Here's a second vote for Akobian's lectures.
How to develop your knowledge?
Sort:
Chess mentor is great. I improve a lot for every course I take. If you have premium, you should use it!
Dec 16, 2015
0
#24
Diakonia írta:
molpeter84 wrote:
Hi All,
I have a question, that what do you suggest for a zealous amateur who want to improve his chess play, how to make a good study plan? I know that all of these are important: tactics, positional play, openings, etc but I don't really know how to be systematic in an effective way. So what are your expediments, or your best practice in this matter?
All depends on how much time you have to put into the study plan. How many hours per day are you looking to put in?
I have 1-1,5 hour per days that I can put in continously. So it's not about a quick run.
I tried this 'no-engine' route earlier myself, as Silman had advised.
As a lower-rated player (<1200), it was a total waste of time. At that low level, self-analysis is so poor quality that you're more reinforcing bad errors than learning correct play.
Memorizing engine refutations of your terrible beginner moves is a great way to learn, especially how the engine punishes violations of core principles, like early Q rushes and excess pawn pushes in the opening. Those are often really hard for a beginner (even a better player) to find refutations of without a coach or engine to help.
If you've got a coach to help, you don't need the engine since the coach can help, but I think beginners can waste a lot of time without a coach (or engine) to point out key refutations.
I'm not a beginner anymore and my self-analysis is full of errors past move 3!
Higher level players, esp 2000+, seem to do better withotu engine analysis - in the books I have, IM / GM authors often disagree with engine analysis for good reasons. But at 1200, forget about it.
hhnngg1 wrote:
I tried this 'no-engine' route earlier myself, as Silman had advised.
As a lower-rated player (<1200), it was a total waste of time. At that low level, self-analysis is so poor quality that you're more reinforcing bad errors than learning correct play.
Memorizing engine refutations of your terrible beginner moves is a great way to learn, especially how the engine punishes violations of core principles, like early Q rushes and excess pawn pushes in the opening. Those are often really hard for a beginner (even a better player) to find refutations of without a coach or engine to help.
If you've got a coach to help, you don't need the engine since the coach can help, but I think beginners can waste a lot of time without a coach (or engine) to point out key refutations.
I'm not a beginner anymore and my self-analysis is full of errors past move 3!
Higher level players, esp 2000+, seem to do better withotu engine analysis - in the books I have, IM / GM authors often disagree with engine analysis for good reasons. But at 1200, forget about it.
I completely agree with you.
Engines are tools to bounce idea's off of.
Nothing more or less.
Same thing can be done by getting a chess Coach.
I highlighted the text in red because something happen not to long ago in a forum where a disagreement happened.
Well it is a disagreement which happen a while back.
However, it came up in a forum; nonetheless, which was pretty funny.
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-openings/black-playing-e5-in-the-sicilian
Yeah to sum up the disagreement.
GM Sveshnikov ended up disagreeing with one GM Naka's moves.
In one of Naka's games against Magnus in the Tata Steel tourny.
Naka playing black played the move...h5.
The move...h5 was actually a engine top move in the position.
However, The line Naka was playing is one created/founded by GM Evgeni Sveshnikov
Yeah so you have a GM chess player who created the line known as the Sveshnikov opening in the Sicilian Defense criticizing another top 5 GM for playing a number 1 recommended engine choice move!
Who exactly should you side with in that "scenerio"!
Yeah I didn't pick a side lol.
I stayed on the fence on that one lol.
I am sitting on the fench watching giants walk by lol.
I never try this, but using engine for practising, playing, winning position is very good and can help your game.
Let say you study opposition(in king pawn endgames) and lucena rook position, you can set up your engine so you can practise winning these positions.
You can also set up a positionaly winning position. Let say a dominant knight against bad bishop.
Knowledge and skills are different things. Engine is a perfect tool to practise/test your knowledge.
Which book by Silman is recommended for the middle game?
tanker137armor wrote:
Which book by Silman is recommended for the middle game?
I can't remember the name.
I know Silman has like a couple of them for sure.
The one which deals with imbalances in the position is very good one for middle game in my opinion!
I believe the name of the book is called "Reassess your chess"!
I have never read Silmans End game book.
Some people have said it was good.
I know others have recommended a few other Endgame Book's from other peeps as well.
Not sure how well Silman's End game books is compared to other writers.
However, I doubt that it can be bad!
Surely it has to be in like the top 5!
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708094419/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/ammind.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708095832/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review769.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708091808/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review285.pdf
https://web.archive.org/web/20140708103149/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review594.pdf
Dec 17, 2015
0
#33
I totally agree with X & hh. Although I wouldn't be on the fence about that particular issue. I always side with the "human" even if it's ironic. Heh.
I've always treated computers (or engines nowadays) as helpful for self improvement than looking to them as reference. I need to figure things out for myself using my own experience and knowledge I'd accumulated. Guess I'm old-fashioned. I mainly use the computer (not engines) to search for new themes, games, advances in opening theory but never for "best" moves. I truly believe engines don't know how to "play" chess. Not like I do. Yeah, with their vast databases & incomprehensible calculating ability they could crush me but hey...Heh...I like competition with other humans. For me, at my age, winning a game on my own resources is the best.
The great thing about the Silman Endgame book is that it divides up the endgame into slices appropriate to a player's chess rating. For instance, Silman doesn't recommend learning the Lucena position until a player is rated 1400-1599.
This is brilliant. It makes learning the endgame much less intimidating since you don't feel responsible for learning the whole book, just the chapters for your class level. Furthermore, you don't wind up studying positions too complex for your level and getting discouraged.
I wish more chess books, especially for openings, were organized this way.
I've looked at a lot of study stuff, and the best stuff out there:
#1) Plug your losses into an engine and review all the mistakes you made. And not just for tactical misses - for positional stuff that the CPU gives you a minus assessment for, but which isn't tactically clear.
#2) Basic tactics study if you haven't done it already
#3) Don't overlook how good Youtube videos are. Seriously, they're better than most of the books out there now for club level players.
Check out GM Akobian's lectures on youtube for amazingly clear and amazingly instructive game analysis.
All of his lectures are like gold, and this one is just an example of his excellent concepts and teaching:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HAVAcz8Jm0&list=PLVWaFpMwtaGguNTCmp2fAFJxhKi0JEpp6&index=4