4 years to become a chess master

How goes it?

all the best

It is nice to have a long term plan, but you have to be prepared to abandon it if the first steps either fail to go according to plan, or reveal that what you really need to be doing is something else entirely.

Planning to improve your chess is a lot like making a plan for a chess game.  You can only start from where you are, and you can really only plan for the next step, because you don't know in advance where it will take you, or what it will reveal.

I think the best way to improve is to have a strong player as a mentor.  Not so much to instruct but to monitor your progress and help you avoid falling into bad habits or getting misconceptions about the game that will have to be unlearned before you can reach your potential.

This pieces of advice opened my eyes! Yes, rating is important to me. Yes, somehow chess has stopped being a game to me and is now something 'serious'. This attitude is holding me back! Games are won way before a proper endgame. driver start I never knew there were so many "experts" around.

Boldchess wrote: We all know that improving at chess requires time and dedication. But even when we do invest time and dedication in our chess development, success is not guaranteed. I know that as I've plateaued at 2000 (with a peak at 2100) for the past 15 years (I started playing chess 20 years ago)! So in the first 5 years of my chess carreer, I improved steadily and fairly quickly to reach a decent level. What happened next? Instead of focusing on the most important chess skills (tactics, calculation, endgames), I started studying opening theory, thinking that it would allow me to reach the next level. After a few years of vain effort I decided to start playing rather offbeat openings (1.g3 and 1...g6). This approach brought me some successes but didn't really contribute to my chess development and I almost gave up chess because I thought I was unable to improve.Until I met a Russian IM who told me the following: 'Like all club players, there are significant gaps in your chess skills (tacitcal and positional). What you need to do is start again from scratch with a beginner's mind. Start playing again like you were a promising 12-year-old. Without fear. Play sharp openings (Sicilian, King's Indian, 1.e4), study tactics and calculation, then positional chess, then the endgame and after that the opening. Enjoy chess, it's a game! Forget about ratings, try to find the best move in every single position and play it with confidence! Don't bother learning theory. Just learn the first 10 moves of the main lines and try to understand the ideas, where the pieces belong. Makes mistakes and learn from it!'This pieces of advice opened my eyes! Yes, rating is important to me. Yes, somehow chess has stopped being a game to me and is now something 'serious'. This attitude is holding me back!Based on these recommendations I've decided to set up a training programme for the coming 4 years. It should allow me to fill the gaps in my chess skills. Here it is:Year 1: Focus on tactics & calculationGM Wesley So said recently that 'Chess is 95% calculation' and I tend to agree with him. Even the simplest positional plan needs to be backed up with calculation. If you miss a tactical shot 2 moves ahead, even in a 'simple' position, then you're lost. And this happens all the time at all levels! So in the first year of my study programme I'll focus on solving tactical puzzles (in CT-ART). I've already solved all puzzles rated 1800 and 1900. I've also started working on Excelling at Chess Calculation by GM Aagaard. After that, I'll probably start solving the positions in Grandmaster Preparation - Calculation by the same author. I'm also planning to study pawn endgames. Pawn endgames are a great tool to practice calculation!I'll also dedicate some time to openings. I'm going to start playing the King's Indian and Najdorf as Black. And 1.e4 as White. I'll write a post about my opening repertoire at a later stage. At this stage, most of my opponents will be rated between 1900 and 2100, so theoretical knowledge shouldn't be a decisive factor.Year 2: Positional chessYear 2 will be dedicated to positional chess/strategy. I will also study some of my openings in a bit more detail and start working on rook endgames.Year 3: EndgamesYear 3 will be dedicated to endgames (theoretical endgames and strategy in the endgame).Year 4: OpeningsYear 4 will be dedicated to a detailed study of the openings I play.My goal is not to reach a 2400 rating after 4 years but to reach a 2400 playing strength.What do you think about this project? I'd very much like to have other players' feedback! You can also have a look at my website where I'll post about my project! (www.isolated-pawn.com).

Two books on becoming a master:

What It Takes to Become a Chess Master by Andrew Soltis

https://web.archive.org/web/20140708093409/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/review857.pdf

"... When two 1700 players meet over the board, one will typically self-dstruct. Not in the opening, as an 1100 player would, but by move 40, if not 30. As a result, many players can reach 1900 strength simply by not blundering.Mastering chess takes more. It requires a new set of skills and traits. ..." - GM Andrew Soltis (2012)

Reaching the Top?! by Peter Kurzdorfer

http://www.thechessmind.net/blog/2015/11/16/book-notice-kurzdorfers-reaching-the-top.html

http://www.jeremysilman.com/shop/pc/Reaching-the-Top-77p3905.htm

"... On the one hand, your play needs to be purposeful much of the time; the ability to navigate through many different types of positions needs to be yours; your ability to calculate variations and find candidate moves needs to be present in at least an embryonic stage. On the other hand, it will be heart-warming and perhaps inspiring to realize that you do not need to give up blunders or misconceptions or a poor memory or sloppy calculating habits; that you do not need to know all the latest opening variations, or even know what they are called. You do not have to memorize hundreds of endgame positions or instantly recognize the proper procedure in a variety of pawn structures.

[To play at a master level consistently] is not an easy task, to be sure ..., but it is a possible one. ..." - NM Peter Kurzdorfer (2015)

Also perhaps of interest:

https://www.chess.com/article/view/can-anyone-be-an-im-or-gm

It’s been 4 years - how did you make out with your training program? 😊

Everybody has his idea of the perfect training or studying program.  There is no perfect program.  What works for one person may not work for another.  Do what works for you.  I do agree with the op that analysis and calculation are the bane of the 1800-1900 uscf rated player.

No update?

these are big paragraphs and I do not to read it (no offence)

 

want

 

This was a great read, even though the original user closed their account. Still good reading material for knowledge. 

Great comment, there seems to be a lot of people who instead of discussing ideas prefer to just insult or just chat about nothing.

What OP proposed is just deliberate practice with rearanging which parts should be focused on first. We can debate if the order is correct or if maybe some other, important parts are forgotten. I would say that both the interval length of 1 year per topic is too long, as well as just measuring progress in time instead of achiving some goals are not optimal. But as a starting point, it was  a good topic.

I looked at the author's rating. His last game was in December 2017 and then he closed his account. His bullet rating is 1956 and blitz rating is around 1600. He didn't improve to a master level. Either his plan had flaws or he didn't stick to it. Thanks.

I can be very patient and just enjoy the fun that chess brings 

You now what's lots of fun? Making a detailed plan to become a chess master, lose 30 pounds, master the violin, or become fluent in Italian. It's fun, and it's easy. Anyone can do it!

You know what's really hard? Working at that plan every single day; putting in the hours, weeks, and months that are required to actually achieve those goals. That's hard, and not always fun. Very few people do it!