Growth vs Fixed Mindset and Chess Improvement Goals

I have heard some talk lately about improvement mindsets. The consensus is that it is better to have a “growth” mindset rather than a “fixed” mindset.

The growth mindset has the view that you can grow in your understanding and skill while the fixed mindset believes that you have a certain level of talent and that if you fail it is because you just lacked sufficient talent to succeed.

How does this affect goal setting for chess improvement?

I think that focusing on rating gains (results) often comes from a fixed mindset while focusing on specific processes that will improve the way you play chess focuses more on growth.

If important processes are improved, then rating gain will naturally follow. Bobby Fischer wrote that “Tactics flow from a positionally superior game.” This idea can be transformed into “Rating gains flow from superior game-playing processes.”

Some Process to Improve:

1. Improve visualization, calculation, and evaluation.
2. Improve candidate move selection.
3. Improve time management.

I’d like to set goals to improve these game-playing processes.

While I think it is possible to have a rating improvement focused goal and still have a growth mindset, I also think it is better to set SMART goals that are based on improving processes so that the rating improvement naturally follows.

Thoughts?

Oh, another question.

Proper goals need to follow the SMART principles.
S = Specific
M = Measurable
A = Achievable
R = Relevant
T = Time-based

The process goals I mentioned above are obviously relevant. It is not difficult to set specific, achievable, and time-based process-oriented goals. My problem is ... how can these be measured?

Now that I think about it... it may not be so easy to set specific and achievable process goals. At least I am having trouble with that.

I am very time-constrained for my improvement goals.

I think you should measure time devoted to specific areas of training, and maybe you can add a qualitative indicator (like good focus during training, avg. focus...). You can also count the # of puzzles/games/pages read, but I believe quality of work is very important in chess, and rushing through puzzles to reach a daily target may be counterproductive.

My main problem is the lack of time -work, family, other commitments... Probably the same for many adults with busy lives, I guess.

And then I do not want chess to become something that is stressful (for that I already have plenty!). On the contrary: I want it to be enjoyable. I try not to obsess with my ratings but actually try to appreciate the process (of learning more and more). Of course, I am not at your level (I am worse!) and thus it may be easier for me to say that. Because I do not have any expectation other than to improve a bit -but not to reach any higher level, at my age and with time constraints seems unrealistic. But perhaps I am wrong! In any case, what I like is to see others here trying to improve and I am following your journeys with curiosity -and wishing you the very best. Cheers, Jose

I've spent a lot of time on chess in my adult life, and haven't improved, so even pouring a lot of time isn't a guarantee of success. I think it's very important to enjoy the learning process and playing, and hope for the best. Even if your rating doesn't reach the heights you hope for, you may derive a lot of satisfaction from some well-played games.

Ironically, I always feel like I understand more about chess today than I did yesterday, and especially "yester-year." Always. That does not translate to rating gains, though.

Something I think is often overlooked is that everybody wants a higher rating but our rating is always in comparison to all those others seeking to improve their rating.

Right now I look at my stats on this site. In Rapid I am at the 99.2% level. Blitz 96.3%. Daily 98.9%. In any other sport this would be considered very strong! In our game, though, this is not even "expert" level!

Hi

There is a book on mindset in chess - "Chess Improvement: It's all in the mindset".

Amazing coincidence that the list of principles spells "SMART".

It might be possible to measure time management by deciding on some metric and looking at a sample of your games.

It might be possible to measure calculation by analysing a complicated position for a fixed time period (e.g. 30 mins). For example, some of the positions in "Think Like a GM". You want a position which is tactical and very rich in possibilities. As you do this, write down every variation you thought of together with your evaluation of the resulting position. Then you fire up an engine to see how accurate your variations were, and how many of the important ones you looked at etc etc. Maybe you could come up with some metrics from that - at the very least, you could measure number of moves you analyse per minute.

I've had a go at blindfold exercises in the hope that this might help with visualization. What I do is take a short game - maybe 10 moves to checkmate. I use the video feature on my iphone to record me saying the moves, stopping just before the checkmate move. Then I play this back and try to follow it in my head, and at the end work out what the checkmate move is. Following this, I try to set up the final position on a physical board. I believe it would be possible to measure how good I am at this exercise over time - I'd hope to be able to do it with longer and longer games.