I wonder if its more effective to follow sequential or adaptive lessons or focus on courses more targeted to your rating.
Here's my take on it. Adaptive is nice if you're an advanced player who isn't sure where your weaknesses are, want to find them and work on them. For a near absolute beginner maybe sequential is better. For everyone else, pick a course that interests you and study it. And if you are a near beginner but want to study the Sicilian, I say go for it. This is about fun, right? If you were on serious "master track" , you'd have a coach who would set up a training program for you. Everybody else should just do whatever their little hearts desire.
I've been doing this coure
That's the first time I've come across a lesson like that also Maradonna, (out of curiosity I just did the first lesson). It's kind of a neat idea actually. So many of the other courses have long complicated introductions that you would really need to dig out your chess set and set up the position to follow unless you were an advanced player who could follow it in your head. As a result I think a certain amount of ChessMentor material gets read, but not understood or not read at all. I like the "click along" approach much better.
@Maradonna: OK, that is indeed one very strange little course. Only the last lesson is "scored", the famous opera game. Kind of wish I'd realized it was being scored at the time and I would have given MUCH more time to my answers. Oh well, it is interesting to see Chess Mentor develop in a new direction. Thanks for the heads up on the course....
...thanks for the heads up on the last part of the course, I'll take my time. Been a while since I've seen the Opera game ;)