25 May 13
4 edits
Originally posted by hamworldI worry if my rating drops - it usually means i'm stressed, I've seen that with other players stress or a diversion wrecking there play. but i just reach my limit.
If, after 100 games one has not improved his/her rating, would you say it is a good idea to change the approach to studying chess?
It might mean to change your opening? I try to undermine openings i loose to often and find tactics that just i know...
not sure what to suggest i see a few players on here who have fairly static ratings.
26 May 13
Originally posted by e4chrisWhen I say not making any progress, I mean in blitz chess.
I worry if my rating drops - it usually means i'm stressed, I've seen that with other players stress or a diversion wrecking there play. but i just reach my limit.
It might mean to change your opening? I try to undermine openings i loose to often and find tactics that just i know...
not sure what to suggest i see a few players on here who have fairly static ratings.
26 May 13
Originally posted by sonhouseIs that a joke?
Does Hamworld refer to amateur radio? My call is AI3N if that means anything to you. BTW, if you are interested in improving your chess, why have you only made 14 moves total since October 2005?
Anyway, I do prefer blitz chess over correspondence chess.
26 May 13
1 edit
Originally posted by hamworldI think the post was serious from start to finish. My first thought of "hamworld" was that you might be a ham radio operator. And when you say "100 games" in this forum, most readers are going to assume that you played them here, and in the regular format.
Is that a joke?
Anyway, I do prefer blitz chess over correspondence chess.
If that is not the case, then it would help if you provided some kind of context for the games. For instance, 100 blitz games is almost meaningless as a measure of progress, but other formats would probably yield a different opinion.
27 May 13
Originally posted by Paul Leggetthamworld is short for Hamze's world. 05 was because hamworld was already taken
I think the post was serious from start to finish. My first thought of "hamworld" was that you might be a ham radio operator. And when you say "100 games" in this forum, most readers are going to assume that you played them here, and in the regular format.
If that is not the case, then it would help if you provided some kind of context for the game ...[text shortened]... ngless as a measure of progress, but other formats would probably yield a different opinion.
Fair enough, though I don't have the patience and mental fortitude for correspondence chess.
What if it were say, 1000 blitz games? Or pick any arbitrary number and say "after this long, if you are not improving there must be something wrong with your studying".
27 May 13
Originally posted by SwissGambitI guess I try to learn from my mistakes. "next time, don't make that move, or play this move to avoid getting into that bad position"
In general, that's what you want if you're trying to improve. Just not so much stronger that you can't win 2-3 games out of 10.
That covers strength of opposition. When you study chess, what specifically do you study?
If I'm studying chess, it's probably either openings or endgames...