Originally posted by gaychessplayerI was thinking much the same thing.
Wow...that's perhaps the most instructive post on RHP I've ever seen! You could probably turn that post into an award-winning article! Great job!
I wonder, however, if talented and insightful writing is enough to get published, or whether he'd need to have a chess title or at least a higher rating. Also, unless copyright laws have been updated, information published on the Internet enters the public domain, and editors are notoriously unwilling to purchase items which, in addition to appearing previously in print, have a public or murky copyright status.
Possibly he might be able to gain footing or make a name for himself with a chess blog called, say, The Chess Auto-Didact. (The title's obscurity might work in its favor, if it attracted visitors curious to learn what it means.) This could also function as additional motivation to put his improvement plan into action, provided it didn't eat up too much time.
1 edit
Originally posted by Mark Adkinsuntil he has the rating to prove it, it doesn't matter what he writes. anybody can lay out a reasonable study plan, but actually sticking to it is what makes improving hard.
I was thinking much the same thing.
I wonder, however, if talented and insightful writing is enough to get published, or whether he'd need to have a chess title or at least a higher rating. Also, unless copyright laws have been updated, information published on the Internet enters the public domain, and editors are notoriously unwilling to purchase motivation to put his improvement plan into action, provided it didn't eat up too much time.
it's a good plan, one of many, no doubt about it. but having a good check list just isn't enough to reach 2000. it's all determination, high threshold for pain and work, work, work. that's where the difference lies. the legwork.
Originally posted by wormwoodIndeed. Though I think it a step in the right direction to have a plan laid out first 😉 And in posting my plan here, no matter my own gains, its there for anyone else to use as a guide in formulating or refining their own improvement plan to reach whatever goals they have in mind.
until he has the rating to prove it, it doesn't matter what he writes. anybody can lay out a reasonable study plan, but actually sticking to it is what makes improving hard.
it's a good plan, one of many, no doubt about it. but having a good check list just isn't enough to reach 2000. it's all determination, high threshold for pain and work, work, work. that's where the difference lies. the legwork.
In fact I've been planning on posting a subsequent version of this that is fine tuned for players of lower ratings and to make it more accessible. The "master list" implemented in its entirety could probably help anyone, but you could also improve without using the full list, and players at different levels could get the most out of a shortened list by trimming out the appropriate steps; though this is fodder for another day, as I will learn much more about the importance of different steps through the use of it.
Originally posted by sydsadIn line with the CC format its primarily aimed at (though improvement here should carry over to OTB chess as well) I've been thinking it could use some elaboration on proper and effective database use. This isn't my forte though as I'm only now, since starting this thread, really putting more effort into that and trying new things, which makes for slow going right now. Maybe someone else who has an effective database system could take up the challenge by offering some advice on this.
Excellent thread! Great posts. I am looking forward to follow it!
Also the section on proper evaluation and planning needs more work. In my mind it sort of simplifies to the following:
If threats or tactics exist they must be dealt with first. If no tactics or threats exist the beginnings of a plan can be found in trying to create them. Lacking any clear realizable goals in that direction then a more positional plan should be considered.
That is roughly how my current thinking process works, in abstract terms, and I tried in my first post to break it down into specific components but I really, really need to reorganize that a bit more for a better flow.
Also I think in terms of short-range and long-range plans (when I plan at all, I'm trying to do this more often now) and both are distinctive from one another; i.e. short-range plans may consist of trying to open a file, seize the 7th rank, or exchange off a bad piece. Generally these are things you can do, or try, in a few moves.
Long range plans are more abstract; for instance, creating a mating attack through the accumulation of force, using a pawn majority to create a passed pawn, using a minority attack to break up an opponents pawn majority with the idea of putting pressure on the resulting iso to either win it or tie him down to its defence, or even bring about the exchanges needed to simplify to a winning ending.
But I keep hoping some of the stronger players that visit this forum will chime in with suggestions of their own or refinements. Or not necessarily even stronger players, this is the kind of topic that any player of any rating can contribute to, even if its only to post some of the things they have problems with and would like to improve.
Originally posted by scandiumInteresting, I always love it when I see what I think is a good move
Okay here is the addenda I wanted to add that arose during a discussion of candidate move analysis between myself and Mark Adkins. Note that I am borrowing these ideas from Master level reading I'd long ago done but can no longer remember, and therefore I can't cite the original sources. Although its worth pointing out that ih8sens once suggested something ...[text shortened]... anized and terminate each variation with a short, concise and honest evaluation.
for the other person than see it actually is death to the other player.
Yet that basically means that if I only look for thosee types of moves,
I'm counting on poor play from the other guy. I think at times I stop
looking into lines because of pain and suffering I see at first, but that
means I'm playing poorly too now it seems. I guess I need to avoid
playing poorly, and maybe I'll go from 1700 to 2000, of course I do
play to many games and I rarely give any game more than a few
seconds or a minute of my time, again poor play results there too.
I guess take my time, go deep into the game not where I think I
should stop but find that extra move that matters, and play only the
amount of games I can handle and give enough time to, to matter.
I like your take on it, it was eye opening for me any way!
Kelly
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayIts important to consider both their best looking replies as well as those that seem less promising, or perhaps even initially bad. If you look one move further at the "bad" move and it still seems bad you can then, if for no other reason to be pragmatic, discard it, as you can be reasonably certain then that it is bad and further analysis of it will just waste time and energy.
Interesting, I always love it when I see what I think is a good move
for the other person than see it actually is death to the other player.
Yet that basically means that if I only look for thosee types of moves,
I'm counting on poor play from the other guy.
Its equally important that when you see a strong looking potential move from your opponent that you don't assume it really is strong and simply play the move that meets or prevents the threat. Better to carry the analysis a little further (the 1 move deeper rule) to see if its really as good as it looks. Maybe it leaves an important square unguarded allowing a tactic or stronger response that wasn't possible before. Or maybe, in allowing it, after only a few defensive moves its become neutralized while he has in the process created a weakness or allowed you to improve your position.
Of course as chess players and not computers we can't analyze everything, but we can improve our analytic abilities by discipling ourselves to check each and every move we consider, as well as the move our opponent just made, against certain criteria to ensure we don't make simple blunders and improve our chances of finding tactics. Likewise by considering positional features, when appropriate, we improve our ability to create and implement plans. Some famous GM once said better to play with a bad plan than no plan at all.
Last point: everytime a move is made the position changes in a subtle way. Much of my checklist can be distilled down by taking an alternative view of simply asking yourself what has his move done to change the position (or your move when looking at candidates); pieces may have become unguarded, squares no longer controlled, lines no longer disputed, potential outposts created, etc.
There's a lot of fodder here for improvement and one need not incorporate it all overnight; even adding a few ideas that you don't consider now while making it a point to be more consistent in your thinking approach will, I honestly believe, bring you a step further down the improvement path.
Originally posted by scandiumHave you considered incorporating chess training software like ChessMentor, Personal Chess Trainer 2007 and the Convekta range? Well, at the very least the Chess Tactics Server can't hurt and it's free.
Okay, first off that's a pretty big jump from my current 1700 rating but why not aim high? Some of this I've written in another thread, but this is an attempt to put a little more structure into it. Now hopefully I can stick to it. Here goes:
I. Analyze the board every move using the following system:
1. Take a look at the board with fresh eyes, setti ...[text shortened]... anyone actually took the time to read this whole thing and comment. 🙂
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayKelly,
Interesting, I always love it when I see what I think is a good move
for the other person than see it actually is death to the other player.
Yet that basically means that if I only look for thosee types of moves,
I'm counting on poor play from the other guy. I think at times I stop
looking into lines because of pain and suffering I see at first, but tha ough time to, to matter.
I like your take on it, it was eye opening for me any way!
Kelly
Where did you get the quote featured on your player page, "About KellyJay"?
Edit: I hate this text editor! Every time I put something in quotes and enclose the whole thing in parentheses, the text editor automatically changes the terminal quote-mark and parenthesis combination into a winky-face.
Originally posted by exigentskyHmm kinda sorta. I'm not familiar with Chess Mentor, the Convekta stuff or PCT 2007 (although I will a look at these now). Have you any experience with them?
Have you considered incorporating chess training software like ChessMentor, Personal Chess Trainer 2007 and the Convekta range? Well, at the very least the Chess Tactics Server can't hurt and it's free.
I have used CTS and its really good. I'm not sure why I stopped using it. I guess I got sidetracked for a few days early in and just never thought to go back.
I have Chess Master GM Edition and have thought about trying to make some use of their various tutorials and exercises (why I bought it to begin with) but still have yet to do so.
This is probably an area where I could and should really consider setting even 30 minutes aside/day and then pick a tool such as these and use it for that it 30 minutes. I know that for me if I don't build in some kind of regimentation then my tendency toward procrastination gets the better of me and plans never move beyond that phase.
Although so far I've been doing pretty well at implementing and adhering to much of the plan I posted, there's always room for fine tuning and new ideas, such as these excellent ones you've brought up.
Originally posted by scandiumI really liked ChessMentor for its explanations and the real-game exercises it often has. I haven't tried it recently but I intend to again. I haven't tried PCT 2007 but I tried the trial of the previous version. While I like the interface better, the lack of explanations is a bit annoying. Although, it's purpose isn't so much to teach as to build "instant memory" so that even if you don't know why you're doing something the right move pops up. I haven't tried the Convekta ones.
Hmm kinda sorta. I'm not familiar with Chess Mentor, the Convekta stuff or PCT 2007 (although I will a look at these now). Have you any experience with them?
I have used CTS and its really good. I'm not sure why I stopped using it. I guess I got sidetracked for a few days early in and just never thought to go back.
I have Chess Master GM Edition and h ...[text shortened]... always room for fine tuning and new ideas, such as these excellent ones you've brought up.
After reading these posts, it all sounds familiar. None the less true and expert, but stuff most of us have read at some point in our evolution to the present. I would pose a question. Why is it important to reach 2000?
I for one would like to reach 2000. But the reason....I will never be able to make any money playing chess. Also, I will never reach a plain where I am of the holder of ant illustrious titles. Which brings us back to why.
My answer: Ego. I want to be as good as the players in the top rankings. I'll probably never reach that level, but I am enjoying the struggle and look foreward to every new game. Good luck
Originally posted by Evil Pawn 666Why 2000? Because it no longer starts with a 1. 😛
After reading these posts, it all sounds familiar. None the less true and expert, but stuff most of us have read at some point in our evolution to the present. I would pose a question. Why is it important to reach 2000?
I for one would like to reach 2000. But the reason....I will never be able to make any money playing chess. Also, I will never reach ...[text shortened]... reach that level, but I am enjoying the struggle and look foreward to every new game. Good luck
Originally posted by scandiumwow, that is very thorough, i wish you good luck, I just don't know how you can go through all that every single move? can it be shortened in any sort of degree so that one can get a similiar result? i don't know but that again... is very well thought out. regards, B.
Okay, first off that's a pretty big jump from my current 1700 rating but why not aim high? Some of this I've written in another thread, but this is an attempt to put a little more structure into it. Now hopefully I can stick to it. Here goes:
I. Analyze the board every move using the following system:
1. Take a look at the board with fresh eyes, setti ...[text shortened]... anyone actually took the time to read this whole thing and comment. 🙂
Some good points and feedback here, to quickly address each:
exigentsky: thanks again for raising the possibility of making use of one or more computer trainings aids of the type you listed. I hadn't considered that, but certainly these have a place in any aspiring player's improvement plan. They may be especially useful to those who have trouble getting into chess books, or even as a supplement to one's literary diet. Chess Mentor sounds worth checking out, though I'll see about incorporating my CM 10 tutorials first (if I can find the time!) and later perhaps move onto something else.
Evil Pawn 666: back in 1995 when I first started playing rated chess on FICS (as opposed to sporadic friendly OTB games) my provisional standard rating soon settled into the 1400s and I was simply in awe of the 2000+ rated players. Also in Canada, a 2000 rating is the lowest rating you can get that has a title of sorts attached to it (Candidate Master), thus its long been the grail for me. I'm certainly much closer now than I was in 1995 (my FICS standard rating having increased by 400 point, although my sporadic play over the years, including a near 2 year hiatus before playing regularly again here at RHP, has meant a lot of peaks and valleys that have, in large part, kept it at bay. Plus, as exigentsky said, it doesn't have a '1' in front of it 😉
big bern: it can be shorted considerably and still provide results. I've promised a revised and condensed version (it'll have core components I think the most important and optional additions to add in as one improves or has more time to dedicate to it), and that will be forthcoming. Right now aside from my own game load and commitments in RL, I have a fewl of these related pet projects underway and I remain committed to all of them, though due to the above time constraints I can't push them along quite as fast as I might like to.
But its a big forum and already so many people have chimed in on this topic of mine, and the related ones, with generous feedback, suggestions, and contributions that I'm very pleased; both with my own efforts at implementing these ideas and that I may have inspired others to use at least some of them to better their own play as well.