1950ish to 2200 in three summers
Sort:
There is a question ppl here will have... What did you do to become 1950?
Aug 26, 2016
0
#22
misterbasic wrote:
There is a question ppl here will have... What did you do to become 1950?
I just played a lot. I started out in elementary school and played almost all the way through high school.
congrats!!!
Aug 26, 2016
0
#24
steinitz_attack wrote:
so you are a NM now? congrats!!!
Yeah. Thanks! Hopefully it will show it on my username soon. 
I think you have to apply to get the title (email the admin) in your username here no? Either way congrats man. You have natural talent if you made 1950 by just playing. I learned the rules at 16 y/o so maybe I've been too set in my ways of thinking. I'm 28 sitting on a uscf rating just shy of 1800.
I admit that tactics is underrated for sure but I believe a general grasp of openings and strategic chess is important for most levels.
Like have a favourite opening you play and a secondary. A response to D4 and E4 ect.
Like knowing the basics of good/bad pawn structures and piece activity.
iswarprasaddeuri wrote:
study Chess mentor study plan for basics
That goes a lot into positional chess.
Aug 27, 2016
0
#29
Cool. But you have been 1900 for the past 5 years... I wish getting NM here to be exacly as in usa but we have 2 norms and rating over 2300 : (
Scott-fox21 wrote:
this is a very interesting problem, that I have only seen in older adults that are already over the hill (40+ years old)
How dare you!! How arrogant. Just wait until you are over 40. And young kids that know no better start telling you that YOU are "over the hill".
iswarprasaddeuri wrote:
ModestAndPolite I no longer trust anger anymore.
Can you elaborate. I am not sure what you mean.
Scott-fox21 wrote:
You see, the real key to improvement is not how much you know about chess, but how hard you train your chess calculating ability. This is what I have found and this is how I gained 250 rating points in three summers!
Peter's progress is impressive, but while he was studying tactics and skimming MGP1 he was also playing a heck of a lot of slow OTB chess. I doubt that studying tactics alone would have been enough to improve from 1850 to 2200+ if he had not also been learning from the games he was playing.
Scott-fox21 wrote:
You see, the real key to improvement is not how much you know about chess, but how hard you train your chess calculating ability. This is what I have found and this is how I gained 250 rating points in three summers!
Peter's progress is impressive, but while he was studying tactics and skimming MGP1 he was also playing a heck of a lot of slow OTB chess. I doubt that studying tactics alone would have been enough to improve from 1850 to 2200+ if he had not also been learning from the games he was playing.
Aug 27, 2016
0
#37
Of course he was learning for many years. Apparently calculation was a weak point, and he worked on it and gained rating points.
In any case, players are often unreliable when recounting what they did to improve.
Aug 27, 2016
0
#38
ModestAndPolite wrote:
Scott-fox21 wrote:
You see, the real key to improvement is not how much you know about chess, but how hard you train your chess calculating ability. This is what I have found and this is how I gained 250 rating points in three summers!
Peter's progress is impressive, but while he was studying tactics and skimming MGP1 he was also playing a heck of a lot of slow OTB chess. I doubt that studying tactics alone would have been enough to improve from 1850 to 2200+ if he had not also been learning from the games he was playing.
I actually played only during the summers, and went from 1950 to 2136 in only a few tournaments. You can look me up on the USCF, and see that. Also, believe it or not, but I did not really study my own games very much. I mostly only did tactics as I have said. Also, I am sure that those 40+ years old can improve a lot by doing lots of tactics too. Philidor should have said that tactics are the soul of chess, because they are.
0110001101101000 wrote:
Of course he was learning for many years. Apparently calculation was a weak point, and he worked on it and gained rating points.
In any case, players are often unreliable when recounting what they did to improve.
That is a little disregarding but is true to some level. It is important to note that improving ones calculation/visualisation will help their positional play also. It's not only for when things are tactical. That is seeing a position a few moves back and evaluating it with positional reasoning.