Learning from your mistakes?

DeirdreSkye
torrubirubi wrote:
I think you should all play chess in uniforms, like little soldiers following a hard regime of discipline.

This is the future of chess: Hard work, concentration, more discipline, more hard work, and if you are tired, more work, much harder.

Follow the master, be rude, tell everybody how smart you are.

March! 1-2-3-4, be hard, work hard, and fight all signs of laziness wherever you see it. Try harder!

      Hard work and concentration is indeed the only way. It even worked with you. Not with your chess , nothing can help you with that , but it helped you improved your humor.  Might be the first time in your life that you show some signs of intelligence. 

Well done!

BobbyTalparov
torrubirubi wrote:
I think you should all play chess in uniforms, like little soldiers following a hard regime of discipline.

This is the future of chess: Hard work, concentration, more discipline, more hard work, and if you are tired, more work, much harder.

Follow the master, be rude, tell everybody how smart you are.

March! 1-2-3-4, be hard, work hard, and fight all signs of laziness wherever you see it. Try harder!

I could be wrong, but I think what @DeirdreSkye is saying regarding Chessable (specifically their opening books - they have expanded greatly since that feature) is that it is all about memorization.  So yes, if you end up memorizing a line and your opponent plays that line, you end up in a decent middle game position.  However, as soon as your opponent deviates, you are forced to rely on skills you have not practiced in the opening (specifically, understanding your objective behind the moves you were making).  For the free opening books they have, that is the biggest problem I have seen (I haven't purchased a book there, so the paid books may convey that information - assuming the player is wise enough to read it).  Memorization without understanding will not help someone improve.

m_n0

I tend to agree with this sort of thing. I've written three books for Chessable, and I tried to spend a lot of words on typical ideas and plans, in addition to the concrete variations - plus videos to help the reader along. 

Of course, if you're trying to learn an opening like the Dragon, sometimes you just gotta straight parrot-fashion memorize stuff to avoid losing right out of the opening.

DeirdreSkye
BobbyTalparov wrote:
torrubirubi wrote:
I think you should all play chess in uniforms, like little soldiers following a hard regime of discipline.

This is the future of chess: Hard work, concentration, more discipline, more hard work, and if you are tired, more work, much harder.

Follow the master, be rude, tell everybody how smart you are.

March! 1-2-3-4, be hard, work hard, and fight all signs of laziness wherever you see it. Try harder!

I could be wrong, but I think what @DeirdreSkye is saying regarding Chessable (specifically their opening books - they have expanded greatly since that feature) is that it is all about memorization.  So yes, if you end up memorizing a line and your opponent plays that line, you end up in a decent middle game position.  However, as soon as your opponent deviates, you are forced to rely on skills you have not practiced in the opening (specifically, understanding your objective behind the moves you were making).  For the free opening books they have, that is the biggest problem I have seen (I haven't purchased a book there, so the paid books may convey that information - assuming the player is wise enough to read it).  Memorization without understanding will not help someone improve.

    That is what I am trying to say plus one thing more. Knowledge doesn't make you better , you might read all the books in the world and still not improve. Chess needs a lot of personal work because improvement in chess is relative to how hard you push your mind to think. That is why nothing can replace the study with a good book a real board and concentration.

     But this simple truth is too much for torrubirubi to comprehend. Let him mock , he doesn't realise that it's himself that he is mocking. He doesn't realise that he only betrays his ignorance.

torrubirubi
BobbyTalparov wrote:
torrubirubi wrote:
I think you should all play chess in uniforms, like little soldiers following a hard regime of discipline.

This is the future of chess: Hard work, concentration, more discipline, more hard work, and if you are tired, more work, much harder.

Follow the master, be rude, tell everybody how smart you are.

March! 1-2-3-4, be hard, work hard, and fight all signs of laziness wherever you see it. Try harder!

I could be wrong, but I think what @DeirdreSkye is saying regarding Chessable (specifically their opening books - they have expanded greatly since that feature) is that it is all about memorization.  So yes, if you end up memorizing a line and your opponent plays that line, you end up in a decent middle game position.  However, as soon as your opponent deviates, you are forced to rely on skills you have not practiced in the opening (specifically, understanding your objective behind the moves you were making).  For the free opening books they have, that is the biggest problem I have seen (I haven't purchased a book there, so the paid books may convey that information - assuming the player is wise enough to read it).  Memorization without understanding will not help someone improve.

The thing on memorisation applies to every opening book.  The advantage of Chessable over classical repertoire books is that you can ask the authors about moves that you don't understand.  I am known in Chessable to ask questions  about almost every move thatbI can't understand, even not when I go through the whole line. I don't know any other tool where you have free access to the knowledge of IMs and GMs as in Chessable.  The idea that Chessable is only  about memorisation comes or from people who don't understand the concept or from people who are eager to criticize Chessable  to show how smart they are concerning training.  I know  hundred of comments from authors of Chessable's authors showing the ideas behind moves.  In fact,  Chessable's books are the join work by author and students of these books. 

To call all 30 000 Chessable students "lazy"is just a a sign of huge ignorance. It is simply ridiculous.

We have probably people in Chessable learning by heart without understanding what they are learning,  but they are a minority. Even these students profit from the questions asked by other students.

torrubirubi
DeirdreSkye wrote:
BobbyTalparov wrote:
torrubirubi wrote:
I think you should all play chess in uniforms, like little soldiers following a hard regime of discipline.

This is the future of chess: Hard work, concentration, more discipline, more hard work, and if you are tired, more work, much harder.

Follow the master, be rude, tell everybody how smart you are.

March! 1-2-3-4, be hard, work hard, and fight all signs of laziness wherever you see it. Try harder!

I could be wrong, but I think what @DeirdreSkye is saying regarding Chessable (specifically their opening books - they have expanded greatly since that feature) is that it is all about memorization.  So yes, if you end up memorizing a line and your opponent plays that line, you end up in a decent middle game position.  However, as soon as your opponent deviates, you are forced to rely on skills you have not practiced in the opening (specifically, understanding your objective behind the moves you were making).  For the free opening books they have, that is the biggest problem I have seen (I haven't purchased a book there, so the paid books may convey that information - assuming the player is wise enough to read it).  Memorization without understanding will not help someone improve.

    That is what I am trying to say plus one thing more. Knowledge doesn't make you better , you might read all the books in the world and still not improve. Chess needs a lot of personal work because improvement in chess is relative to how hard you push your mind to think. That is why nothing can replace the study with a good book a real board and concentration.

     But this simple truth is too much for torrubirubi to comprehend. Let him mock , he doesn't realise that it's himself that he is mocking. He doesn't realise that he only betrays his ignorance.

We talk like you be a super GM. And although you are clearly better than me you are just a huge patzer  in comparison with really strong players. I know several titled players that are modest and kind,  and a lot of such strong players believe that Chessable is a great tool. Spaced repetition is being used since decades by strong players. 

DeirdreSkye
torrubirubi wrote:
BobbyTalparov wrote:
torrubirubi wrote:

 

To call all 30 000 Chessable students "lazy"is just a a sign of huge ignorance. It is simply ridiculous.

We have probably people in Chessable learning by heart without understanding what they are learning,  but they are a minority. Even these students profit from the questions asked by other students.

  Yes , a FIDE certified trianer is ignorant. A guy that is an IM , has played chess for 30 years in FIDE tournaments , reached 2425 peak rating , he is a teacher the last 10 and has created many titled players is the ignorant.

   You on the other hand, a guy that understands nothing about chess and chess training ,you are the knowledgeable.

   When I think I have heard every nonsense possible , comes one more that surprises me. I really admire your creativity , it's too bad it's only in nonsense and nowhere else!

   

    Now I will try to explain you some things, you won't understand , but others might.

Having a teacher that answers each and every question is good but not good enough. Does these great teachers you have in Chessable give you things to work on yourselves? The really good teacher is the one that knows what homework to give to the student and knows how to make him work as hard as he can. It's not the one that gives chewed  digestible food. It won't change a damn thing even if Kasparov comes in Chessbale andd starts answering your questions. That is why those who bought Kasparov's masterclass , saw with dissapointment their chess not improving. When I said in reddit that I am expecting that Kasparov;s masterclass won't help them , they laughed at me. Today a year later I was right. They are still the same players. Why? Because Kasparov is not good? Of course not. Because simply they expcted chwed food and CHEWED FOOD IN CHESS SIMPLY ISN'T WORKING. The good teacher leaves unanswered questions and forces/guides the student to answer them himself.

     Chessable methods are for guys like you that will be happy if they get 100 points every 5 years and they are going to stuck in a point anyway(usually somewhere around 1700). These methods are for those that don't hope in understanding chess , they only hope in getting a respectable on-line rating(around 1700) which by the way means nothing. 

     Are all 30.000 members of Chessable in that category. I bet 29.900 are. The rest are exceptions. But exceptions only verify the rule , they don't cancel it.

      One more thing. The best way to stagnate is to play openings chosen from others. The same mistake do those who buy opening repertoires books do or those who try to imitate what Carlsen or what Stockfish plays. Opening is a "personal quest" and it needs some level of understanding before you are able to choose your opening that suits your type(I don't say style because you won't ever have any). Simply put , some openings don't work for some people , no matter how good they are. This is too much to you to understand but others do. Do they tell you that in Chessable? Of course not. Why ? Because they don't give a shit if people like you  will be stagnant in 1700 on line rating for ever. You are the type of guys that will feel accomplished if gets his on-line rating a 100 points higher. No one really cares about you. They only care about your money. And from what I see they are doing a fine job.

     From the 30.000 there will be someone talented that will do well(and he would do well anyway) , they will promote him as advertisement and they will ignore the 29.999 stagnants. That is the truth that you don't like and you will fully realise in 5 years as I will be right in every single word I said. But 5 years and who knows how many bucks will be wasted already. Bartholomew will be rich and happy , my teacher will be still  an "ignorant" FIDE certified trainer and you a "knowledgeable" 1700(best case senario) online patzer who still understands nothing about chess. Mark my words.

     That is my last word on this topic. The most difficult thing will cetainly be watching a bunch of nonsense and not answering but I must  practice my self-control. So go ahead , give me your best shot. 

      

CoffeeAnd420
torrubirubi wrote:
I think you should all play chess in uniforms, like little soldiers following a hard regime of discipline.

This is the future of chess: Hard work, concentration, more discipline, more hard work, and if you are tired, more work, much harder.

Follow the master, be rude, tell everybody how smart you are.

March! 1-2-3-4, be hard, work hard, and fight all signs of laziness wherever you see it. Try harder!

 

Unbelievable. Another one who thinks chess is "tough work". It's a BOARD GAME that you choose to play voluntarily for enjoyment. It's not hard, nor is it work, nor does it matter.

 

You guys are absolutely delusional with this chess obsession at this point. It's not the measuring stick of anything. Monopoly, Chutes and Ladders, Chess - These are board games for children. They're just there to kill an hour here and there with. Nobody "works hard" at a board game, even if they think they do.

kindaspongey
DeirdreSkye wrote:
torrubirubi wrote:
BobbyTalparov wrote:
torrubirubi wrote:

 

To call all 30 000 Chessable students "lazy"is just a a sign of huge ignorance. It is simply ridiculous.

We have probably people in Chessable learning by heart without understanding what they are learning,  but they are a minority. Even these students profit from the questions asked by other students.

  Yes , a FIDE certified trianer is ignorant. A guy that is an IM , has played chess for 30 years in FIDE tournaments , reached 2425 peak rating , he is a teacher the last 10 and has created many titled players is the ignorant. ...

Does any of that measure a person's ability to judge character?

CoffeeAnd420
kindaspongey wrote:
DeirdreSkye wrote:
torrubirubi wrote:
BobbyTalparov wrote:
torrubirubi wrote:

 

To call all 30 000 Chessable students "lazy"is just a a sign of huge ignorance. It is simply ridiculous.

We have probably people in Chessable learning by heart without understanding what they are learning,  but they are a minority. Even these students profit from the questions asked by other students.

  Yes , a FIDE certified trianer is ignorant. A guy that is an IM , has played chess for 30 years in FIDE tournaments , reached 2425 peak rating , he is a teacher the last 10 and has created many titled players is the ignorant. ...

Does any of that measure a person's ability to judge character?

 

On the contrary. The fact that the person has spent almost all of their lives doing nothing but playing and studying chess leaves them virtually clueless in every other department. Obviously - You can't learn about life playing chess. You can't learn about people playing chess. You can't make a living playing chess. You can't win anything playing chess. Nobody respects anyone for playing chess. Etc, etc, etc. Basically, the more you win at chess the more you lose at life.

 

Go to any USCF event and you will absolutely see the bottom of the barrel of our society. At least people with a heroin addiction are combating something real and trying to improve themselves as a person.

kindaspongey
DeirdreSkye wrote:

... they are going to stuck in a point anyway(usually somewhere around 1700). These methods are for those that don't hope in understanding chess , ...

Is understanding chess a yes or no thing or a matter of degree? What qualifies you (or anyone) to judge the character of those who are glad to have help getting to 1700?

torrubirubi
I am sure that everything you said is absolutely true...for you. Pity that nobody cares what you say. If you know soooo much about everything, about what is good and bad, what is fact or fiction: why you are not a GM?

I don't remember that you came to a thread and said something positive. Every time you have to begin with something like "everybody is wrong" or "everybody(but you)" are lazy, always referring to your wonderful unknown chess guru. Do you have any idea how silly and arrogant this sounds? Do you think you can impress people with such a behaviour? Really?

I am sorry for people who have to deal with you daily in real life. Something really bad happened to you to make you so a negative person. You think you know more about chess training than Kasparov or JB? Well, write a book and let's see what do you have to say (beside of course the "hard work -discipline mantra, of course; empty words).
BobbyTalparov
DeirdreSkye wrote:
That is why those who bought Kasparov's masterclass , saw with dissapointment their chess not improving. When I said in reddit that I am expecting that Kasparov;s masterclass won't help them , they laughed at me. Today a year later I was right. They are still the same players. Why? Because Kasparov is not good? Of course not.  

      

I agree that the MasterClass will not help most people improve, but disagree with the reason.

My wife purchased the MC for me as a birthday present.  I enjoyed it (it took about 3 days for me to go through all of the videos and his workbook of puzzles).  The main problem is that he was trying to do the impossible:  teach a class that would appeal to everyone, regardless of their current level.  Anyone beyond the beginner phase will find the first 11 lessons as nothing but an interesting review.  Almost all players will find the simul lesson to be rather useless - but intermediate and advanced players will enjoy his analysis of the simul games over the next 3 lessons.  Everything from lesson ~21 on was more or less a history lesson on how he and other great players rose to the top.  If you were already 1500+, you won't get much out of 25 of the 29 lessons.

 

I think Chessable can be a useful tool - but like any tool, it is only useful if you know how to use it and when you should be using it.  It is kind of like a chess engine:  it is an amazing tool in the hands of a strong player, but a weak player only impedes their own growth by relying on it to do their post-game analysis instead of doing it themselves first.

 

As for the authors responding to questions:  a good coach would be able to give you far more personal feedback.  For example, I was going over a couple games with my coach recently where he asked me why I played a perfectly fine line in the Sicilian (the Taimanov) instead of my usual Najdorf, which made me realize I approached the 2 games where this happened "incorrectly" (not that the line I played was incorrect, but it led to positions that are common in the Taimanov, but not the Najdorf).  You are not going to get that kind of feedback from an author who knows nothing about you.

torrubirubi
Bobby, the questions in Chessable are always related to very concrete positions, like "Is it really necessary to exchange the bishop for the knight here?" or "why Do I have to play Ne7 here and in a similar position I play Nf6?" and so on. Some questions are on possible plans out of the opening or on alternative moves.
TachibanaYukiteru

Agreed

qbelpla

KMS

 

kindaspongey
BobbyTalparov wrote:

... As for the authors responding to questions:  a good coach would be able to give you far more personal feedback.  For example, ...

What about the cost of the good coach?

Musikamole

I record the first mistake I make in every game. Opening mistakes mainly. I use other tools to sharpen the middle and end. 

BobbyTalparov
kindaspongey wrote:
BobbyTalparov wrote:

... As for the authors responding to questions:  a good coach would be able to give you far more personal feedback.  For example, ...

What about the cost of the good coach?

That is another matter entirely.  However, $30-50 per hour for an IM to get quality personalized instruction or $6-15 to get generalized answers.  As the saying goes:  you get what you pay for.