26 Nov 07
4 edits
Originally posted by TalismanTalisman, I think you have a good point, but I find it a little exaggerated. I'm -for 2 weeks now- applying what you have just narrated, but probably with a 1/4 proportion. that is, previously I was trying to solve difficult tactics problems only, and was hardly ever playing. in these two weeks, I switched to simple tactics + difficult tactical positions (the same type in the previous study type) and plus a 30 min. game daily, and I'm feeling a lot more confident now over the board, I have the feeling I'm improving faster than I was in the previous method, and that fog about the game slowly -very slowly, but it's OK- dissapears.
I honestly think there is a huge misconception regarding improvement. the general idea seems to be that studying books, learning about a specific area of chess and then applying it to your games is the way to improvement. I'm not so sure!
Both Alex Yermolinsky and Jonathon Rowson in their respective books, The Road to Chess improvement and Chess For Zebras free from the influence of Brainwashing forced upon us from the modern day chess market.
the thing is, I'm the analysist type (in general), and I like to think of things as composite structures -actually I'm spending a lot time on working on that specific philosophy-, and chess is no exception to me. Those books which tell you study tactics, the endgame, the opening, certain strategies etc. seperately, already assume you play a lot of games in which you consistenly try to apply what you have learned.
so, I agree with some of the "brainwashing" statements, but still believe everyone has a point and one has to make composures to find the right method of improving for himself.
probably the biggest misunderstanding of a chess student is that things will be easy. all those "rapid improvement" short-cuts are just BS. (I just came across in this forum a site that claims they can make you a master with 5-10 hours of study per week in one year. one year my ass!)
one has to step up and say that things are veery, very difficult and that you have to devote so much time of your life, which includes an enormous amount of theoretical study together with an enormous amount of playing and analysing those games you've played.
- Joined
- 20 Jan 07
- Moves
- 24578
26 Nov 07
1 edit
Originally posted by diskamylWithout question you are right, i just found the information relayed in those two books very refreshing and there are far too many examples of terrific players that i know personally who have never read a chess book ever! but of course there are great players who've read everything.
Talisman, I think you have a good point, but I find it a little exaggerated. I'm -for 2 weeks now- applying what you have just narrated, but probably with a 1/4 proportion. that is, previously I was trying to solve difficult tactics problems only, and was hardly ever playing. in these two weeks, I switched to simple tactics + difficult tactical positions (t point and one has to make composures to find the right method of improving for himself.
I was just having a problem with a serious book addiction that was taking over my life. Now however i'm over it.
Unfortunately like the reformed smoker i'll always have to be careful. Got to Keep away from those glossy covers!
I always seek solice in the fact that Paul morphy only ever owned 3 chess books, at least that's what we're told. not even sure if he read them all.
26 Nov 07
Originally posted by TalismanChess for Zebras is sitting on my bedside table. I don't read it to learn, I read it out of interest and if something rubs off on me and I improve that is a bonus.
Without question you are right, i just found the information relayed in those two books very refreshing and there are far too many examples of terrific players that i know personally who have never read a chess book ever! but of course there are great players who've read everything.
I was just having a problem with a serious book addiction that was takin ...[text shortened]... er owned 3 chess books, at least that's what we're told. not even sure if he read them all.
Its a great fun book that I can stronly recommend.
26 Nov 07
kramnik made an interesting comment recently that unlike most of the younger generation, he hardly ever played online blitz. He thought it was pointless.
It was also pointed out that he has the best technique(i presume this means endgame) than anyone alive.
It is such a difficult subject, I tried a few months ago to study properly for the first time (capa's Fundamentals) I was learning alot but it was hard work trying to remember it all. What chance did i have over the board?
I have also heard that it takes 10 000 hours of study to become expert in any given subject, thats nearly 7 years of study at 4 hours a day.
I have since decided to simply enjoy the game for what it is and not worry about ratings. life is too short.
27 Nov 07
Originally posted by rijnsburgerrijnsburger,
hi all,
apologies for this topic if it has been discussed (probably) many times, but maybe some other n00bs like me can benefit off this one. I have purchased some chess literature and I'm not quite sure which order I should start studying them in. I am quite a weak player, so I bought the books and I'm starting some coaching lessons in January. Which ...[text shortened]...
The Art of Checkmate (Renaud/Khan)
Best Lessons of a Chess Coach (Weeramantry/Eusebi)
I want to share with you some ideas that I've found to be helpful. Like you, I have a large selection of chess books, and about a year ago I decided on an order to read them in and got started. I soon realized that this approach was a bad one, and my play did not improve. Here are some reasons why.
First, it is the thought of many that reading a chess book cover-to-cover will give you a ratings bump. It can be true if you really study the book, actively applying what you've learned to every game you play. The trap I fell into was trying to finish the book I was on, so I could move on to the next one. That kind of reading is worthless.
Second, trying to put your books in order now is pointless. The book(s) you are studying should be the ones that focus on your weakest area at that time. Analysing your own games should always be a part of your chess study plan. This allows you to see where and why you are losing your games. Then you should try to be studying books that address that part of your game.
Third, the best study plan, I feel is a balanced one. You shouldn't study a strategy book exclusively for months, because it neglects the other areas that also need study. Try to balance the four areas (tactics, strategies, openings, endgame) in you study based on your own game analysis.
You are getting a chess coach which is great! I wish I could. I believe he/she would agree with me on this kind of approach, but let me know if he/she doesn't!
28 Nov 07
Originally posted by AProdigyI was actually thinking about reading some of those books cover to cover and the thought scared me! Over and above it not being the most effective way to learn, I think I would get demotivated along the way very quickly. Heck, I was sitting with a SINGLE mate-in-two for almost 15 minutes the other night and the prospect of getting through Polgar's puzzle book is not looking feasible in the near future.
rijnsburger,
I want to share with you some ideas that I've found to be helpful. Like you, I have a large selection of chess books, and about a year ago I decided on an order to read them in and got started. I soon realized that this approach was a bad one, and my play did not improve. Here are some reasons why.
First, it is the thought of many that ...[text shortened]... ieve he/she would agree with me on this kind of approach, but let me know if he/she doesn't!
What I have identified by analysing some of my own games is, however, tactics... I just don't have the board vision I use to and blunder a lot of material. I'm hoping a tactics book or two alongside chess puzzles and a few solid games a week will improve that aspect. As for the coach, we'll see how that works out 🙂 I start in January... I'm very excited since he was our country's u20 champ a few years ago and he happens to be friend of my brother-in-law's.
thanks for taking the time to share your good advice