My chess study program, trying to get it right.

So after many hours of going about things the completely wrong way and hitting many dead ends. After alot of research i think i have come up with a suitable training program that should secure some improvement. 

Please feel free to suggest any constructive criticism.

All the training will be done with a real board.

                                                                          Play and analyse.

1. Play long online or OTB game
2. Annotate game and look for blunders, missed tactical opportunities without the aid of a computer.
3. Check my Analysis with the aid of a computer computer.
4. Study the opening used in the game and the ideas behind it. Use chess position trainer to store the opening and ideas.
5. Identify, Study and practise any missed tactical themes and motifs in the game, use tactics trainer in unrated mode to practice those motifs.
6. Identify, study and practise any endgame patterns I have missed in the game. play the endgame again using an engine and endeavour to get a better outcome.
7. Re-annotate game and publish online in the hope of constructive feedback.

Knowledge procurement and internalisation.

8. Study my pet opening repertoire, endeavour to gain a greater understanding of the ideas behind it using engines, books, internet and of course you tube. Log the opening and ideas in chess position trainer. Then i will train them using chess position trainer.
9. Practise random tactical positions using a tactics trainer. Set the position up on a real board and solve the position without moving any pieces. Write down the motifs and patterns used in the position before checking the answer. Study the definition of any unfamiliar motifs you come across. If you get the puzzle wrong, Study why your solution was wrong and why the answer was correct. Now visualise the correct sequence of moves on the board 3 times.
10. Study positional/strategy concepts using books like “reassess your chess”. Write down the basic ideas and concepts in your own words to cement the knowledge.
11. Study the endgame using Silman’s endgame course and practise endgames using an engine.
12. Study annotated master games.

Bump

Looks great.

I've run into some pitfalls with motivation before. I don't know how much they'll apply to you, but here are a few tips that might help:

Make a end of week or end of month goal, and record your day to day progress at the end of every day.
Keep it fun. In the long run exhausting yourself each day won't help because you'll burn out, but learning 1 new thing each day adds up quickly over time. It could be as simple as a tactical pattern you hadn't seen before.

I'm just going to address point #12 "Studying master games," because I'm not sure many top coaches understand just how formidable this can be for a novice-intermediate player.

When I was starting out,  I tried and tried to go over GM games with an actual chess set.  Invariably, I'd get bogged down on some tactical sub-variation, not really comprehend all of it, then try to go back to the game continuation, forget to put at least one piece on the proper square, and then get all screwed up.

Years later, when chess came to the internet, I said, "Great!" and played through games on Chessbase or watched a DVD, BUT, it became a case of passive learning, where I put my mind on a 30% "energy-saving" mode, and watched the program move the pieces around.

Finally, I developed a way of studying master games that combined the virtues of both approaches and mitigated the drawbacks.  

1. Choose games played by the GMs in your opening repertoire.  If you play the French, look for games by Korchnoi or Uhlman or Botvinnik, etc.  Even older players are fine.  Don't worry about being current.  Too many current games are confused by engine continuations.

2. Avoid tactical, combinational battles.

3. Choose games that have a contested endgame.

4. Find the game on chessbase, or some database, and hide the annotations.

5. Go through the game in 20-40 minutes, and concentrate on coming up with stratgic plans.  Make written notes.  Don't get bogged down in figuring out combinations.  Just look at how the game unfolds.

6. Then, after you have done the work, play the game through with annotations OR watch a video of the game on youtube or on a chess website.

7.  Make notes as to what you missed in the general plan of the game.

8.  As you look at more games in the same opening, look for repeating patterns (pawn levers, minority attacks, recurring tactical motifs, typical engames.)

Great advice, i'll will try to that on board.

thanks.

At your level, it's important to just play a lot, and don't jump to any conclusions about generalities of chess. 

I going to keep it simple, studying tactic and get a good book on Morphy's game collection but you can do it the hard way. Your above plan is meant for advance players.

I've done the " Just Play games and do some tactics" method and it does not work for me. i need to know  WHY is something is working and WHY something is not.

I do not think my program is too hard. It's just detailed and requires some motivation. It's definitely harder then "just do some tactics" But the harder you work...............

Many tactical books/interfaces make it too difficult for the novice, by combining "Tactical Awareness" with "Calculation."  Don't spend a lot of time, at first, trying to solve problems.  Concentrate, instead, on looking at a probem and trying to identify what tactical motifs are present in the problem.  (Loose piece(s), back rank weakness, over-worked piece, immobile piece, etc.)  If you can spot what the tactical motif in the problem then you are learning, even if your calculation skills are not yet good enough to find the solution. DO NOT get frustrated by spending a lot of time.  Just try to spot the motif, and then go on to the next one.

Here is a video by IM David Pruess that explains this process and it's value: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mvkuji08dMc

Again, advanced players forget how confusing and frustrating it was to learn this stuff.

also just enjoy the game win or lose.think this will help.

Trust Cherub there. He is right. Just play more and focus. A study plan without a clear goal will lead to failure. To begin with, a chess study plan is long-term which means unless you can manage to follow it through to the end there'll be close to no resultt. Even worse, you might frustrate yourself.

But if you really feel the need of a plan I'd prioritize:
(1), (9) and  (11), maybe (10) aswell. Self-analysis at this point is pretty useless because you don't really know what's going on. Mind you, progress won't be as steady as you're hoping for.

I don't know if it will help you, but I'll tell a bit about how my game has changed since I started playing here.
(1) Spend too much time, blunders a lot, plays hope chess, has no idea what he's doing. Believe the game is a draw after queens are exchanged.
(2) Plays a bit faster(more or less memorized some opening moves, because of repetition), know about opening principles, blunders a lot, knows some basic mates and is flatered by the smothered mate(Still am xD)
(3) Tactics rating way beyond play level, wonders why the tactic won't appear in a real game, rarely blunders but also can't make real threats( more than 1 move threat), gets cocky and think everyone that outplays him cheated( But I never complained here! ), barely understand k + p endgames.
(4) I'm currently here so I can't say much. For some reason I'm blundering more according to engine(my rating is higher, though), but my games are more satisfying. I can find tactics way faster but sometimes I get so focussed on my combinations I forget I'm playing against someone. I can still blunder spectacularly but I'll auto resign in these situations.

Hope something from this helps you out.

Judging by your games, it's just that you're not practicing tactics hard enough.

Dan Heisman has said that it takes 100+ hours of good tactical practice (by far the greatest time needed for beginners) to get "OK" tactically (and then way more practice from then on). Tactical training is by far the hardest thing for beginners to practice on. In proper chess development, it easily takes up more time than all other aspects of chess practice combined at your level. 

The only book you need for practice is "Back to Basics: Tactics", which is by far the best book for improving your tactical skills to the intermediate level. 

Also, jumping to conclusions is probably the worst thing a chess player, especially a non-master, can do. I'm constantly reexamining what I think I know, and often I'm proven wrong when interacting with a stronger player / analyzing my games. 

That's why studying too much advanced stuff without a basic foundation will hurt you, rather than help you.

What you're describing above is detailed, yes, but will ultimately be ineffective at your level, where *all* you have to do is study tactics and have a basic thought process to use those tactics (which essentially boils down to - don't be impulsive). 

I could explain what I mean, but bottom line - buy a copy of Dan Heisman's "A Guide to Chess Improvement: Best of Novice Nook", if you want a proper guide on how to improve in chess. Heisman isn't arguably the best chess coach in the US for nothing. 

Point your pieces towards the rival king.  Sac sac mate.  That'll be 5 cents please. Thank you.

I think i need to ask a few more questions.

 My program was created with the the help of some strong players at my chess club (180-190 ECF) which equals roughly around the 2100 Fide rating. They advised that tactics only appear on the board when your pieces are on the right squares, therefore tactics is not the only consideration.

I've played ~2100 FIDEs, and never once have they dropped material to a basic tactic, unless it was a very complicated position. 

At the 1700 level, and much more often than the beginner level, this happens all the time, so this (tactics only appear when your pieces are on the right squares) is definitely not true at your level and for a good while beyond. 

Literally all I did to get to 1600s from 1200 in a year was study tactics, play games, and analyze my games by myself, and occasionally with a weak engine. 

I never had a copy of Silman, or any positional chess manual that told me more than "develop, control the center, grab material if you can, etc."

I mean, look at your games and think for yourself. I pulled out the first rapid game I see (the most recent one), and no surprise, your opponent played some ridiculous opening as black, while your positional play, non-tactical part, is more than OK.

https://www.chess.com/live/game/2066443746?username=mcdirtalot

And it wasn't a bad game overall for you, but missing 2-move tactics like 20.Bxb8 even once in a game is worth more than all the positional play and "other stuff" you could possibly study. 

Yes, but in Russia I'm sure they had 1200 rated kids going over endgame studies for hours each day. Just because an informal method will work doesn't mean a more structured approach is not superior.

His #9 is going to help him a lot with tactics, and missing short combos (you point out in post 19) is just part of the growing pains.