This same group, I believe, has previously done a similar teacher ladder -- a couple of years ago, perhaps. In that variation back then, there were two rungs of the ladder: novices being mentored by players with some experience (1500-1800), and in turn those mid-level players being mentored by higher-experience players (2000+). I participated in the mentoring (which involved playing a game or two) for the second rung then, and as part of our game(s) we engaged in a discussion...
Teaching Ladder
Sort:
I was thinking along those lines: unrated games with post-mortem analysis and discussion, and/or analyzing and annotating games.
For the second method, my thought was that the pupil would do initial analysis themselves (the old fashioned way: no engine analysis) then send it to the mentor to study the game and analysis and add their own feedback and annotation.
This could be done once a week for consistent mentoring. Then maybe rotate students every 3-6 months as they improve.
This is still in the concept and checking for interest stage.
I was thinking a different kind of teaching ladder.2 players of almost the same level playing and asking for help in a forum topic.The better players don't give move but they explain the plans.
I still haven't figure out all details.For example , should the "ask for help" be in an unlimited number of moves(as many as the players want)or limited (let's say 3) to force players to make good use of the help?
Michael, that is another valid approach yes. Its good to see there is at least some interest in forming some kind of teaching ladder. I think if we can get enough interest we can then sort out the details in the way that best pleases everyone involved.
We don't need many Scandium.If there is one that can play with you we can start and see how it will work in action.
There is another way we can do that.A player of our group playing with a player of another group.The 2 players will take advices in 2 different forum topics.It is like vote chess but much faster and the decision of the move is on the player that has the move and not on voting.It doesn't matter if players belong in both groups and can see each other's advices because the game has a learning purpose.Or we can create 2 sub-groups that will play against each other (if there is enough interest).
Sounds like a plan Michael. Using valentin's structure, I'm in the 1500-1800 bracket. Any novices (under 1300 in turn based chess) here interested in a free mentor?
I'm willing to either annotate a couple of your games per week (you pick the games) or play a slow (30 15) unrated match against you, 1 a week (2 games - one with white, one with black) and then do analysis with you when the games are over or a turn based match (2 days/move and 2 silmultaneous games).
Anyone else interested in the ladder should post in this thread as well. Also please list your highest rating.
My highest current rating is 1773 (Online Chess).
It's a nice idea! I'm in. My current rating in online chess is 1619.
Has anyone participated in, or are interested in taking part in a teaching ladder?
For those not familiar with it, its essentially amateurs mentoring weaker amateurs: a person is assigned a mentor of high enough strength to learn from them, and this mentor in turn gets paired with someone higher than them for mentoring.
While the caliber of instruction is not going to be the same as with a coach, it will at least free - which makes it preferable to me than having no mentoring process.
Advantages:
- a mentor is a second set of eyes to look over your games and analysis to find mistakes and overall weaknesses in general.
- a mentor can motivate you to continue the self-improvement process.
- a mentor, being a stronger player, will have faced the same obstacles you face and be able to draw on their experience to help you overcome them.
Disadvantages:
- like every ladder, there is a top and bottom. The person on the top will have to gain satisfaction for their effort in improvement in their pupil and playing the key role in the whole teaching ladder system.
That's the only real disadvantage I can think of. If there's enough interest, we can iron out the details. For now I'm just putting out a feeler to see if there's interest in this.
Oh and one less detail: in being part of such a system, you have the opportunity not only to improve your game, but also to make friends you wouldn't otherwise have such opportunity to make.
Thoughts?