichess player i can say that it was beneficial video. It is a great process of analyzing. I guess when you're looking at online chess you should also mention time control and playing too fast at critical moments.
You have called me out! I definitely agree with everything said here. I was making a lot more progress when I was going over my games without the computer. But it's hard! So I kind of fell into the habit of just computering it and going "of course I should have played bishop g6." And then move on to the next game. Thank you for keeping us honest! Also, I hadn't thought of the eval bar only approach. That could make things more interesting rather than just jumping to the full computer after analyzing the game myself.
Great and instructive video! I use the analysis with a grain of salt, but haven't sat and pondered the best moves without computer assistance. Thanks again!
I posted in a chess subreddit asking, any ways to improve post game analysis skills. I got no good response, if only they shared me this video. I am much better now, but 2 years ago, I would never understand why computer gives the eval it does, even after going through the lines. That would make me go mad and run away. Now I have improved a lot in puzzles and chess in general that I see computer recommendation , turn it off and try to figure out all the lines myself. Edit: went through the video, and thats an excellent suggestion. See why I dont have any lines for what computer thinks is bad.
This video is incredibly useful. I am going to use your recommendation! The idea to use the evaluation bar like that is really nice. It would be useful to have a video explaining the best approach to study chess books.
14:11 'Putting voluntarily your rook in a pin, that's so ridiculous and tells so much about your horrendous lack of chess intelligence". Well there is a Ding Liren guy who just did that instead of the toth "normal, primer soviet chess school" King move, and instead of a 3-fold repetition the Ding Liren guy won the game and became World champion. Red thumb.
Welcome to the world where rules have expectations. If you can't figure out the difference between the two, that is what a red thumb is - whatever that is meant to be! By the way I honestly can't believe you spent the time and effort to compose that comment..
I absolutely agree to everything you said, I also quite like that you don't just tell people to not use an engine at all. it is a tool - but not the only one. regarding developing "chess sense", what do you think about analysis of high-level games, especially ones that one can find in books? I find it is very tedious at times but I feel it must be good for me, so I take one of my books, search for the pgn online, go through the game and do an analysis and then read the annotations, then try to understand them and then use an engine to check stuff. The process takes ages, at least an hour, but it exposes me to high-level play. What makes it tedious sometimes is that books usually use example games to point out one thing, but not everything, and sometimes I find other things about the games way more interesting ;D
Thanks for this, Andras. There are very few feelings better than somebody explaining to you exactly why you're wrong because that's where you can improve the most. :D
you mention that improving players should have a coach. What do you think is the appropriate time to get a coach? Like, I am 1350 or so on lichess, but I'm not sure that I need a coach to tell me that I made a 1 move blunder and lost, or that I won because my opponent dropped an exchange in the opening
Thank you Coach!! I have one question, I’m a total beginner at 500elo, should I analyze my games in full? Or stopping at the blunders that completely ruin my games, making me playing a terrible position afterwards? Thank you for this content and hoping more ppl find your chanel! Edit: I was concern of wasting my time analyzing a losing position for me after I blunder a piece or sth of the like
@@ceejelly8783 you can sometimes find lots of instructive stuff in positions that are hopeless. That said the main focus should be on the first (few) big mistakes.
Good stuff - I think I picked up the main point from someone like David Pruess a while ago but really good illustrations of it here. I don't have a huge amount of time for study but I normally think through the game in my head, where I think I went wrong and compare that with the analysis - and focus on any bits where I'm surprised at the analysis. I wonder about your thoughts on this though. Re: openings I barely look at stockfish at all. But if I play any blitz game where I got an unfamiliar opening I'll always compare what I did with the masters database quickly to see if I was following a sensible plan and make a note if I did something obviously weird or wrong. That does seem a smartish way to build some general opening knowledge? (to supplement chessable etc.)
As you say this take much time. When do you stop your analyses? Is it reasonable to but in lot time (many hours, days?!) on this, instead of moving on and play an other game?
What do you think of decodechess.com/ ? It's a new AI that aims to explain the reasons behind each move. Edit : fixed the link, it's decodechess, not chessdecode.
@@ChessCoachAndras it is fairly new, I believe it was launched a couple of months ago. But I'm genuinely curious how this new semi-engine semi-coach tool fits with your video. Thanks for the great content BTW
@@plagiats I was wondering the same thing - especially since they put an email out the other day featuring chess streamers that have spoken about it. I've used it a few times, but I always seem to get to those moments where I just say "aha, and move on".
Wish i had a coach like this... Too late i am 23 now... Started to play again at after watching The Queen's Gambit... Might get an official rating this time....
Damn, Andras, I wish you had a chess radio show and we lived in a world where Fischer were still alive... Andras: Hello ladies and gentlemen! Today it is my absolute pleasure to be joined by legit legend and chess genius Bobby Fischer! Bobby- Fischer: I object to being called a chess genius because I consider myself to be an all around genius who just happens to play chess, which is rather different. A piece of garbage like Kasparov might be called a chess genius, but he's like an idiot savant. Outside of chess he knows nothing. Andras: Speaking of Kasparov, as a former world champion yourself you must- Fischer: Former?! . . .
This is a summary of the video that I have just written for myself as I have watched it. Thanks very much to you Andras for spelling out in no uncertain terms exactly how we should be analyzing our own games:
FIRST PASS. This is your initial analysis. Go through the game without any engine assistance at all. Play through the moves and where you think there may have been a valid alternative move, stop, calculate and then make notes. You must write exact lines, coupled with your evaluation of those lines. The evaluation, even if it’s incorrect, should be concise and based on the lines and variations that you calculated and your interpretation of the position at the end of those lines. It shouldn’t be based on thoughts, feelings and stories or anything fluffy.
SECOND PASS. This is where you refine your initial analysis. You keep the moves covered, you play through the game again, keeping the moves and the evaluation number covered up but leaving the evaluation bar on the side of the board visible. Whenever you get to a point where the evaluation bar goes up or down by a significant margin, look at your analysis notes and see if you have stopped and calculated a line and how you evaluated the outcome. If not, this is the time to start looking at that position again in depth. Why don’t you have a line calculated at that point? Try to work out what you missed and why, again without any help from the engine, but make a note of the move number so that you can return to this point in the game on the third pass.
THIRD PASS. Go through the game one last time with the aid of the engine so that you’re able to see the lines that it’s calculating and the evaluation that it’s giving to each of them. This is where you compare your refined analysis from the second pass with the output of the engine and attempt to learn what you can from it.
You must be the one that comes up with the content, with the evaluation and with the learning, at least initially. If you don’t then you’re just wasting your time.
=======
Here's another massive hint and this comes from stuff I've learned by watching Andras and attempting to put it into practice:
The level of analysis outlined above of just one of your games gives you an idea of how much thought you should be putting in when you actually play the game in the first place. That level of thought is only possible if you have enough time on each move to practice your thought process and your calculation/visualization. This is why Rapid, Blitz and especially Bullet won't help you as much as you like to think they do.
This video is an absolute masterpiece. Post game analysis is the best tool for chess players who seek to improve their game and taking notes without engine is just awesome work.
Thanks for the kind words!
The quality of this new content is second to none. Let's blow up this channel, fellas.
Indeed let’s do it!
I watched the whole video, I can’t believe nobody explained this to me in my years of playing chess! Thanks for being the one with quality content, thinking about the player. I love these videos
My pleasure! Glad it was an eye opener for you.
This was, unsurprisingly, a great addition to an already excellent series of videos.
Thanks sire, glad you enjoy the content.
This is an excellent video on how to use the engine’s analysis in my opinion. As someone in the 1600 lichess range who was guilty of this I will do better and learn better.
Thanks William, glad you like it!
Finally!... someone tells me in plain english how to self improve with an engine.
Glad to be at your service!
I've discovered your channel after I saw you in a video with Eric. Man, you surely deserve more viewers, I wish your channel grows quickly. And thank you for this video!
Thanks man, bring over the rest of the rosen fans and I will be fine. In fact, 1 quarter will do!
The first 4-5 minutes is valuable for everyone. Great content!
Thanks, koszi!
Well I think the whole video is valuable for everyone 😄!
Very instructive, thanks. One little trick I use when I don't understand an engine recommendation is following it up with a waiting move, then watching the plan starting to unfold (it should work to understand why 7...a5 is the suggested move in the Petrosian variation of the KID, for example).
This is a couple of years old, but I've just now discovered it. Awesome ideas! Analyze without the engine, and then analyze with just the eval bar to provide a sanity check. Whenever the eval bar disagrees with what you thought, try hard to figure out why. Only then, as a last resort, if you get stumped, peek at the engine's lines. The idea of using just the eval bar is something I never considered. I just tried this process out on one of my games, and I think it's going to help me enormously. Thanks!
yeah I’m definitely going to start doing this, Playing a game and then moving on immediately really is a bad habit of mine which I plan to correct because Of this video
Let me know if it helped!
I never thought about post-game analysis in that way. The ideas presented here are very interesting to me and I'll try to apply them from now on
HOpe it will help you imrpove!
That just showed the harsh reality. An eye opener
Hey man, hope it was a good kind of eye opener.
We always got the advice to look for yourself first. Of course back in the day you already knew computers were not that strong, so you'd only use it for short term tactics you would have missed. I've used the engine in various ways, sometimes in the ''proper'' way, maybe sometimes too much. Even when analyzing I'd still ask the questions. Often I would not agree with a move played or the suggestion of the engine, so then I'd build a huge tree of variations to figure the problem out. Back in the day I could still ''push for my move'' until the engine could sometimes finally see my move was better! I have not seen that lately.
I like your approach, although these days it is essentially impossible to prove the engine wrong.
This video is absolutely fantastic. Real and actionable chess training advice.
Thanks mate!
This is a great video! I know I should analyse my games manually, but the allure of the engine at my fingertips makes me cave into temptation. I do try to find out the “why” behind why the engine recommends a line, but like you’ve said it’s like interpreting coded messages. And as a 500 rated player, it’s probably more difficult. I think I’ve gotten a little bit better than a few months ago, but the frequency of my mistakes is a dead giveaway that I’m not paying attention to the causes of them. Time to start the hard work of analysing my games myself!
Good luck, it will reap results, trust me!
Maybe it's useful to mention that on lichess if you want to look at the moves without computer analysis you can import the game into a study (from the Study button in the analysis menu), which strips the game of previous serverside analysis, and if you need it back later you can request a serverside analysis of the study chapter itself.
As for the video, it's spot-on, I'll try to adopt some of these ideas to hopefully better understand the variations the engine gives. For my games, I can't really analyze immediately after each game, and I can't afford coaching, so I play games one day of the week and put everything in a lichess study for later analysis when I have time. My process is that I go through each game without an engine, first looking in the database to see where I first left theory, and then I analyze each game without an engine and try to write down some main takeaways from it - recurring tactical oversights, failures to follow or find a plan, going passive instead of proactive, flaws in calculation. Only after do I do the serverside analysis mostly to check tactical shots I might have missed.
Outside tactics engine eval feels very nebulous, I can't really manage to tell plans or motifs from just a few objective continuations, especially when the lines given are completely different from the way I or my opponent would play - maybe the exception being endgames, where playing the computer seems instructive, because then you can very objectively see the consequences of a move or line.
Good luck with your chess sire, I think you are on the right track!
The Kb1/Rd2 comparison thing at around 17:00 in the video I do literally always as a 1600 (with the engine's aid tho), but I never really analyze full games myself (or only with eval bar) just because I'm lazy af... I will start with that beginning with my next game.. thx so much for the video!!!! :D
My pleasure, glad you liked it!
Which video do you discuss the Chess base /fritz kibitzer please? I'd like to give that a watch
Amazing! Every one of your videos is a revelation!! I speak as an old guy who has played seriously for more than 50 years and I am still less than 2000 OTB. Please keep up the good work and thank you.
My pleasure dude.
Really a vital video, I think analyzing your own games properly is something very few lower-rated people (like me) do. Thanks Andras!
My pleasure
I find analysing my own games hard, and there's a very strong tempation to believe that having my mistakes pointed out to me by the computer is a good proxy for learning, as you pointed out in this video. Oftentimes for me when I'm watching chess streamers analyse their mistakes they so quickly and easily point out their wrong moves, even during the game, which has helped me form the opinion that analysis should be natural and easy - none of us have witnessed the countless hours you have all put in to develop the game sense and pattern recognition to make it seem like it is that easy. I used to save all of my long games from each month into a study and perform analysis on them, which I've fallen out of habit of doing. I will try from now on to do that again and perform the analysis manually.
This is a really hard one , because the main difference between great players vs low ratred ones is that the former know where to look for mistakes (and will find them fast), the weaker ones will not find their mistakes and especially unlikely to find the correct refutation. In fact, good players usually know when the game is still on, where they went wrong!
As a 2200 lichess player i can say that it was beneficial video. It is a great process of analyzing.
I guess when you're looking at online chess you should also mention time control and playing too fast at critical moments.
You have called me out! I definitely agree with everything said here. I was making a lot more progress when I was going over my games without the computer. But it's hard! So I kind of fell into the habit of just computering it and going "of course I should have played bishop g6." And then move on to the next game. Thank you for keeping us honest! Also, I hadn't thought of the eval bar only approach. That could make things more interesting rather than just jumping to the full computer after analyzing the game myself.
G,ad it spoke to you, hope the results will show soon!;:)
Great and instructive video! I use the analysis with a grain of salt, but haven't sat and pondered the best moves without computer assistance. Thanks again!
I posted in a chess subreddit asking, any ways to improve post game analysis skills. I got no good response, if only they shared me this video.
I am much better now, but 2 years ago, I would never understand why computer gives the eval it does, even after going through the lines. That would make me go mad and run away. Now I have improved a lot in puzzles and chess in general that I see computer recommendation , turn it off and try to figure out all the lines myself.
Edit: went through the video, and thats an excellent suggestion. See why I dont have any lines for what computer thinks is bad.
YOu sharing it there would mean a lot! Thanks for the kind words btw, glad you found good content on my channel!
Insane how accurate this is! It's as if you were inside my head!
Haha, thanks man!
This video is incredibly useful. I am going to use your recommendation! The idea to use the evaluation bar like that is really nice. It would be useful to have a video explaining the best approach to study chess books.
14:11 'Putting voluntarily your rook in a pin, that's so ridiculous and tells so much about your horrendous lack of chess intelligence". Well there is a Ding Liren guy who just did that instead of the toth "normal, primer soviet chess school" King move, and instead of a 3-fold repetition the Ding Liren guy won the game and became World champion. Red thumb.
Welcome to the world where rules have expectations. If you can't figure out the difference between the two, that is what a red thumb is - whatever that is meant to be!
By the way I honestly can't believe you spent the time and effort to compose that comment..
Another incredible video. Thank you for sharing your knowledge and passion with others like you do. Cheers!
I am glad you enjoyed it! Welcome!
I absolutely agree to everything you said, I also quite like that you don't just tell people to not use an engine at all. it is a tool - but not the only one.
regarding developing "chess sense", what do you think about analysis of high-level games, especially ones that one can find in books? I find it is very tedious at times but I feel it must be good for me, so I take one of my books, search for the pgn online, go through the game and do an analysis and then read the annotations, then try to understand them and then use an engine to check stuff. The process takes ages, at least an hour, but it exposes me to high-level play. What makes it tedious sometimes is that books usually use example games to point out one thing, but not everything, and sometimes I find other things about the games way more interesting ;D
I find one of the best things to do is to analyse positions, preferable with someone else, also preferably someone better than you (perhaps a coach!).
comment for the algorithm
Great , thanks guys!
Such good information here. Thanks
Thanks,. glad you liked it!
Thanks for this, Andras. There are very few feelings better than somebody explaining to you exactly why you're wrong because that's where you can improve the most. :D
Glad it hit home, hope it will help you improve!
you mention that improving players should have a coach. What do you think is the appropriate time to get a coach? Like, I am 1350 or so on lichess, but I'm not sure that I need a coach to tell me that I made a 1 move blunder and lost, or that I won because my opponent dropped an exchange in the opening
There is no ideal time IMHO, but generally, the sooner the better.
@@ChessCoachAndras might be a neat topic for a video. How and when to use coaches/coaching time.
Thank you Coach!! I have one question, I’m a total beginner at 500elo, should I analyze my games in full? Or stopping at the blunders that completely ruin my games, making me playing a terrible position afterwards?
Thank you for this content and hoping more ppl find your chanel!
Edit: I was concern of wasting my time analyzing a losing position for me after I blunder a piece or sth of the like
@@ceejelly8783 you can sometimes find lots of instructive stuff in positions that are hopeless. That said the main focus should be on the first (few) big mistakes.
Thank you for your reply Coach 🙏
Good stuff - I think I picked up the main point from someone like David Pruess a while ago but really good illustrations of it here. I don't have a huge amount of time for study but I normally think through the game in my head, where I think I went wrong and compare that with the analysis - and focus on any bits where I'm surprised at the analysis.
I wonder about your thoughts on this though. Re: openings I barely look at stockfish at all. But if I play any blitz game where I got an unfamiliar opening I'll always compare what I did with the masters database quickly to see if I was following a sensible plan and make a note if I did something obviously weird or wrong. That does seem a smartish way to build some general opening knowledge? (to supplement chessable etc.)
Fully agree, best way to play blitz. I believe I have discussed this too, in a previous video, a short while ago!
As you say this take much time. When do you stop your analyses? Is it reasonable to but in lot time (many hours, days?!) on this, instead of moving on and play an other game?
I would focus on some key moments and the opening (what stage were you out of book, how did u react etc) should not be much more than 15-20 mins
brilliant lesson thanks
What do you think of decodechess.com/ ? It's a new AI that aims to explain the reasons behind each move.
Edit : fixed the link, it's decodechess, not chessdecode.
Never heard of it, will check it out.
@@ChessCoachAndras it is fairly new, I believe it was launched a couple of months ago. But I'm genuinely curious how this new semi-engine semi-coach tool fits with your video. Thanks for the great content BTW
@@plagiats I was wondering the same thing - especially since they put an email out the other day featuring chess streamers that have spoken about it. I've used it a few times, but I always seem to get to those moments where I just say "aha, and move on".
Great stuff.
Thanks mate, glad you liked it!
So sad that I can only like this video once. Fantastic tips right there. Thanks.
Great advice!
Glad you think so!
Thank you for this
Wish i had a coach like this...
Too late i am 23 now...
Started to play again at after watching The Queen's Gambit...
Might get an official rating this time....
Too late? I have more than 1 student above 70....
@@ChessCoachAndras Wanna be a Master.
Not possible.
@@FirebirdADThe limit is the sky sire!
@@ChessCoachAndras But i am still trying That's why i ended up here..
Thanks for the words...
Good advice - now I have to get the rubber on the road 😀 thanks!
Mom I’m first on the UA-cam video, are you proud of me?
YOu bet!
No
THIS IS MY PROBLEM! THIS RIGHT HERE! AFTER A MONTH I FINALLY FOUND OUT WHAT I WAS DOING WRONG! A VIDEO WORTH ITS WEIGHT IN GOLD!!!
Damn, Andras, I wish you had a chess radio show and we lived in a world where Fischer were still alive...
Andras: Hello ladies and gentlemen! Today it is my absolute pleasure to be joined by legit legend and chess genius Bobby Fischer! Bobby-
Fischer: I object to being called a chess genius because I consider myself to be an all around genius who just happens to play chess, which is rather different. A piece of garbage like Kasparov might be called a chess genius, but he's like an idiot savant. Outside of chess he knows nothing.
Andras: Speaking of Kasparov, as a former world champion yourself you must-
Fischer: Former?! . . .
We all wish..:)
Pure gold
Thanks sensei!