14403 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!
Some people say that the way to improve is to constantly analyze your games. But many do that and yet very few manage to get above a certain level.
Then there is parctice. But even with that there is a good chance that you'll reach a 'personal max' and won't improve any further.
Or is all down to an exceptional brain?
I would love to hear the opinion of everybody, but especially that of top players.
Many do that? Really?
My experience is rather just the opposite.
1. Prodigies brains are wired for chess.
2. Average player needs:
a. Obssessive love of the game of chess
b. Average cognitive ability
c. An outstanding memory
d. Extensive training in visualization patterns through a training regimen.
To my poor knowledge, very few people care to seriously analyse their own games (and losses in particular), and when they do they mostly attribute their loss to the "bad opening", the "bad weather", the "bad mood" and very rarely to their bad, inconsistent play.
I think the definition of an exceptional player is rather wide and subjective. For some players, it boils down to getting extensive amount of practice. For some prodigies, they are born with it,so they are naturally amazing at chess. For some players, eventhough they are average, yet they don't need to really analyze their games, they just simply remember the tactics used by their opponents and reuse them.
Pfren, I have to say that I do try to do this, but ultimately, I really don't know how to effectively analyze my own games.
"Find where you went wrong." Is great advice, but if I knew where i went wrong, I wouldn't have ;)
I think that ultimately one needs a certain amount of knowledge about how to analyze a game before one can do it well. And my problem is that I'm not able to find a good "how to" that shows me how to analyse.
Do you know of a good book or video for C players and below that goes into detail around how to effectively analyze?
If you cannot analyze your own games almost from the start then you can be a good chess player but not an exceptional chess player.
Hint if you cannot analyze your own games then try to have a master or above analyze 2 or 3 of your games and from his/her comments you will learn how to analyze your own games to some extent.
assuming the master explains his analysis...
How to Become IM? (seeking IM pfren) (Catalan refuted)
by infinitebrainpower a few minutes ago
What to do to get #1 on Most Active members list?
by Chessman265 3 minutes ago
A woman, a dog, a shotgun, a bicycle and a chessboard
by karna_katz 3 minutes ago
Weird openings please !!
by jbomber732 3 minutes ago
Sexism in Chess ...
by Ambrr 4 minutes ago
Who is better Paul Morphy or Magnus Carlsen
by chessredpanda 10 minutes ago
Daily Puzzle 12/12/13-Mate in __!
by Roche 11 minutes ago
12/12/2013 - Polugaevsky - Szilayi, Moscow 1960
by han_han 12 minutes ago
What is your favorite kind of tactic??
by chessredpanda 13 minutes ago
If you could combine two chess pieces powers what would the two pieces be???????
by chessredpanda 14 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 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!