I'm a long way from good, but I was interested in your perception of tactical problems as incredibly boring. I've been known to nod off to a tactics book myself. The onsite Tactics Trainer with its' merciless timed countdown and rejection of all lines but the shortest and deadliest? Not so much nodding off there. Lots of obscenities screamed at the monitor...yes. I know, I didn't really answer either question, but at least I didn't hijack your thread. For what it's worth I think tactics and the pattern recognition that goes along with it are the quickest way to get better. Can't tell you how to get good.
How did you get better?
Sort:
I got better by playing a lot and being critical of my mistakes. A lot of asking, why not this move, or why that move when looking at a game with a computer. After a ton of sidelines I'd often forget what even happened in the real game heh.
I also did some of the dirty work, but at my own pace so it was fun... which was reading a few books and solving tactics puzzles.
For about 6 months once I tried to follow a strict study regimen. I guess it worked in that I got the work done I wanted, but I should have played more, and something I regret was not using that time to go to a lot of tournaments.
I wasn't up for it, but if you go to, lets say at least 10 (more than a few anyway) tournaments a year, and are always reading a book, you'll improve pretty quickly. Or more simply put, it's just like anything else: work over time = getting better.
So if you skim a book it wont be as good as going through all the pages and taking notes or even reading the book again a year later. If you analyse with a computer for 15 minutes to find your major blunders you wont get as much out of it as sitting at a desk with no computer and analysing a game an hour or two a night for a week (again taking notes). Then a year or so later, take a look at your game again. 
So getting to where I am in 10 years (I didn't improve every year) could be done in 1 or 2 probably by someone who, lets say had a coach, worked hard, and went to tournaments often.
Finding a stronger player to talk with about games and/or play against is very helpful. Going to tournaments and reading books is very helpful.
Good luck with your chess!
May 7, 2012
0
#4
i think studying a bit and playing OTB seriously helped me to get better. it's amazing how much more mistakes hurt in a six hour game as opposed to one that lasts a half hour.
Heh, yeah, make a mistake in blitz, and you'll forget it in 3 minutes. Make a mistake in a 6 hours game, and you'll remember it forever 
May 7, 2012
0
#6
I don't think I've ever played a live game which lasted more than three hours.
Sep 19, 2012
0
#8
Back when I was a student, I improved my chess by playing long games and quick games OTB, and by analyzing with stronger players.
I don't understand how anyone can find tactical problems boring. I probably like it even more than playing actual chess
Vivinski wrote:
I don't understand how anyone can find tactical problems boring. I probably like it even more than playing actual chess
Im currently on trial diamond here, and I have to say tactics on chess com are fun. I dont know what it is, but the ones on chesstempo are boring, very boring.
mitharris wrote:
Two questions.
The first, how did you... for lack of a better phrase, get good? How did you achieve the rating you are at now? Did you follow a strict study regime? If so, do you mind sharing it with me? And if not, could you suggest a study-plan for a Class D to improve?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you want to be a strong player with a rating of uscf 2200+ within 3 yrs. you will have to do the following:
1. Build into your mind the following 5 memory banks:
A. Basic checkmate visualization pattern memory bank
B. tactics visualization pattern memory
C. Endgame technique visualization pattern memory bank
D. Opening repertoire visualization pattern memory bank
E. middle game visualization pattern memory banks
In the process of building the above into your mind you will also have to play 60-72 uscf rated over the board tournament games per year. And finally you will have to begin to change how you think about chess now. This can be done by learning to apply 3 concepts into your game. Those 3 concepts are: siege warfare, 2 chess opening theories, and pawn structure.
The next, is there a way around tactic problems? Can I use another method to improve my tactical skill, or is that the only way? I find tactical problems incredibly boring.
Thanks in advance.
Sep 19, 2012
0
#12
You will never get good if you find tactics boring. Tactics is to chess as "showtime" is to NBA basketball. That's where the applause and excitement is!
Jan 7, 2013
0
#13
1) by playing long games and analyzing with stronger players
2) if you're young enough (U25), playing a lot of blitz/quick games can be a substitue for tactical training ; if you're older, don't despair, as there are ways to make tactics training funnier 
Jan 7, 2013
0
#14
I tried everything to improve and it took years to break from about 1800 strength to 2200. I looked back at my career and figured out what worked best, and what didn't, and put it all on video so others may duplicate my success. My 11 lessons video course is on my website, linked in my profile, and is free on YouTube.
Two questions.
The first, how did you... for lack of a better phrase, get good? How did you achieve the rating you are at now? Did you follow a strict study regime? If so, do you mind sharing it with me? And if not, could you suggest a study-plan for a Class D to improve?
The next, is there a way around tactic problems? Can I use another method to improve my tactical skill, or is that the only way? I find tactical problems incredibly boring.
Thanks in advance.