How to Learn Chess Part II: Accurately Defining the Problem

Sort:
Oldest
erikido23

And to answer your question why people look at only speed chess.  (I think) you are mistaking people looking at speed chess with looking at live chess versus turn based.  Turn based is NOT real chess imop.  Good for analysis etc.  But, there is ZERO calculation involved and you can even look up master games etc.  So it isn't really truly indicative of your abilities.  

 

As for even analyzing blitz being bad for your chess.  That is just flat out factually wrong.  Any analysis that is honestly pushing you past your present abilities will improve your chess to some extent.  I wouldn't disagree that playing only blitz up to a certain point is probably counterproductive though.  Some blitz play, even for lower level players, can be productive.  1.  the game should be fun and if you like it then you will stick with it longer.  

2.  It will show you things which you need to work on and if you look closely where some consistent visual holes you might have(When I blunder a lot of them are move order related.)

3.  You make more mistakes.  The more mistakes you make the more learning opportunites there are.  If you just make the mistakes and don't learn from them then of course it is counterproductive. 

erikido23
Senchean wrote:
erikido23 wrote:

Hmmm...this may sound like a joke.  But, you talk about how different people learn differently and then go on to write paragraph after paragraph without a single graphic or puzzle.  I am a visual and kinesthetic learner.  See and doer.  If you understand there are different types of learners try and involve those in your future posts

Principle and Post 2 will talk about the three different learning systems and methods on how to use them.  For you I"m assuming you learn best by either watching people play, watching video lessons and actually playing yourself.  And if you are reading a book you probably use either a program like game editor on chess.com or a real board so you can physically move the pieces.  Also, if you have to read something, occupy your hands.  Play with a ball, or some dice, whatever.  This will help keep your mind occupied so you can concentrate. 

This method also works really well for people who have ADD.   The problem with those with ADD is they have no way to filter out distractions.  So by occupying their hands it helps them focus, because they have a consistant, constructive distraction.  It's strange, but it works.

I haven't used any diagrams because right now I'm just trying to get the information out there.  And I don't think it's a joke.

wow, fantastic......whenever I play (or at least when I am playing well) I find myself playing with the pieces which I have taken.  Yes, I do have(unofficially diagnosed-but sure I do) ADD to.  Thanks for the advice.  Never would have thought about that while reading

pawnwhacker

erikido23: "And to answer your question why people look at only speed chess.  (I think) you are mistaking people looking at speed chess with looking at live chess versus turn based.  Turn based is NOT real chess imop.  Good for analysis etc.  But, there is ZERO calculation involved and you can even look up master games etc.  So it isn't really truly indicative of your abilities."


I would beg to differ with you.


I believe that in today's world, most people are in a huge time bind (or so they think...sometimes it is more perception than reality). So, speed chess is appealing. That and because most people are not "deep thinkers". Just look at their religious views, politics, etc.

erikido23

Wait, so you are thinking man so you play correspondence chess making moves in 10 seconds.  Hmmmmm

erikido23

There is no calculation involved in correspondence chess because the analyze board is there for you to visually calculate out variations.  Which makes it factually about as far away from standard chess as you can get.  There is no room for opinion.  If your opinion is correspondence chess corresponds to otb chess then you are simply wrong.

 

Of course you can play it like blitz like I do a lot of the time because I don't really play competitively anymore and just want to keep myself somewhat sharp.  But, that doesn't change the fact that the rules allow otherwise.  

pawnwhacker

"Online" differs from correspondence chess in that it allows one to make moves quickly, slowly or somewhere in between.

 

You can take seconds or minutes to calculate a move. This provides a lot of flexibility. It also allows the play of dozens of simultaneous games, which make it far less boring than correspondence chess.

 

And, yes, it is a thinking man's game because depth of thinking is far more rewarding for the thinking man than the hurried-up games of bullet and blitz.

 

The analysis board is an option. Sometimes I use it. Often I don't. If anyone uses it all the time as a crutch, then they will have problems visualizing in regular games.

 

It is good that we have many choices.

Chicken_Monster

@Senchean: I made a note of all of those books. Thanks. What others do you recommend?

Also, what collections of GM games (well-annotated) do you recommend?

Senchean
Chicken_Monster wrote:

@Senchean: I made a note of all of those books. Thanks. What others do you recommend?

Also, what collections of GM games (well-annotated) do you recommend?

For game collections:

Petrosian Move by Move is really good.  I have only read a little bit.  I'm a huge fan of Petrosian, but it's gotten rave reviews and it's on the short list for Book of the Year by the British Chess Association.

Capablanca Move by Move is really good too.

The whole move by move series has got some great books in it by Everyman Chess.

Karpov's Strategic Wins 1 and 2 is also fantastic.

Fischer: Career and Complete Games by Karsten Mueller is really good.

Fischer's My 60 Most memorable games is a classic and it's annotated by Fischer himself.

Those are some of the ones I have except 60 most memorable games.

http://www.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/viewcategories.asp?idcategory=79

This site has a lot of reviews on games collections as well as many other books.  I use it a lot to judge whether something is worth purchasing.  And so far I ahve not been disappointed.

Also Lessons with a Grandmaster 1 and 2.

Chicken_Monster

Thanks. Yeah, the Silman site is good for reviews. They review most books it worth reviewing it seems.

Senchean

No problem.  Also chesscafe is really good for reviews too.

Forums
Forum Legend
Following
New Comments
Locked Topic
Pinned Topic