In the absence of argument, one issues personal attacks against one's interlocutors.
I can explain my system for reaching a TT rating of 1763 (down from a 2400 peak). It's quite simple. I use TT late at night while falling asleep, during moments of insomnia at 2:00 am, and after a night of partying.
When I am serious about my training, I use other resources, such as The Encyclopedia of Chess Combinations, 5th ed.
eastyz wrote:
Ziryab, with a TT rating of 1763 you have a lot to say. Aquarius, likewise with a TT rating of 1350, you have a lot to say. If I had to write up the system up here, it would take too much time. I would rather write a book if I had that sort of time. Anyway, I did not post here to brag about my system but rather to inquire about how others approached positional play if you look back at the original post. I was hoping to get some ideas for such a system for positional play if possible. The TT rating speaks for itself I would have thought but not with you. I am not first person to get such a rating. If you don't believe that a person can get such a TT rating, I have nothing further to say. Thank you.
Sorry but now I'm done with this thread. No one judges me by my rating, it's the one thing I don't take. So ya, go fuck yourself.
eastyz wrote:
Ziryab, with a TT rating of 1763 you have a lot to say. Aquarius, likewise with a TT rating of 1350, you have a lot to say. If I had to write up the system up here, it would take too much time. I would rather write a book if I had that sort of time. Anyway, I did not post here to brag about my system but rather to inquire about how others approached positional play if you look back at the original post. I was hoping to get some ideas for such a system for positional play if possible. The TT rating speaks for itself I would have thought but not with you. I am not first person to get such a rating. If you don't believe that a person can get such a TT rating, I have nothing further to say. Thank you.
Sorry but now I'm done with this thread. No one judges me by my rating, it's the one thing I don't take. So ya, go fuck yourself.
A little evidence for after you clean up your post and go into denial mode...
Ziryab, I worked 7 days around the clock (12 hours, I run my own business). I did my TT at very late into the night but only with the occasional drink. Perhaps we make a team.
baddogno wrote:
IAmAquarius wrote:
eastyz wrote:
Ziryab, with a TT rating of 1763 you have a lot to say. Aquarius, likewise with a TT rating of 1350, you have a lot to say. If I had to write up the system up here, it would take too much time. I would rather write a book if I had that sort of time. Anyway, I did not post here to brag about my system but rather to inquire about how others approached positional play if you look back at the original post. I was hoping to get some ideas for such a system for positional play if possible. The TT rating speaks for itself I would have thought but not with you. I am not first person to get such a rating. If you don't believe that a person can get such a TT rating, I have nothing further to say. Thank you.
Sorry but now I'm done with this thread. No one judges me by my rating, it's the one thing I don't take. (deleted by moderator)
A little evidence for after you clean up your post and go into denial mode...
I stand by it (deleted by moderator)
Aquarius, nobody is judging you but they are judging what you say just as you have been doing the same.
who is the sinner ?
easytzy,
Please ignore the negative comments - your authority on tactics is quite clear from your TT score and I was finding the conversation quite interesting.
I'm guessing that your system is highly complex, almost organic in the sense that you have layered it over years, hence the reason you can't just give us a two paragraph answer.
Thanks Robbie. You are right. I am trying to simplify it to make it more accessible. What I am finding is that while it seems more simple, it is getting simpler in some ways but in other ways perhaps not. What is also happening is that the development of the system has resulted in me getting better at using the system. It is hard work learning the system but worth it. I was always considered to be talented in tactics but doing tactics "intuitively" leads to many oversights. I don't claim that the system is foolproof. But it does mean that you miss a lot less. And what you find is that your intuition gets better too. It challenges the way you look at a position to remove preconceptions which lead to mental blocks. Computers have no such prejudices and that enables them to find surprise moves like any other move. How often did the solution involve a surprise move which, once you look at it again, was not so surprising? I am not saying my system is the best. But it works for me.
Typng in ipad: there has been a lot of research into thinking processes recently, and in my professional area (medicine, diagnostic thinking) I'm fascinated by the expert thinking process - pattern recognition and heuristic shortcuts - that require brute experience over thousands of hours to aquire - and the application of structured processes to detect heuristic errors and deal with cases where heuristics come up empty. The strctures are also essential to develop healthy heuristics.
Your system wouldn't happen to involve - ducking into tt, taking a screenshot, closing tt, solving the tactic with an engine, then going back into tt and entering the solution, would it?
regicidal, I won't even care to respond to you. RobbieCoull has a better idea. I had a soviet coach once and all he did was give me exercises to do which was a disappointment. Ever since I have been thinking about developing a system.
Your system wouldn't happen to involve - ducking into tt, taking a screenshot, closing tt, solving the tactic with an engine, then going back into tt and entering the solution, would it?
011 something. I am not the only person to get that rating. A certain grandmaster who is a member of this website told me that a person who had a playing rating of 1400 got to my TT rating well before me. But you keep doing what you are doing because you are obviously of the view that there is no hope for you to ever improve, no matter who teaches you or whatever you learn. All good.
I'm one for whom this subject is entirely beyond discussion. Better to simply ignore my posts.
In any case, the nature of this absurdity distinctly divides people between those who understand and those who believe you. So there is very little need for you to make any sort of persuasive effort either way.
011, as someone who believes in the scientific method, I believe in keeping an open mind and remembering that what we know now is not 'right' or 'truth' but, as Prof Brian Cox says, "just the least wrong ideas so far".
As a programmer I understand that logical systematic thinking brings amazing efficiency.
As an educationalist, I understand that the way we learn can bring big changes in the way we think.
Sure, one explanation is that easytyz got his TT score from cheating and then likes to talk big on here. However, this is far from being proven, in deed I would say his comments suggest he has insight into process, and someone has to be the best, so why not him?
Ziryab, with a TT rating of 1763 you have a lot to say. Aquarius, likewise with a TT rating of 1350, you have a lot to say. If I had to write up the system up here, it would take too much time. I would rather write a book if I had that sort of time. Anyway, I did not post here to brag about my system but rather to inquire about how others approached positional play if you look back at the original post. I was hoping to get some ideas for such a system for positional play if possible. The TT rating speaks for itself I would have thought but not with you. I am not first person to get such a rating. If you don't believe that a person can get such a TT rating, I have nothing further to say. Thank you.