16187 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
Gah, it's hard to post from blackberry. It keeps deleting the extra blank lines. Sorry if the previous post is hard to read. There were supposed to be 4 paragraphs.
They were brilliant!
To master anything you have to spend 10,000 hours on it. If you study chess for 10,000 hours no matter what kind of study it is you will master it. There are no shortcuts to hard work.
I tend to agree with this; hard work is probably the most significant factor. But I also believe that spending the majority of the time on the opening isn't going to turn you into a really good player. I believe (and try to live like that) that tactics and endgames are clearly most important to study. I would guess, 90% of the study time.
To go back to the title "Myth..." Every single titled player I personally know work years-about that 10 000 hours- to get where they are now. Some more-some less, some are bright -some not such, and from there comes that difference in strenght and understanding of the game.And every single will tell you Endgame first-Opening last.I did a topic "How to learn chess properly" but not much quality answers were given there.
They were brilliant!
How long does it take to learn to master a musical instrument? The Chinese fable implies that these first 5-7 years ARE JUST FOR STARTERS! There's simply no short-cuts, but even with hard work, there are no guarantees.
Question for all: I'm looking at John Nunn's "Understanding Chess Middlegames" ... anyone like this book, or recommend a different one? I will also order Psakhis' Advanced Chess Tactics ... thanks to CombatVision :)
I was thinking a lot about this topic yesterday night and I think I came up with the missing piece. Studying how a grandmaster plays certain positions is not enough. It's like watching Messi play football to be able to play like him. Imo opinion it's necessary to set up those example positions from the book and play against a strong opponent and repeat the process until you can exploit that small advantage you have. You should also practice playing the opposite side. It's very time consuming so 10000hours might be close to the truth. Unfortunately if one of your family member is not a master it's really hard to find a strong player who can practice with you all the time. A different approach could be to learn all the theory from the book which is not an easy task and look at your games you play online like practice games. It has drawbacks though because you need to recognise the theme and remember all the information.
I was also thinking about tactics study. One might think that solving puzzles = practice. However I think it's just half of the work. All the tactic puzzles are somewhat artificial and every pieces on the board are on the perfect square to launch a tactic. You "only" need to find some forcing moves which is not easy and still beneficial but if you train yourself to find the right moves in ready made positions, can you expect those perfect situations to appear in your own games? You also need to practice to get in those positions which could allow a tactical shot.
To sum up
Practice in real games = ImprovingReading,examining, playing through games is not enough.
Thanks. I learned to be a master on my own. I figured out how I did it and share the methods I used. So, there are shortcuts, but you still have to do the work. I train you to do just that. The latest videos, 005-008 really are going to help a lot of aspiring masters, but they need to see 001 to 004 first.
I think books and hard work are only half the story. The rest is about the ability to visualize. I´ve been playing for years, I love the game, I read books and work through them, but I simply can´t visualize the board as it will be in more than three or four moves at best. I´m a musician; when I write music I can hear it in my head, I know how it´ll sound when played by whatever instruments I´m writing for. But seeing a chess position in five moves hence is completely beyond me. I´m also famous for not being able to remember stunningly beautiful churches bang in the middle of the village in which I´ve just spent two weeks on holiday ... the visual talent is simply not mine!
10000 hours is a good heuristic. If any motivated player spent that much time on their game over, say 5-6 years, they would definitely be a master at the end of it.
Examples of chess players who you're basing this off of please.
Fischer would be one. No, he wasn't born that way, he worked very hard to get to the top. The Polgar sisters are another prime example and in their case we know how long it took and what they did on the way.
10000 hours is a good heuristic.
As soon as you said that you gonna give poor andyclifton an ulcer.
Yep. Seeing "10000 hours" and "heuristic" in the same sentence is pretty much guaranteed to turn me into this:
Everyone seem to go offtopic.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
You can train your ability to vizualize. Besides, in most positions, seeing 3-4 moves ahead is good enough.
I want to share something I just realized recently. For me it was a rebelation of something that was in front of me for the last 10 years, almost since a began to play chess seriously.
I learnt chess in a chessclub where every afternoon from 17:00 to 20:30 people played blitz. I hadn't known any other club by that time so to me it was the "normal" way to learn chess. After several years of "learning by blitz" I was setting up my play without me beeing aware of by just playing blitz after blitz for such a long term.
I made a list of my strengths and weaknesses some years ago. That was similiar to this:
A- Good sense of the position
B - Good intuition in complex positions
C - Good elemental tactics (2-3 moves combinacions, forks, easy mates, etc)
d - Short of ideas in general, I run out of plan easily and tend to play passive
e - Poor concentration during the games, I lose track of the game easly.
f - Poor long-term thinking
Do you recognize something in my list? My play is highly influenced by blitz habits. While playing blitz you train not to get caugh on cheap tactics and to take advantatge of our opponents errors ( points B and C ). You have little time to think so there's no room for playing for the best move, you just have to play quick and save ( points A, d and f ). Also, blitz is a few-minutes struggle (point e).
You get my point? I trained a lot blitz and that's the way I learned chess. When I look at a given position I first look for cheap tactics and see for uncommiting and save moves without going deep in the position. Thats how I play, as if I was playing blitz even if I have 2 hours on the clock to spend!
So, my conclusion would be: you get better at what you train most. There's no magic recipe. Analize a lot of games and you'll get rich at ideas. Learn by playing blitz as I did and you'll find it difficult to concentrate for 3 hours and you rarely will go deep in the position.
Hope this long post helps someone.
That was indeed a rebelation.
What is funny to me is that ask ANY strong player and they will all say the samething,... they played too much blitz as a youth... blitz has problems but its also a great learning tool used appropirately
I never met a grandmaster (well, hardly ever anyway).
I played 2 (OTB). Not sure how you can "guarantee" this...but I'll buy it anyway.
The best reason I can think of to move to a small country: to be able to play in the chess Olympiad.
question about the BAT GIRL?
by A_L_I_V_E a few minutes ago
ღ OFFICIAL 2014 Chess.com Awards ღ
by kaynight a few minutes ago
Will ever be born a player better than Karpov?
by nils78 6 minutes ago
Trace & Tracking
by Redmi_1S 10 minutes ago
Positionnal and dynamic white repertoire?
by ThrillerFan 10 minutes ago
by nils78 12 minutes ago
which country invented chess
by Sqod 12 minutes ago
Caro-Kann - Advance Variation (3...c5) question
by Vladimir_Ikhonov 14 minutes ago
The Backyard Professor
by Ziryab 15 minutes ago
What does the little box signify that is usually green next to each players name
by kleelof 23 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!