14980 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!
Scandium, you must still be aware of two things about Easter Europe coaches :
I'm nowhere near ready for a coach anyway (if ever I did get there). As I was quite a bit stronger than I am now in just coming off my 8 year break from chess, I already have a pretty clear cut and easy to follow study plan, and one which covers each phase of the game as follows:
1. Tactics: Right now I'm working through Polgar's Chess Tactics for Champions. I plan to work through it 3 times, doubling the number of problems I do daily with each pass through. Then my next candidate is a newer book I have ordered called "Capablanca: a primer of checkmate." Then the "Complete Chess Workout," using the same method I'm using with Polgar's book. That's as far ahead as I have the tactical component laid out so far.
2. Strategy: Right now I'm finishing up GM McDonald's "Chess: the art of logical thinking." My planned follow up to that is "My System" (I have the new edition with the fresh retranslation), and then probably Marovic's "Secrets of Positional Chess." I have several books to pick from from there. I also work through whichever book I'm on daily.
3. Endgames: I'm using Silman's Complete Endgame Course for now. Once I've caught it up to one level beyond my current one, I'll look at supplementing my endgame study with another book. I haven't decided which one yet.
4. Openings: This is an area where I have no real regiment of study for, as I'm not at a level where solid opening play has a big impact in my games; I get by, mostly, with some knowledge of the ideas in the openings I do play rather than with concrete variations. Probably my single biggest achievement here is to have cemented a repetoire of sound openings that cover most of my games and which lead to positions I enjoy. I do have a few openings books that I'll glance at post-mortem, when I know it was an opening void that cost me the game.
Well, if you're interested some day in the future, you may find Eastern European coaches a good fit. Looks like you share a common work ethic.
I specifically referenced $70 an hour because that is the number @alexlaw mentioned.
People are free to pay or not pay for whatever services they want. If someone can get quality chess coaching (for example) somewhere else and pay less for it, good for them.
I am worth what I charge, and I am sure most coaches feel the same way. Otherwise, they are in the wrong field.
Do I feel "entitled" to earn a certain rate for my classes or lessons? Certainly I do, just like any other professional in any field.
This is a bit late, but that person playing Bobby Fischer in the pool kinda looks live Kevin Love...
I'm taking lessons with NM Dan Heisman and it's helping immensely. I believe there are two parts to learning - subtracting negatives and adding positives. Books have a hard time doing the former.
My lesson with NM Heisman yesterday was amazing. We worked on my thought process doing the da Groot exercise A and it really helped me to understand what I need to 'fix' in my thought process.
A chess coach is like a graduate advisor, for those familiar with graduate school, in that you still do most of the learning on your own; however, they are there to help you and offer invaluable advice when needed.
70.00/hr is just a reference but yes things are based on a particular local econonmy. local Master coaches get about 60-70/hr so you can reference my rated based on that.
A big part of coaching is also the personality and their ability to relate to their students. One big problem with interenet coaches is that they often are lacking in the ability to communicate very well and they also are more interested in turn over. Also an in-person coach is vastly superior to a distance coach, everything else being equal.
I know dan's approach and he is a good coach for some people. Have you read his novice nook column?
Well clearly Tony and I value chess very differently:
to me it's just one of my games along with magic/yugioh and I am stronger at other non-academic skills than at chess, while Tony is a great chess coach.
The thing is ok if you pay $70 an hour for a year- you get an awesome coach and you reach 1800 level from 1000 in a year. So what?
If I pay $70 an hour for a year for an academic teacher and get an 'A' in the exam-that means a lot more. The university has a higher chance of accepting me, higher chance of getting into required field, better job in future...etc.
of course reaching 1800 from 1000 and reaching 2200 from 1600 is a big difference. With 2200 I think there is a good 'value' to it.
My thought: Aim high, or don't aim (if you wish to pay big sums).
Well there you go. There are more important things to you than chess, for example academics. And there's nothing wrong with that. "To each his own," etc.
But it's not fair to say that $X per hour is expensive because the potential rating gains don't have enough "value" in them. Many people would feel more satisfied and get more enjoyment from chess if they improved a lot.
Some people WOULD pay large sums of money for themselves or their child to go from 1000 to 1800.
When I finished college in 2005, I had no desire to (1) Ever go to school again, or (2) Have a conventional "career." None. Zero. At times I wasn't sure if I could make it just doing chess, but I am definitely doing better than most of my non-chess friends are, and I probably work only 20% as hard as they do, if that. Also, it's nice to wake up at 11:00am everyday and work in the afternoons and evenings only.
If more people knew the lifestyle and working conditions of established chess coaches, I think a lot more parents would be encouraging their kids to become strong chess players, rather than hoping employers deem them worthy enough to get a "good job" after jumping through untold academic hoops...and usually paying through the nose for the privledge of doing so.
well you can ask questions to a coach
To me a coach is 1000 times better... you learn a lot faster and cleaner, and with a coach you can do with what you can't do with a book and that is 'SPAR'...
Are Snickers bars underrated?
I'd say a coach would be better. 1.Books may not be exactly "easy" to understand. 2.With a coach, you would be able to ask questions. 3.The coach could check your games to see where u blundered and things like that. 4.He would be able to give you good tips and openings. All this is from personal experience. I have a Coach Who is VERY Good. he helped me improve by about 800 points in less than half a year.
If the books are too difficult than the person is reading the wrong books; wrong becsause they are either not written well to begin with, or that person hasn't developed enough of a foundation yet to be ready to digest that material.
Your other points are valid, but a big thing I've noticed in some of the newest books is for the author to try and anticipate questions the reader might ask, and print the questions and answers in the book.
Yes they are. I prefer Milky Way Bars
with all this debate ive come to the conclusion that its simply a matter of taste and neither option is better than the other. someone pointed out the 2 ways of improving and from past experiance I can conclude this
coaches subtract negatives from ones play usually
books add positives to ones play usually
A book cannot speak. The spoken word comes across much better
A book cannot speak. The spoken word comes across much better
Not necessarily. It depends on your brain's preferred method of learning (which is hardwired). There are three "preferences:"
1. Visual learners who attain the best results from visual cues (diagrams, text, etc.).
2. Audio learners who get the best results from explanations that are spoken to them (or at lectures, etc.).
3. Kinesthetic learners whose natural method of learning is by doing.
The key word there is "preferred." You get the best results when you combine 2 or 3 methods, but where the emphasis is on your preferred learning style.
I'm a visual learner, so books and videos work well for me. With a book, though, I still combine 2 methods to get the most out of it:
I play through the moves in the book using Chessbase (which combines the visual method with kinesthetic learning) , and include key variations and annotations. That means it takes longer to work through the book than if I took a simpler approach, but the extra time invested means I get more out of it.
Videos on this site work well for me, as they are combining my preferred visual method with audio.
Chess Troll for the Year!
by EDB123 a few minutes ago
Black to move - what result?
by caveatcanis a few minutes ago
Another French Fry Please.
by Sangwin 3 minutes ago
Official Chess Troll of the Year!
by EDB123 3 minutes ago
by CrashLanding 4 minutes ago
a new learning tool tin tactical trainer
by Scottrf 4 minutes ago
12/10/2013 - Easterwood-Williams 2004
by moonw3ll 4 minutes ago
Cheeky Shenanigans and other tactics
by UIUCBoss 5 minutes ago
New group for Alekhine lovers
by puiuus 5 minutes ago
guys who don't know how to play 1) d4 but still play it.
by Scottrf 7 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!