4 hours a week to get better - what should I do?

25Weeks is so much time!

With the right training program you should expect anywhere between 500and 700points improvement

You can personal message me if you're interested in talking further

"The OP's play seemed "clueless" beginning around move 10.  Probably because he ran out of choreographed / memorized opening moves.  The rest of his play kept getting worse." zborg

I was probably clueless earlier than move 10.  I don't really have any openings memorized beyond a few moves.  

Thanks for posting that game, David.  I used up all my time early and the hanging rook and bishop I missed at the end - I saw right away after my time ran out...

I do miss a lot of hanging pieces, my own, as well as my opponents'.  Not because I don't know what they are, though, I just don't see them immediately under time pressure.

For those who wondered, Tactics Trainer does give problems where you simply are supposed to notice the hanging piece, though now at the 1300 level it seems like most, though not all, of the problems are forced mates.

Two questions about the above game:

15.Rxf3 (White should have done 15.Qxf3, right?)

Also, my idea with letting my light-squared bishop get chased around by pawns was to hopefully open up his kingside...it sort of worked: bad idea?

As per your questions -- 20) d4 (?) was the losing move.  NEVER open up the center with you KING stuck there, and queens still on the board.

Instead -- 20) Ra1-g1 was infinitely better.  And the game is still roughly even.  Assuming you can eventually get your king to safety.

P.S.  His kingside was fine, yours was full of holes.  After 20) d4 (?), your position rapidly collapsed.

********************************************

At fast time controls, consider exchanging all your pieces (for equals) and then play for a win in the endgame.  Given a 5 second bonus added to your time controls, that should improve your play at Blitz, as well.

Indeed, the easiest way to "side-step openings" (and reduce your blunders) is to quickly blast through to the endgame, via piece exchanges.  You'll have more time left on your clock, in any case.

GM Nesis has a series of books on "Exchanges," but they are a bit advanced.

Just learn the basics, and play to reach level endgames (at any speed).  That's a rapid way to improve, overall.

In any case, reaching level endgames will probably scare the Be-Jesus out of many of your current opponents.    

"Every now and then someone advances the idea that one may gain success in chess by using shortcuts. 'Chess is 99% tactics' - proclaims one expert, suggesting that strategic understanding is overrated; 'Improvement in chess is all about opening knowledge' - declares another. A third self-appointed authority asserts that a thorough knowledge of endings is the key to becoming a master; while his expert-friend is puzzled by the mere thought that a player can achieve anything at all without championing pawn structures. To me, such statements seem futile. You can't hope to gain mastery of any subject by specializing in only parts of it. A complete player must master a complete game ..." - FM Amatzia Avni (2008)

I must say I love ylblai's research

15.Rxf3 is correct as it's the only move that wins a piece. 14..Nxf3+ was a tactical blunder. Your bishop on g6 is attacked by the pawn on h5. After 15.Rxf3 your queen is also under attack and you cannot save both pieces. After 15..Qh4 White should have played 16.hxg6 to capture your bishop. He didn't so you got away with that one.

If, instead, White played 16.Qxf3 you could just exchange pieces on f3 and then move your bishop to safety on h7.

The plan to open up the kingside was fine but the execution wasn't so good. After 10.h3 exchanging pieces on f3 would have weakened White's kingside pawn structure after which Nd4 would likely win a pawn. Retreating left the bishop in the corner with limited activity staring at a line of pawns.

Hi zborg - I was black, in the game above, so I am glad to hear that 20.d4 was the losing move and my kingside was in good shape.  Phew!  That is what I was going for.

Obscurist- yes I remember hoping that just the fact that my queen was getting behind his king would distract him from taking my bishop. I kind of knew it was an error on my part - but I hated to retreat my bishop, thinking I would then have to retreat my queen on the next move too - so I was experimenting with just trying to worry him with an attack.  But I can see that against a stronger player that would have been foolish.

Aside from the loss on time this would be an easy win for black. 

I think the OP has no trouble at the 1000 level particulary since his online rating is over 1800. 

Basically play more bitz in order to speed up pattern recognition in blitz.  Study tactics to improve calculation and clarity.  Get familiar with your openings and play them quickly.  If you end up up a minute out of the opening, equal and in familiar territory you should be ok.

Once up significant material don't be clever.  Exchange down and then chomp until your opponent has no counterplay left.  Then go for mate in the fastest (time not moves) way possible.

I recommend lots of blitz games and search up "good chess openings" online. Watch a few videos (I really like thechesswebsite.com. They have lots of good free content) and just keep doing what you are doing. Play the colle system, recognize the patterns, and play them in your own game. I have found that black is often uncomfortable in the english because they do not know the theory but there is a very clear plan for white.

Study endgames. Then the middle game will make more sense. Learn how to trade down to a winning endgame, then beat him there.

For the OP- 

What should your 4 hours a week look like.

First, divide the hours up so you are getting 4-6 shorter "shifts" so your time is focused work. I recommend early AM because you have quiet and energy to commit to your work. The only activities I do in the evening are database management, searching for good games to study etc. Tasks that don't require active thinking and energy. 

So lets say you divide your 4 hours into 5 45 minute blocks (aprox). An example schedule

Week 1 - chess player strength 1000

Monday 5am

15 minutes warm up - (blitz tactics on chess.com for example.) Don't worry about getting them right as much as just get your mind running. It's 5 am after all.

15 minutes - Quick play through Morphy vs Brunswick Isouard. This is played without going into the annotations. The goal is to just get a general idea of how the game went and get impressions.

15 minutes - Tactics at 150 pts above your current strength. If you don't see the answer immediately, sit on your hands and really work at moving the pieces around. 

Tuesday

10 min warm up.

35 min - Morphy vs Isouard - This time play guess the move and record everything you see and consider. The goal is you should start to see some of the ideas that weren't played and you should start to see some of the moves you wanted to play and why they are not good. By the end of the week, you should be able to play this game from memory and teach it to a class of chess players.

Wednesday

5 min Warm up - play through at a blitz pace as much of Morphy - Isouard that you can from memory.

40 minutes - tactics, your rating strength to 150+ depending on how you feel. Again the goal is to improve your ability at moving the pieces around in your head. You will do pattern training in later months. 

Thursday-

15 min warmup 

Morphy - Isouard - play through the game at tempo and then go back a second time and really identify places where you didn't remember the move. By this point, most of the moves should make sense and the few that do not  likely represent a hole in your understanding (this is a good thing, discovering a weakness makes it something you can work on). 

Record your notes for the game. You will return to it later to see how much you remember.

Friday -

5 min warmup 

20 min - progressive tactics

20 min - "Stoyko" this is Spend 5 min+ per position and calculate as much as you possibly can and record your notes. After compare with annotation/computer.

That is week one.

Each week or two you will add a new master game to study. Game selection is very important as you will be putting a lot of effort into them and you want games that are illustrative and very well annotated (until you are strong enough to do your own annotations)

Let us know what study plan you decided upon and how you are going about it so we can see your progress!

Hi, i am very suprised to see no-one has adviced something i will say:

Chess books great, tactics great, lots of things are great. But lets assume you are trying to solve some tactics problems do you know where to start, how to calculate, when you went wrong why you were wrong or can you understand the solution ?

It will be very hard for you to train like players who already had invested a lot of time already. Instead i advice you to took the other approach, train the same way have similar experience. Kids. There are some programs training for kids which have lots of pros compared to adult books

• They first explain what they expect of you
• They usually build-up gradually and with same topics until it becomes solid
• They are more fun (As a 30 y.o i found some programs designed for kids fun)
• Another plus is you can train them with your kids, both you are improving and spending some of your chess time with your kids.

Secondly you can try to teach your kids chess, this is more long-term approach you will frustrated when they refuse to learn how rook moves, you will need to be fun while teaching because otherwise they wont want to play chess at all. They probably want more time of you then you can afford. But think positives of it, your wife and kids will be happier just because you are spending more time with your kids. If you can manage to keep them learning and having fun same time (If they got bored they will simply quit or improve like tortoises) they will catch you in 1-2 years and pass through, but you will have 1400-1500 Elo players in your own house in no-time simply playing games with them will improve you much faster then playing a game against a random stranger on internet.

Third think you want to play, slow games where time is no pressure to either side. And after analysis them with someone stronger, you can hire a coach just for analysizing them but dont let him overwhelm you, he will try to impress you with his chess knowledge, may want to give you lots of homeworks, and may want to make you hire him for more time and more. But you dont have too much time to be aggresive in your improvement, simply you wont have enough time to do all homeworks or you may find hard to do things he advice (believe me i am a chess coach and every coach subconciously tries to turn his students into world champions while they cry about they dont have any time, but neither side gave up) But if he is good and fun coach, you can also hire him for helping with your children they have much more time then you.

Fourth, you can go through structured tactic books, which are themed (pins, skewers etc) Downside of them is, if they are categorized by themes they probably vary too much in difficulty from problem to problem. If they are graded with difficulty then they vary about themes.

You can consider working your endgame, simply because learning some easy theory (zugswang, opposition), then work your way in simple (but precise) poisitions only a few pawns and may be 1-2 pieces is relaxing, helping you calculate better step by step, also give you feeling about how you should move your pieces (even in your middle game), gives you starter skills in planning. So many amateurs think its very ineffective way because it doesnt help you in most of your games. Yes it doesnt sharply change the way you play instantly, but little by little it improves your overall game. Your attitude, concentration, psychology, calculation every important part of your playing improves. Most of the time the knowledge you gain from studying endgame wont help you, but its not the only thing you gain, and others are much more important then the knowledge itself.

1. To summarize, use your time in a way gives you maximum positives in your life (happiness, family life, economics etc.)
2. Make it count (be your improvement long term)
3. Choose a reasonable way (Not something drain all your energy and drop performance in other things you do)
4. Make it fun (No point in getting better in chess if you quit it afterwards)

Keep it simple, and reward the kids with candy, or money.

Saves on keystokes too.

the challenge here is having to be super focused. I don't think anyone would debate that tactics, study of master games and analyzing your games and endgame study will lead to improvement. 

Hi nimzo5,

that's an interesting approach (1. quick play through the game, 2. guess the move, 3. blitz play from memory, 4. play from memory and go back a second time to think about the moves you didn't remember).

Do you have a list of further games to study this way that you could recommend to OP and other interested readers?

thank you.

I do, but you want to choose games that suit the strength of person studying. i.e.

1000 - 1400 - Morphy and the romantic era of chess.

1400 - 1700 - Capablanca, Marshall, Duras, Janowsky etc. 

1700 - 1850 - Botvinnik, Smyslov, Geller, Keres

1850 - 2000 - Karpov, Fischer, Spassky

Some great games that jump to mind

Karpov - Spassky (8) 1974

Geller - Fischer 1962

Capablanca - Bernstein 1911

Fischer - Spassky (6) 1972

I could go on all day but these are a couple good ones.

Since part of your goal is to essentially "memorize" the game. You will want games that are about 40 moves or less, are tightly contested, and have instructive value.

I disagree rating - champion relation. Morphy, Capa, Karpov games always great. Geller is also good, never seen a Keres game but Rubinstein's games good too. Fischer, Botvinnik etc games somewhat related to opening theory which loses some efficiency but no one can denies they have instructive values as well, Spassky is in between (Like Tal good value for aggressive players) and very good but Alekhine might be better. Kotov is suitable for sharp players he thinks he is bad at calculation himself but his style is sharp. Lasker is considered to be psychological player but some of his speculative moves are verified by latest engines so we should think about him as intuitive (no way to calculate some of his moves even engines couldnt a few years ago) Kasparov for learning initiative, Carlsen for learning deepest positional nuances. Petrossian for seeing how tension must be evaluated in a game he plays solid, prophilactic chess but he is better tactician then most (he defends against tactics doesnt prefer the attacking side) real hard to attack him.

I don't think a deep study of Kasparov's games will help a 1400 much. My point isn't about style of player but that the older masters games are easier to understand without reference to anything. Frequently the old master games they were able to carry out a plan to completion which makes it easier to follow. 

a 1000 studies Morphy to learn the value of time vs material in the opening and to reinforce tactics. 

a 1400 Studies Capablanca which has elements of tactics, endgame and positonal play. You rarely get ugly, quixotic moves with Capa. If Capa plays g4 with his king 0-0 there is a strong reason. You don't need to know much opening theory etc to understand his play. I like Rubinstein as well, but it is hard to find annotated games - which is important at this level.

a 1600 can start to tackle 50s and 60s chess imo. A little bit of theory, a lot of good players to look at. I chose botvinnik because he comes in contact with everyone and has fairly straightforward style. 

at 1800 I am thinking 70s chess, you could add Tal, Petrosian, but I would not add Larsen

at 2000 you get to Kasparov - by now you should have a good grounding in the prior generation and Kasparov will require much more advanced calculation and understanding of dynamic play.

My 4-hour per week chess training regimen began yesterday.  

My regimen will be based on the ideas of nimzo5 and some others who have kindly responded to my request for advice. 

This is how a typical session will look:

1. 15 minutes of tactics warm-up, at or below my level

2. 15-30 minutes of studying a master game (in the particular order and style given by nimzo5 in posts above)

3. 15 minutes of tactics above my level

I am also going to try to get in one OTB game or a 30 minutes a side live game per week. I will keep a log of my time spent so that I will be able to gauge the results and compare them to how closely I followed the regimen. I have kids, so I expect broken sessions now and then.  For example, yesterday I only got in 30 minutes.  But I intend to make that time up later this week.

Also, Candidate35 kindly offered me a free lesson and some interesting advice.  I will include that in my log.

zborg suggested studying a beginner book until I know it inside out and backwards.  I like that idea alot, partly because books are nicer than computer screens.  I may substitute a book like that for my tactics warm-up.

Thanks again, all. I'll let you know how it goes.

Tuccihops

P.S. I've beaten my nemesis four out of our last six blitz games online, ten minutes a side.  But I lost 2 of 3 OTB with him at Thanksgiving.