How to calculate - Final training case study report
First a complaint. Chess.com isn't really interested in bloggers here. The new design kills some blogging features without substitute and the last trial to add something to the blog inventory lead to deleting parts of the entries. Feedback in the forum to reporting bugs is not given.
Maybe this is due to the quality of a lot of blog posts here. But there are some very good ones from people blogging only a little. So I decided to reduce my activities here.
Now to the first Results of the case study.
From 8th of April till 10th of June the case study was done. These are 63 days with the pauses and breaks. The breaks were due to my chronical health problems and related fatigue, reactions to weather changes, a short holiday with friends without internet, tournament days.
So there were 235 problems to solve in 45 days and I did 88 wrong.
While trying to look for the chess in the first move my rating grew as you can see in this picture:
The black point show the starting and finishing day.
So there has been a rating rise by starting to think more systematic in my case. This is only the tactic rating here.
There has been a second rating rise otb. I managed to jump over 2000 DWZ, the national rating. It is a little lower than Elo and seems to have a deflation. So probably this is my highest rating ever. The tournament is still running, but as I managed to have a game with a GM in the last round I can only fall to 2015 or 2016.
So far there are two basic explanations possible The continuous training did help. The thinking method did help. The interaction may have helped too.
- Studying with different material seems to be necessary for generalization to otb play. Using books and the chess board helps at least in my case.
- Starting with the first move doesn't lead to generalization in later moves automatically. I could have solved some problems if I had looked for the checks in move three or four.
- The features of the problem positions change with the rating. The higher the rating, the less useful is the check in the first move.
- The source of mistakes changes over the training days. I give only an over-all categorization, as this is a hint to further training.
- Maybe my otb-chess changed a little in the last two month to a more aggressive play. But I have to check this and need more games to evaluate this.
Each wrong solved problem was analyzed to find the source of the mistake in the thinking process. A rough categorization is sufficient for further training ideas.
- In 28 cases I didn't see the best defense or a threat of the opponent.
- In 26 cases I was superficial, tired, moved spontaneous.
- In 13 1/2 cases I didn't get the combinational motive.
- In 8 cases I didn't use the position for searching, but an idea of what should be going on in the position. This restriction of the searching process prevented the finding of the best move.
- In 7 1/2 cases I couldn't do the needed visualization.
On Monday I have my game against the GM, which I should lose. But I will give my best and see what happens. I'm looking forward for this.
Then I have to do some bureaucracy urgently. This happens even to retired people, especially if they hate paper work.
If this is done a second case study will be developed. I don't know, where the running report will be published. This is something do decide if the time has come.