If there was a brand new beginner and you taught him how the pieces moved, and the rules so he knows how to play chess.
After that, you drill him with tactics, he has to puzzles everyday say 20 at least but more is better and then he can play some slow chess, 20min each or more, slow is better.
How strong do you think he would be?
You do not teach him endings, middlegame, openings, strategy nothing, no books, no sample games.
All you do is teach him how chess is played, and tactics then he can play and learn that way.
What rating do you think he would have?
Originally posted by giantrobotTactical puzzles as in the ones from books. If they are opening tactic puzzles in the book, to bad. They are still tactic puzzles.
He would be good at tactical puzzles. That is all. BTW, all of the puzzles would have to be pure compositions or he might gain opening knowledge through the positions he sees.
You can learn how to checkmate through tactical puzzles.
I learnt a lot of different checkmates and better ways to mate by doing puzzles.
I think he would be pretty strong, 1600-1700.
I can't remember the last time I really went into a serious endgame. If you are up a piece or 2, trade down and eventually you will mate them.
It's all about that tactics I say. To bad we can't try this experiment 🙁
Hard to say, I guess it would depend on his natural tactical ability. For a no-talent beginner, I'd guess 600 to 800. An average to talented beginner, maybe 800 to 1200. And a beginner with world class talent, maybe 1200 to 1400 to begin with.
I'd also guess that he'd win more games in the middlegame, and lose more in the opening and ending.
Keep in mind this is just a wild guess, nothing to back it up with. So take it with a grain of salt.
Originally posted by RahimKAre you talking about fake internet ratings or USCF/CFC/FIDE ratings? If you're talking about internet ratings then he would be anywhere from 27-24566 on yahoo. If you're talking about in real tournament competition I would say he might make 1000 USCF playing kids.
Tactical puzzles as in the ones from books. If they are opening tactic puzzles in the book, to bad. They are still tactic puzzles.
You can learn how to checkmate through tactical puzzles.
I learnt a lot of different checkmates and better ways to mate by doing puzzles.
I think he would be pretty strong, 1600-1700.
I can't remember the last time I r ...[text shortened]... will mate them.
It's all about that tactics I say. To bad we can't try this experiment 🙁
Originally posted by zebanoOn his own.
Does tactics include basic mates or does he have to figure those out on his own?
Say you have a kid, and you teach him how all the pieces move and then the rules, castling, check etc...
So know he know how to play chess.
You don't tell him to put rooks on open files, basic checkmates nothing.
Pretend you lock him up in a room with only a tactics book and if he needs help with the tactics you can show him.
Then everyday you play a game vs him with a slow timer or you let him play someone else. You do not discuss the game after.
So all he know is how the game is played, and tactics. If he learn middlegames and strategy from the tactics then fine.
I think in a year or so, he would be at least 1500 but probably more. It doesn't take a genuis to figure out that rooks belong on open files, how to mate etc...
Originally posted by giantrobot1000 only? No way!
Are you talking about fake internet ratings or USCF/CFC/FIDE ratings? If you're talking about internet ratings then he would be anywhere from 27-24566 on yahoo. If you're talking about in real tournament competition I would say he might make 1000 USCF playing kids.
There are little kids who barely know how to play and they are at 1200 already, 4-5 year olds.
Originally posted by RahimKSo now it's a year?? You're an engineering student. Figure out the parameters of your experiment then get back to us. First it's tactics in a vacuum. Then it's 'whatever he happens to pick up'. Then it's after playing for a year.
Uscf, CFC, Fide whatever...
Anyone playing chess for 1 year, just playing should be able to get to 1200 but if you study tactics on top of that, well WOW!
I was talking about starting out, tactics in a vacuum.
Originally posted by giantrobotHaha, Well several months to a year. Of course if you just start you can't be at 1000 already.
So now it's a year?? You're an engineering student. Figure out the parameters of your experiment then get back to us. First it's tactics in a vacuum. Then it's 'whatever he happens to pick up'. Then it's after playing for a year.
I was talking about starting out, tactics in a vacuum.
Tactics and vacuum yes, but some tactics are about mates also. So you can learn checkmates from tactics. You can learn a bit about openings and middlegames from tactics also.
Anyone got a new born who wants to learn chess? 🙂