Criticism of Chess.com University Prodigy Program

Before I begin, I would like to express my distaste for the way PawnPusher3 handled KJGenius's response.  It was a general response, that in my opinion, didn't really address the truth of the matter.  I'm not going to get into it as seeing how you yourself are not going to man up and explain your accusation that Kairov did an ad hominem attack on you, when in actuality he didn't, as the evidence is sufficient to suggest that you have ulterior motives for writing this thread, as indeed you are a chess coach yourself.  The fact that you no longer have time to coach is immaterial, and no one here knew that, especially from looking at your obviously outdated profile, according to what you say here at least...

 

I get a bit antsy when people say someone is commiting an ad hominem when there is no actual argument being made.  The argument may have been interpreted into Kairav's words as a logical conclusion by the reader, but until you show us that being a chess coach yourself in no way gives you an ulterior motive to talk trash about a program you obviously know nothing about, your claim that Kairav is ad hominem attacking you holds no water, as clearly, from looking at your profile, you do indeed have a motive to talk trash about a program that is stealing your customers.  Again your credentials are immaterial as none of us knew that.  Now that we know, at least we think it may be true, as you might just be lying to save face, we can adjust our thoughts about your motives for writing this thread accordingly, though this very act of trash talking a program you know nothing about still begs the question nonetheless, "Why are you trash talking a program you know nothing about?"  As far as I am concerned Kairav gave a sastifactory answer to your bogus claims.  You can either hide behind your filth or take on the argument like a man and own up to your trash talk.  Apparently all you know how to do is run your mouth.  Prove me wrong.  Write an actual rebuttal to Kairav's response.  Fact of the matter is you can't.  Because you know nothing.  So now the real question is why are you running your mouth in the first place?  Kairav gave his theory, but you say otherwise.  So I am asking you, Why are you even bothering to write crap in a forum you already have a low opinion of when you obviously has a lot of stuff going on in your life already?  There must be a reason....  

 

The Prodigy program is broken into different sections.  Every Year a new section is added.  When I started there was a 900 section, a 1200 section, and a 1500 section.  Now, there is a 1750 section.  I am currently in the 1200 section.  I started late last year and now I am playing catch up.

 

In the 1200 section the instructors cover what I believe to be a solid opening repertoire for both colors.  The choice of the opening repertoire is based on the insight of masters.  Rather than chosing openings that either take more skill or a lot more memorization rather than using chess opening principles, the masters to chose our repertoire hand picked the openings that are basic and easy to understand, as well as allow us to use the opening principles we are learning, and do not require a whole lot of memorization.  In addition to that, the live instruction also includes tactics sessions where an instructor shows the students a problem, and we think about it for awhile, then we give our answers.  The master leading the lesson will go over all the variations posted and explain why the wrong answers are wrong, and how to correct the thought process that lead you to the false conclusion.  There are also general lessons as well.  End Game study, counter attacking, you name it.  i personally enjoyed Kairav's endgame lesson last year, as he gave us valuable insights, as well as simple little end game rules to know for king and pawn endgame, that are easy to remember, that you can apply to any king and pawn end game situation, it is just up to you to figure out which rule to use.  The homework that Kairav mentions in his response actually goes along side with the live lessons that went on that week.  With the live lessons and the homework combined with the games you ought to be playing on the side, along with your own analysis of those games, you should improve steadily as time goes by.  

 

The Prodigy program is not a cookie cutter program.  It's like stepping stones in a pond.  You start out in the beginning of the pond, the 900 section is the first stone.  When you use the opening repertoire and the techniques learned in that section you move on, and keep going until you are at the end.  In the end, it is up to you, I believe, to develop your own repertoire.  The repertoire that we use, I believe, is only for instructional purposes, to get better at chess.  I personally do not like the Sicilian, but I play it, because I feel there is something to be learned by me playing it, as that is the opening I was instructed to use.  Though I am told to use a paticular opening, I still have my own style of play.  They do not tell us how to play, save for, always look for checks captures and threats!  that is a given.  I've improved a lot with the Prodigy program, especially over the board, as I am better OTB with medium time controls.  I can say that I actually beat a formor master in chess, though I did have a big time advantage, but I was good enough to win multiple games!  

 

In addition to the live lessons and homework there is a simul every month and you get to submit two games for analyse every month, and if your gutsy like me you can bother Kairav with game questions to!   

 

I currently play chess for fun.  Right now I do not exactly know if I am going to go back to my day job or not.  If I go back to my day job I won't have much time for chess, but I'll still play it, because after being in the prodigy program I started to understand more and more about chess.  My actual game hasn't improved a whole lot, probably only 200 points, however, my insight in the game increased a whole lot I think, and it happened after I became a member of the prodigy program.  My insight helps me know what to do to improve, as I know how much time I need to spend on tactics trainer now, and how much time I need to play games and analyse them, and more importantly, because of the prodigy program, I do a whole lot better in the opening.  Though the openings I use are basic now, I know in the future they will just get more complex, as I get further along in the prodigy program.  I am just at the second stone...

Your evil! You gambiter!! Keek!

I'm only responding to this because I feel that it is almost necessary for me to say I haven't coached any one in two years (for pay) - I only taught to students (4 and 5 years old respectively) at my school that were the faculty in residence's kids. I need not defend myself against Kairav either, as he has chosen to block me and as such I can't directly discuss anything with him. He does not want to work with me/talk to me as he knows I have a valid point and he himself doesn't have the credentials to be charging the obscene amounts he charges for coaching either. 

 

That being said, I will go ahead and say that I agree with a member from earlier on in the thread - I shouldn't have titled this criticism of the chess.com university prodigy program, but rather an alternative to it. 1 on 1 coaching provides a specific style of teaching that is catered to a student when done properly, while this program, although it has made adjustments (monthly analyses of games for students) cannot fully cater to specific student needs. It can only cater to the most likely student needs. They have strong players, which means that they are likely decent to good teachers. If Kairav would like to message me AND unblock me so I can respond, I'd happily reply to him, but I don't have the time nor would like this argument with a staff member to continue as I am in the midst of cancer research and don't particularly care what the outcome is. 

 

 

Was high 1300's  2 years ago, took lessons with GM's and IM's at $90/hr and $50/hr, and watched all the aww-rats videos, some limited success.  Didn't beat first OTB 2000+ till I got into PP.  Heck not even an 1800 (at best drew 1900 on a close flag).   (You can look me up if you want - msg me if you cant figure it out) 

 

The material is fantastic, and the price is completely reasonable, especially if you figure an IM charges $50/hr   or even at aww-rat's $25 rate -  that's still only 6 hours.    

 

12 hours with GM's and IM's - asking whatever questions I want.  and that's not worth $150 ?  Sorry, but you are mistaken.  

 

To the point of  "Hey! Look at me! I want a Menu!  You must give me a Menu!"    - No you are wrong, you are just wrong.  (And  seriously - drop the French Defense - if not for anything than your health) 

 

To the point of - "You can't get specialized service"  -  You get enough.  You can ask questions all day if you wanted  (Just as TasmainianTiger!   - just kidding buddy!)   Instructors like Yermo + Nazi  will literally walk through every single sideline we want to see.  Plus -  seriously, you don't think you need what you really need anyways sub 2000.    If it was that easy I'd say - hey go study endgames and pawn structure!  

 

Speaking of Pawn Structures - How about having the friggin AUTHORS of pawn structure books come lecture - and you get to ask him anything about his book?  Yeah.  It's like that. 

 

Just sounds like a bunch of butt-hurt coaches losing business because somebody found a better proposition.   *hint*  one on one coaches aren't magical either, but having a team of the world's best is .. well ..   better than some guy telling you you goofed on a move (and hearing the chessbase whistle go off) 

 

 

 

I'll try to criticize constructively. I actually enrolled into one month of the prodigy program. It's been over a year now since I dropped out of the prodigy program, so I can confidently give some reasons why the program isn't as good as its hyped up to be by the founders. There isn't a clear system of foundational theory that they teach. When I was there they hired a variety of stronger players to analayze moves in games. That's not teaching. As a matter of fact, the fact that they hire so many different teachers only makes things more chaotic for the student. Each teacher analyzing has a different style of thinking. As of right now, the university prodigy program is severely over priced. I actually attempted get a refund and never got it. Again, the program fails to teach any consistent foundational principles because every teacher has a different method. It's chaos. I'm not saying you won't learn a thing or two but it's severely overpriced and not worth it. There are other online chess schools who deliver on their promises in giving you a system of play/thinking. The prodigy program isnt even backed by someone who has mastered the game. My $150 mistake for not looking into the guy before I joined.

Your comment reminded me of a music student's comment I heard once: He said he once asked Joe Pass (a phenomenal, extremely fast, famous jazz guitarist) about taking guitar lessons from him, and Joe Pass said he gives lessons for $50/hour, but added "I don't know if I could teach you anything, though." That's sort of the key concept: For beginning and intermediate levels, hiring any top notch teacher is overkill. In fact, the more skilled the teacher, the more likely they've forgotten what it's like to be at the bottom, and therefore likely can no longer relate to where you're at. The best teachers might be people only 1-2 levels beyond the students they're teaching since they still remember the problems they recently had, and how they overcame those problems.

For top levels, by the time you get there, you're already gotten so good with whatever approach and thinking style you've been using that you no longer need lessons. People approaching the top level can probably already write an entire book about their knowledge and approach, and they're close enough to the top levels that they can get there without (much) additional help. The top level people probably know a few tricks that lower level people do not (I'm starting to think that high level chess isn't much more than a collection of tricks + the usual background skills (tactical ability + positional knowledge + memorized opening/ending knowledge), but mostly they are at the top because they've highly refined whatever techniques they've been using that worked for them.

----------

(p. 15)

Building a personal theory

 

   To become a strong player, you will find it very help-

ful to start to compile your own personalized theory.

Begin to compile positions that mean the most to you. The

320 positions in this book provide you with a foundation

to build, revise, and expand your own "personal theory" of

(p. 16)

the game. As you continue your chess growth, add to your

archives those positions that communicate essential ideas

in ways that are especially meaningful to you. And relo-

cate or delete positions that become redundant or no

longer useful. Let them evaporate! Keep in mind that iso-

lating what's truly important is the biggest part of the battle!

 

   In compiling your personal theory, you will find that

you can profitably reorganize the material by themes. For

this purpose you can photocopy the pages of this book for

your own exclusive use. Or you can buy an extra copy and

cut out the diagrams for this reorganization. Since the

same position may embody several themes--decoy, queen

sacrifice, back-rank mate, or others--you may even find

it useful to copy a position as many times as it takes to file

it under all the themes it contains. One of Alburt's students

who jogs several miles a day carries a few torn-out pages

from second copies of earlier volumes of the Comprehen-

sive Chess Course so he can continue his studies, literally

on the run.

 

   Archiving your own games will confirm that you are

moving to the highest level of learning. What we call

(p. 17)

"knowledge" is sometimes really just the first rung on the

ladder of learning. As chess players, we first learn to iden-

tify--to name--a back-rank mate, then to recognize when

others use this idea effectively. Next we learn to identify

situations that hold potential for such a mate, to find these

mates in problems, and then, finally, to create (or prevent)

back-rank mating threats in our own games. This last step

is the highest level of learning, and the one we seek. for

without it, we're forever restricted to the ranks of the "ap-

preciator"; with it, we join the ranks of the creators.

 

   As you archive your important positions, include brief

annotations containing the concrete lines of play that

would have resulted in a more desirable conclusion. Also

include notes on how to avoid any mental lapses that may

have led to the errors.

 

   Among the key positions that represent the knowledge

necessary to becoming a strong tournament player, some

positions do need to be memorized--for example, Phili-

dor's rook and pawn versus rook endgame. But the exact

positions that best convey broader conceptual ideas may

differ from player to player. The example that's most rel-

evant to you will be the easiest for you to remember.

That's why compiling your personal theory is so impor-

tant. For instance, different examples can be used to

demonstrate the theme of back-rank mate. Lev's favorite

(p. 18)

example is Bernstein--Capablanca, below. But you may

find another position more meaningful to you--perhaps

from one of your own games.

Alburt, Lev, and Al Lawrence. 2008. Chess Training Pocket Book II: How to spot tactics and how far ahead to calculate. New York, New York: Chess Information and Research Center.

LOL. So true. The educational system, at least in the USA, is unbelievably bad nowadays.

The Reason Education Sucks [Caution: very explicit language!]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILQepXUhJ98

An interesting sidelight of that music conversation I mentioned is that the same student then followed with a comment that if you can get lessons from a top notch jazz guitarist for only $50/hour, then maybe jazz wasn't the field to get into if you want to make money! In comparison, imagine trying to take guitar lessons from a top notch rock star! That comment makes you think.

This program is more about trying to dazzle you with big name coaches than anything else.  As if Anand has been taking time out of his busy schedule preparing for the world's top tournaments to work on training material for 1200s.

I love this Joe Pass song.

LOL, a lot of people not knowing what they are writing about regarding the the University program. The program is excellent, its pricing is reasonable and Kairav is doing a great job of running it.

I beg you pardon, but that's personal opinion, not a fact, 150 USD a month is a lot of money.

You know, I don't have a clue whether the Chess.com University Program is any good or not.  

 

However, it's not a good sign when the OP's first sentence on the matter is objectively wrong and the rest is a bunch of cliches, exaggerations, and outright nonsense.

 

No, chess is not one of the most complex games out there.  While I love and adore chess beyond all others, and will do so until my dying day, games like contract bridge, Preference, and Go are far more complex due to a far greater number of necessary calculations and possible variations.  

 

And saying that every player learns differently, while technically true, is a poor approach to this topic.  A good training program will benefit ANY player.  

 

Lastly, it is outright idiocy to blame Josh Waitzkin, a prodigy who made IM, a far higher level than most prodigies ever accomplish (and I say this being a top 15 scholastic player in the US for my age growing up), not being more successful on the late, legendary Mark Dvoretsky.  

 

A coach who, in addition to producing one of the greatest players and title contenders of the late 80s to mid 1990s, Artur Yusupov, only worked with Waitzkin for an extremely short period of time in his youth.  That would be like blaming an NBA prospect who didn't pan out on something his junior high coach said to him 10 years ago.  

 

So yeah, the OP convinced me more of his arrogant ignorance far more than he did any failings of the Chess.com program.  

 

Also, while I agree $150 USD a month is a lot of money for many people and many countries, one must realize that in the United States, it's a reasonable price for any type of coaching. 

"...chess is not one of the most complex games out there." So a there are some more complex. That does not mean the writer was wrong.

 

The critical words are "one of" . For me there is no doubt that Chess, whilst not the most complex is up there as one of them. I'll not get in to a debate as the the alternatives you propose. I know which I find the most complex out of Chess, Bridge and GO. But that is not the point. The point is that your comment "... first sentence on the matter is objectively wrong" is pure opinion and nothing more.

I took one month over the summer and was very impressed. I plan on taking again in January. I learned a lot from the instructors and saw my Chess.com rating improve. I am in my forties and realize that the odds of becoming a master are very slim if not nil. Unfortunately, I started way too late in life to have that as a realistic goal. Will it make anyone a chess master? Probably not. For one thing, you have to have the time and the will power to put the work into it. Chess.com cannot do that for you.

 

Will it bring improvement? For most people, I believe so. Bottom line: Is it worth the $150? Absolutely! People have this tendency to criticize something because they can't afford it. That isn't right and comes from an entitlement mentality. I know that it stinks when we can't have everything that we want, but such is life. Instead of griping, set it as a goal. I can't afford but a month here and there, but I am grateful for what I can do. You can take one month in the program and everything they give you will take you months to digest anyway.

 

That is just my two cents.

As others said, the results depends on how much you work you put in the process.

But paying $150 is to much for me, even if I can afford it. I think there are much cheaper lessons available, and with good results IF you do the work.

One advantage with the high price tag could be you will do the required work, because you don't want to waste the money. If you get something free, you don't value it so much. Because most thinks something expensive must be valuable.

Not a university but SOME BULGARS STEALING YOUR MONEY.

^^^^^

As far as I know universities dont charge you the whole year in one run... They charge you monthly...

 

In the US, it's charged for the semester. So you pay for a set of courses for that period. You can't go and take an hour class with a professor and to test it out. 

 

My understanding for the Chess.com University is that your are paying for the classes and supporting material for that month. If someone is unsure if it is a good value, they can read reviews by former students.

 

They had a free/trial option a while back, maybe a year ago, but it wasn't handled well in my opinion. Can't speak to the actual product or changes made since then. 

Well, now that I think about it we also pay semesters here LOL.

However in a university you can talk with the directors, and as far as I know a lot of universities do give trials and give you a tour across their instalations. At least that is what they did to sell me stupid and expensive highschools when I was in middle school.

 

Even if formal universities dont give trials that is not a reason for the chess.com prodigy program to be marketed in such a POOR AND DISGUSTING WAY.

Is it too hard for chess.com to invest a lil bit in giving a livestream lesson available to everyone in which they  can see how the classes work?
Everyone on chess.com thinks Im a retard and even I can do a better marketing job than chess.JOKE.