We all play chess because it's fun, but it's more fun to see yourself improve and smash through positions you once thought were insuperable.  So this brings me to two questions. When using the Tactics Trainer, I assume I should calculate it all before I make a move, but often I will see a move that gives me a large material advantage but I miss some of the forced mates (Greed).  Firstly, how do I overcome this? I am hoping for additional exercises/study to compliment the Tactics Trainer.  And secondly, and more importantly, for those of you who have seen a substantial improvement in your games, what training strategy/regiment do you use?

Tactics, Tactics and some Tactics. Analyzing you own games and trying to document your thoughtprocess is very fruitful.

Playing a lot of slow games! 

On the subject of analysing your games, there is a product called Chess Analyser Pro 7 which I've never used - in fact, I've only just this minute heard of it! According to this tutorial on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEY_lY8YTf8), it contains a checklist of common errors. At the end of a game, you step through that game, manually identifying the weaknesses (e.g. Left Piece Undefended; Got Counter Attacked), and count them. After say 20 games, a pattern should emerge. One piece of advice they give is: eliminate your greatest weaknesses to achieve the greatest improvement.

The checklist of factors is interesting, as it gives structure to your analysis. That the analysis is not automated means you have to develop a feel for these concepts. It would be quite easy to develop a list of factors yourself, and analyse your own games using a paper-based checklist - without any software support.

artfizz:

Interesting! Yes, it should be very doable using pen and paper or even (Yikes!) Excel.

Artfiz, NO! IT'S THE BIGGEST CHESS SCAM I HAVE EVER SEEN. It's basically an excel sheet with some common errors listed. and that's it! Seriously, that's it, except some colouring. Don't fall for that.

I was thinking of utilising the method - rather than purchasing the software.  Thanks for the timely alert.

Their web site really looked like a scam. Thank you for the warning! Maybe we should work together defining key words for tha method so that someone Excel literate can make us a spreadsheet?

Thank you for your kind offer! The programming is probably fairly easy but way over my level.

Coming up with a list of errors should be pretty straight forward. Just get a bunch of games and go through them, noting the errors. I think this works better if the person noting the errors is significantly better than the players in the games.

Agreed! A skilled player/coach might be able to come up with the list of categories without looking at any games

you could do the same thing in any kind of text editor. all you need to do is just take a note of your blunder patterns (such as I wasn't calculating but only thinking in general concepts and stuff), and write them down on a page as they happen. When the same error occurs again, put a second check sign on that error on the list.

after 20 games for example, you may notice some weak areas if those check marks are piled up on certain errors.

Oh OK :). I may have gotten a little carried away. This stupid scam was something I wanted to shout about for a long time, and you just gave me the opportunity. In fact, you can download all their material from their own site for free, if you search a little about it. That's how pathetic that program is. and what about the "pro 7000". LOL, was there ever a 6000 version?

and all the e-books they have in that superb package, like "think like grandmasters" or something, are written by an amateur, not even a strong one I might add.

It's all like southpark material.

As Rael's discussion (http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/characterizing-rating-levels) is discovering, no two people are going to agree on what the checklist should be. One difficulty is making it too low-level (e.g. moving rooks out before knights and bishops THOUGH THIS IS SUITABLE FOR NOVICES (i.e. most of us!); the opposite problem is making it too high-level (e.g. failing to develop - suitable for advanced players).

A range of checklists were developed in this discussion (http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/your-mental-checklist-you-run-through-before-each-move) - though they were concerned with what you should be checking BEFORE you move, rather than a post-game analysis of faults.

This chess web site  (http://www.chessville.com/instruction/instr_gen_collection_wisdom_intro.htm) contains condensed rules of thumb (e.g. Rooks need open and semi-open files. Don't let your opponent control open files with his Rooks.     Putting out your hand when you offer a draw is presumptuous; always put it out after the draw is agreed upon, not before.)

Many websites contains guidelines for good play e.g. http://www.exeterchessclub.org.uk/Openings/10openrules.html

One starting point when looking at lost games is to ask: when (at which move) did I lose this game? Then go on to try to discover: why? - and finally how could I have avoided it?

Great Post, artfizz!

What is this list of categories that experienced players think should be included?

THA'S ONE THING THAT I DO: I ALWAYS GO BACK TO A LOST GAME, AND ANALYSE WHAT I DID WRONG, AND FIND OUT IF IT WAS AVOIDABLE. IT  (I THINK ),HAS HELP ME TO PAY MORE ATTENTION WHEN I MAKE A MOVE.

FIRST I THINK, YOU SHOULD LOOK FOR CHECKS ,AND IF BY DOING SO, YOU WILL LOOSE MATERIAL

THEN, PROTECT YOUR PEASES ALL THE TIME.

...AND LOOK FOR WAYS WHERE YOU WILL GET A BETTER POSITION,OR EVEN GAIN SOME MATERIAL, BY SACRIFYING A PEASE OF YOUR OWN.

I think it might be better to play hundreds and hundreds of games and develop a vague idea of where you are going wrong, rather than half a dozen games well analysed. surrounding yourself with sheets of algebraic notation doesn't mean much anyway, does it, if players are honest about it; they are still all at sea.

Try learning this opening: at this site:

http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~goeller/urusov/perreux/lolli_attack.html

one thing i see when i look at my games is the general flow of the game. recently i have been working with queen pawn openings because i want to round my game out. in a few of the games, i ill defended a centre square and it led black to get the initiative based on this weakness. so i say to myself, why is black able to hop around my queenside and make trouble, then i look. OH, there it is! my 3rd move was bad, it pays no proper attention to this threat, and so black smacks me for my inferior play. so it is important for me to ask 2 questions, what is happening? (good or bad), and more importantly why is it happening?

IM Jeremy Silman preaches finding 'imbalances' in the position, once you know all the general rules. The problem with the general rules (such as rooks love open files) is that they all depend on the board position at the time. The reason GMs are so good is that they instinctively know which imbalances in the position are the most beneficial and they exploit them, sometimes in complete contradiction to what we understand as the basic rules. However, if you don't have a general grasp of the basics then you'll never get to this level. Frustrating!

I'd love to see a training manual that guides people by level through the basic concepts and then the common exceptions to the rules and so on right up to 'Plan Like a Grandmaster'. A big ask perhaps.