Hi there,
im curious about the main factor that creates the difference between a 2300, 2400,2500 and 2600 player. Is it the superiority in positional understanding and assessment of positions that separates 2600s from 2500? or a 2400 is superior against a 2300 mainly in tactical play? Or is it the depth of opening repertoire that gives an edge to 2500 against a 2400?
Ofc, there will be all kinds of players in different rating ranges with different set of skills and their strength might lie in different aspects of their play (like generally 2500s might be better at tactics than 2300s but there might be a 2300 who is better at tactics than some 2500 rated player), even between two 2300 rated player, but im asking for a general difference between the rating ranges between 2300 to 2600. After all Norms are also a generalizing notion and basically it is a concept about players ability to display some certain skills that is excepted from a player in that certain rating range.
Id be very happy to hear your thoughts on this, all players from non-titled to titled ones are welcome!
Thanks!
Hikaru's participation in the competition to beat the 20 levels of Komodo was one of the most revealing that I have ever seen.
His ability to judge his winning chances based on the pawn structures was fascinating. It seemed like it was his main focus.
I am sure it would be available on Twitch.
Of course, his instant recall of book lines was amazing and we have seen his tactics ability on Puzzle Rush. But I think we all know of those things.
But the pawn structure analysis as part of a strategic understanding was something I have never previously appreciated.
Hi there,
im curious about the main factor that creates the difference between a 2300, 2400,2500 and 2600 player. Is it the superiority in positional understanding and assessment of positions that separates 2600s from 2500? or a 2400 is superior against a 2300 mainly in tactical play? Or is it the depth of opening repertoire that gives an edge to 2500 against a 2400?
Ofc, there will be all kinds of players in different rating ranges with different set of skills and their strength might lie in different aspects of their play (like generally 2500s might be better at tactics than 2300s but there might be a 2300 who is better at tactics than some 2500 rated player), even between two 2300 rated player, but im asking for a general difference between the rating ranges between 2300 to 2600. After all Norms are also a generalizing notion and basically it is a concept about players ability to display some certain skills that is excepted from a player in that certain rating range.
Id be very happy to hear your thoughts on this, all players from non-titled to titled ones are welcome!
Thanks!