Hello everyone!
What do you think about creating a teaching ladder? Ive seen it working on some servers (KGS which is a GO server for example) and i know it works very well. The point is that in most cases there are some players that you can teach and in return some stronger players teach you.
Please write what you think about it - is it possible that learning from someone who is too weak would actually delay your progress?
What should be the rank difference to teach someone?
etc...
That sounds like a great idea! I've played on other chess sites before but haven't come across something like this. Perhaps Erik can consider starting a forum where people can post their games for comment and instruction.
A poster can then ask a postee to be his or her online coach for a set period, eg the next 3 games. We may need some sort of incentive to encourage the stronger players to volunteer their time... other than making a potential prodigy their friend! Of course, there may be enough people with altruistic motives to make it work even without tangible incentives.
By the way, what do the points against our nicknames mean?
"Perhaps Erik can consider starting a forum where people can post their games for comment and instruction."
The Game Analysis forum already exists. All that's left is to be more formal about who comments the games -- at least that seems to be the direction you are going in. There also exists a feature on chess.com where you can create a group. Perhaps it's possible to implement your idea by creating a "teaching ladder" group.
It should be more like a game and a detailed comment with all students questions answered. Ive noticed that its the fastest way to improve because you have to face your mistakes and you can understand why a move was bad (at least in theory)
Yup ive found game analysis forum and I agree that its a great feature. Playing games against stronger players is great too. Both these things combined would make a teaching ladder :) Its as simple as that. We only need people who dont mind spending their time on teaching.
I have this working currently.
Just work with people. It occurs naturally. First, give. Yes, it takes work and giving on your part. Do this with players below yourself. Chat with them about moves. Tell them what you will do next move. It makes it much more chanllenging :). Helping those lower than you is easy, rewarding and fun. Do it now.
I got to be friends with players much better than myself in a couple of ways.
1) I read and posted in forums discussing chess tactics. That lead to more direct discussions, messages and unrated games along with some coaching sparked by a question or two.
2) I put out 10 challenges for games and set the rating greater than 5 below my current rating. If you are 1350 set the rating <1345. I played my 10 games and learned a lot and lost 10 games. 2 of these players continued to play with me and there is some exchange of ideas. 2 things here: my rating took a plunge, so if you love your rating, this will be painful short-term and second DON'T EXPECT THEM TO SPOON FEED YOU!!! I have cut back on the number of games and now take these games with higher (<200 above me) apart move by move. I do the work! I do 10 hours of work for every 10 minutes I ask of my higher rated friends. Remember they have lives and also want to improve their rating so they are also looking to higher rated players.
Last idea. Look through the forums. These players better than us are posting all over. I know the chess hustler group has a lot of advanced information and people willing to help. I have been on chess.com about 10 weeks and have never had a problem finding chess knowledge and people willing to help. I had a few specific questions not answered elsewhere. Within 2 hours there were 3 good answers. What more could a chess lover ask for?
Final thought. You CANNOT learn effeciently from lower rated players. Heat flows from hot to cold and chess knowledge flows from higher rating to lower.
Pun: Two peanuts were walking down the street. One of them was a salted.
Game Analysis:
I agree the game analysis is underused but I think we are misunderstanding how it is misused. What I have seen is a blank or close to blank PGN file posted and we the HELPERS are to sort through the 25 moves and read the mind of the poster and fill in comments on the moves... no wonder there are generic and very few responses to posted games.
How much time is a 1700 rated player going to spend on a 1300 player's game when the 1300 spent 2 minutes-- enough time to cut and paste it? Then they wait for the "master" to come and spend 30 minutes and types comments.
I think any game posted for analysis should:
1) have a comment for every EVERY move: not much, maybe just "continuing the plan." Critical moves should have the players thoughts and options that the player considered. WHY did the poster choose c4 at move 22????? I do this as I am playing in the notes tap for each move.
NOTE: Why would I or anyone else on Chess.com review a game by a 1300 rated player that has very few notes when they could invest their time studying the games of masters that are fully commented on?
2) Post SPECIFIC questions about the game. Was there a better move at 12? I choose the exchange variation of opening ABC on move 6: can you give me some options on how to reply to what my opponent did on move 8.
3) Really, you need to be VERY SPECIFIC about analysis questions. 1800 and higher players (those you want to attract to your game analysis) are not stupid. They know there are FREE chess engines that can do game analyis. Babas chess with crafty as the engine (babaschess.net) is free. Fritz and Chessmaster are other options. I have seen other free ones in the forums but don't know them. So, don't ask others to do for you manually what you could do for yourself for free.
Pun: I am addicted to plecebos. I'd give them up, but it wouldn't make any difference.
Yup there are chess engines and I use Chessmaster myself. Unfortunately engines are not so good at explaining strategic concepts ;) Sure they are great for tactics and I often find myself very surprised by combinations I totally missed. So... I think that engines are just good tools but they can't replace a human teacher.
When I asked about learning from weaker players I didn't mean to learn from weaker than me. I was asking whether learning from someone rated for example 1400 when you are rated 1100 can be damaging because of 1400 players limited knowelege.
I posted this in my blog and am posting it again here:
I like playing chess; I like waching chess; I like thinking about chess. . .
So it bothers me when people want to play only with players that are above their own rating and not with those who are under (and this is becoming a problem ). . . I know that you get better with playing with players better than you but this is not fair and reasonable. . .imagine that everyone demanding to play only with players that are better than . . .no one would play . . . ahh i am too lazy to continue . . . you get the picture . . .
My point is that this kind of "teaching" (by playing only with stronger players than you are) would be fatal for this site. . .
There should be balance. For example: If you are rated 1400 and are taking lessons from 2 players with 1800 then you should give lessons to 2 players with 1000 rating.
Quid pro quo(a favor for a favor) principle
P.s.
I am interested. If you find someone to teach me i would gladly share my "knowledge" with someone else.
Thats why I wrote that you have missed the point. I wrote exactly the same thing at the very beginning of this thread ;)
I am just pointing to the problem. . .yesterday i wached open seeks and there were about 20-25 of them 80% put that they want to play only with players that are rated higher than they are. . .so if "Teaching ladder" starts it will have the same problem. . . there should be someone to control that if a player gets free lessons that same player gives free lessons. . .
Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.