07 Dec 09
Originally posted by AlexanderAlekhineyes, I do know quite a lot about mastering skills. and although I still consider myself a confused rookie at chess, I think my progress so far backs me up quite well.
You don't play otb? And yet you know so much about the development of chess players.
Amazing.
07 Dec 09
Originally posted by orion25111 000 solved tactical problems probably says more, at least to me. I used to do 2-5 hours of tactics a day for the first 2 years. it was no picnic getting to 1800 RHP, and I burned out several times for couple of months at a time during it.
not playing OTB doesnt mean you don't take chess improvement seriously. I think his CC rating, wich is [debatably] harder, says enough of the effort he is putting in.
08 Dec 09
Originally posted by wormwoodFor me, this is the underrated and major benefit of learning general theory, history and openings. It's fun, it's easy (like taking a ''vacation'' from tactics, prevents burnouts) and most importantly, it DOES also helps you improve. For me, these are the aspects of chess I like most, so learning these subjects feeds my passion for chess and gets me motivated to improve.
111 000 solved tactical problems probably says more, at least to me. I used to do 2-5 hours of tactics a day for the first 2 years. it was no picnic getting to 1800 RHP, and I burned out several times for couple of months at a time during it.
I think it's important to find a healthy balance between learning (theory, history and openings) and training (tactics). If you burned out, you obviously didn't have that healthy equilibrium.
On another note, for people like you who don't play OTB, tactics are less important in CC, since you can analyse the variations as much as you wish. The knowledge of theory will provide you with advantages that will take much longer to come to fruition, advantages that can't necessarely be seen through material evaluation at the end of tactical variations. Also, since the level of tactical blunders is lower in CC games, other types of advantage are MUCH easier to come by, but we can't find them unless we know'em!
08 Dec 09
Originally posted by Maxacre42I agree otherwise, but I believe it's necessary to train the other things just like tactics, going through the positions over and over and over again, until you simply can't get them wrong anymore. (just yesterday I drew a lucena in blitz. 😳)
For me, this is the underrated and major benefit of learning general theory, history and openings. It's fun, it's easy (like taking a ''vacation'' from tactics, prevents burnouts) and most importantly, it DOES also helps you improve. For me, these are the aspects of chess I like most, so learning these subjects feeds my passion for chess and gets me motiva ...[text shortened]... s of advantage are MUCH easier to come by, but we can't find them unless we know'em!
08 Dec 09
1 edit
Originally posted by heinzkatoh no, it was even worse than I remembered, apparently I lost it on time after there were only rooks left! :'(
Show us the game, PGN it, no excuses 😛
(strictly for educational purposes of course)
and it turns out it wasn't even lucena but a philidor. no wonder I didn't get anywhere. still, in the scramble I suddenly had no idea what I was doing, and tried to make progress with a faint recollection that I 'should know what to do here'.
oh well, blitz happens. need to start training basic rook endings again.
wow, 92 moves. that's a lot for a snail like me.