wisdom from Bruce Pandolfini

[badukJr]

This is exactly why I make most of my games 15 minutes main time with min 40sec/byo (prefer 1 minute/byo)

If I get behind I start using my whole byo, even for only move moves. People get quite frustrated when they realize my last 1/3rd of the game will suddenly take more than an hour! It is easier to catch up then.

[gowan]

In my experience one of the easiest ways to lose a game is to get a lead. If you are ahead in the game you tend to play conservatively to protect the lead, often playing sub-optimal moves, thereby allowing your opponent to catch up a little. After a few cases of this your lead can evaporate and then you start making risky moves to get the lead back. So I agree with gogameguru that playing solid, thick moves when you are behind while watching for "underplays" by your opponent is a good approach.

[Bill Spight]

In my experience one of the easiest ways to lose a game is to get a lead. If you are ahead in the game you tend to play conservatively to protect the lead, often playing sub-optimal moves, thereby allowing your opponent to catch up a little. After a few cases of this your lead can evaporate and then you start making risky moves to get the lead back. So I agree with gogameguru that playing solid, thick moves when you are behind while watching for "underplays" by your opponent is a good approach.

I am afraid that I must disagree somewhat with my illustrious colleagues.

I think that there are three important points in what they say. First, if you are behind, don't panic. Keep your cool. Second, being ahead may induce carelessness and underplays, which give you a chance to take the lead. Third, be true to yourself. Both gowan and gogameguru understand thickness.

But suppose a game between these two, in which one of them gets a lead, and then both play thickly. I think that in that case the odds of a turnaround are small. At some point the player who is behind pretty well has to make a shobute, has to put the game on the line.

I think that a good way to study coming from behind is to study pro-pro two and three stone games.

[Kaya.gs]

Bruce Pandolfini is a famous chess instructor and author, featured in the film Searching for Bobby Fischer back in the 90's. He writes a regular column over at chesscafe.com from which I take this excellent advice:


"Just because one is losing does not mean that one has no meaningful input. Students should be made cognizant of a great truth. That is, once opponents get the advantage, they want their opponents to give up. Recognize that desire, and you may be able to exploit it. Much of it has to do with seizing control. The best way to take control, especially when you're losing, is to slow things down."

http://www.chesscafe.com/bruce/bruce162.htm

I find this way of describing the situation incredibly accurate and better than my own.

[gowan]

In my experience one of the easiest ways to lose a game is to get a lead. If you are ahead in the game you tend to play conservatively to protect the lead, often playing sub-optimal moves, thereby allowing your opponent to catch up a little. After a few cases of this your lead can evaporate and then you start making risky moves to get the lead back. So I agree with gogameguru that playing solid, thick moves when you are behind while watching for "underplays" by your opponent is a good approach.

I am afraid that I must disagree somewhat with my illustrious colleagues.

I think that there are three important points in what they say. First, if you are behind, don't panic. Keep your cool. Second, being ahead may induce carelessness and underplays, which give you a chance to take the lead. Third, be true to yourself. Both gowan and gogameguru understand thickness.

But suppose a game between these two, in which one of them gets a lead, and then both play thickly. I think that in that case the odds of a turnaround are small. At some point the player who is behind pretty well has to make a shobute, has to put the game on the line.

I think that a good way to study coming from behind is to study pro-pro two and three stone games.

I'm not strong enough to follow my own advice but I do think that an unreasonable shoubute runs the risk of turning a game where you are behind by a little into a game where you have to resign. I also think that a pro's shoubute usually isn't an unreasonable move, rather it is a risky move which may be difficult for the opponent to handle. White's play in two-stone games is a good way to learn how to play when you are behind. And you can find two-stone games between pros that are serious games, not just demonstration games. Shuei played a lot of two-stone games with white, for example, and there are many 19th century serious pro vs pro two-stone games. I also think it would pay to study Rin Kaiho's games from the 1970's and 1980's. He had a reputation of being a very persistent player, reversing opponents' leads.