Forums

How I'm working towards improving as fast as possible this month

Mpirani

Feel free to suggest ideas, but this is what I've been doing so far:

- 15|10 games, including analyzing every game after I play it

- Puzzles, but also been doing easier unrated puzzles just to get quicker at spotting tactics rather than doing just rated puzzles where the tactics become harder and harder to spot

- Studying e4 openings (Currently really invested into fried liver opening theory and also Guico Piano since its very common to get that when players don't play Nf6)

- Trying to learn how to attack more efficiently in the middle game (this one is especially tricky for me but I feel like the more games I play the more natural this will become)

How do you guys like to study. If at all?

RecklessAccord

Don't bother, you won't improve

Mpirani
RecklessAccord wrote:

Don't bother, you won't improve

Nope not improving at all...


LoukasLusha

Your puzzles are looking great for your rating! I like the puzzles you're emphasizing. One thing I strongly recommend: When solving puzzles, solve the entire puzzle before moving a single piece! This helps tremendously. It will improve your vision much, much quicker than solving them move by move. And I recommend that you keep doing the rated puzzles, as it can be a good metric of checking progress happy.png

 

FloofyGatito

Looking great! I like the 15|10 games but eventually blitz will be a fun thing (not great for learning) but to peak your interest in chess and to show you that intuition is the best way to play.

Mpirani
LoukasLusha wrote:

Your puzzles are looking great for your rating! I like the puzzles you're emphasizing. One thing I strongly recommend: When solving puzzles, solve the entire puzzle before moving a single piece! This helps tremendously. It will improve your vision much, much quicker than solving them move by move. And I recommend that you keep doing the rated puzzles, as it can be a good metric of checking progress

 

Yes I've realized that as well, forgot to mention that. I feel like that's important because if I don't see the entire solution I'm not going to go for it in a game most likely.

Mpirani
FloofyGatito wrote:

Looking great! I like the 15|10 games but eventually blitz will be a fun thing (not great for learning) but to peak your interest in chess and to show you that intuition is the best way to play.

I do feel like I might get a bit into blitz just to work more on openings to be honest but for now I'm sticking to analyzing and sometimes bot games to work on opening knowledge. I'm building a pretty good e4 repertoire at the moment. I learned how to play the fried liver attack super solidly (I managed to get a +2.09 position against the GothamChess bot using the fried liver attack) and am currently working on playing against the Sicilian and so on. I haven't worked much on openings with black, although I do love when my opponents play the fried liver and they realize they don't know enough theory 

Chuck639
FloofyGatito wrote:

Looking great! I like the 15|10 games but eventually blitz will be a fun thing (not great for learning) but to peak your interest in chess and to show you that intuition is the best way to play.

I would refrain from playing blitz and bullet if you are solely focused on improving.

I regret playing a lot of speed chess because I am still stripping away poor habits for rapid and classical chess. Plus, if you’re goal is to play OTB down the road, don’t be lured into speed chess.

 

Mpirani
Chuck639 wrote:
FloofyGatito wrote:

Looking great! I like the 15|10 games but eventually blitz will be a fun thing (not great for learning) but to peak your interest in chess and to show you that intuition is the best way to play.

I would refrain from playing blitz and bullet if you are solely focused on improving.

I regret playing a lot of speed chess because I am still stripping away poor habits for rapid and classical chess. Plus, if you’re goal is to play OTB down the road, don’t be lured into speed chess.

 

Makes sense to me.

AunTheKnight
Nice job! 1000 by next week?
AunTheKnight
I only play bullet and blitz for opening practise. I rarely ever flag. I’d rather play well and run out of time instead of dirty flag.
Chuck639
AunTheKnight wrote:
I only play bullet and blitz for opening practise. I rarely ever flag. I’d rather play well and run out of time instead of dirty flag.

I understand that as well from experience. It’s great that you are disciplined but speed chess is not within a proven formula on improving the fastest. We don’t have to reinvent the wheel. Rapid play is the way to start. 

I can even add to look for a chess coach. Especially if you are serious.

The other thing, speed chess is a totally different game from rapid or classical chess. If you want to improve accuracy and quality of play, or be able to play out a middle and end game; you get that experience thru rapid. You don’t have to worry about losing on the clock where there are a segment of players who will “dirty flag” even in a draw position. If sportsmanship and class matters to you, then stick to rapid. You do have to accept that flagging is an avenue to winning in speed chess. 

With regards to the opening, it’s not going to decide who wins or loses at the 800-1300 bracket. So save speed chess for later.

While we are on openings, advanced players have different openings for speed and classical time controls. Generally more dubious ones for speed chess. Why add more to your work load on something that is not critical at the present time and delay your success?

Now I will say, speed chess can be a lot of fun and addicting but, in your first goal is improving in chess; then it’s a no brainer and stick to rapid and continue what you are doing. The numbers speak for themselves. OP has been linearly improving with an acceptable winning percentage.

Until you are stagnant, reassess and reach out to a coach.

 

 

 

AunTheKnight
Yes. Rapid is my favorite TC
tygxc

#1

"- 15|10 games, including analyzing every game after I play it" 15|10 is good, but you progress faster if you analyse lost games only. Instead of analysing a win, play another game.

"- Puzzles, but also been doing easier unrated puzzles just to get quicker at spotting tactics rather than doing just rated puzzles where the tactics become harder and harder to spot" puzzles are good, but rated harder puzzles are better than easy unrated puzzles. Tactics in a real game are not easy, it is the harder tactics that lose or win games.

"- Studying e4 openings (Currently really invested into fried liver opening theory and also Guico Piano" This is a waste of time. You progress faster if you do not study openings.

"- Trying to learn how to attack more efficiently in the middle game (this one is especially tricky for me but I feel like the more games I play the more natural this will become)" Yes play and analyse lost games. Also study annotated grandmaster games. Learn to attack from games by Kasparov, Fischer, Spassky, Tal, Bronstein, Nezhmetdinov...

Mpirani
tygxc wrote:

#1

"- 15|10 games, including analyzing every game after I play it" 15|10 is good, but you progress faster if you analyse lost games only. Instead of analysing a win, play another game.

"- Puzzles, but also been doing easier unrated puzzles just to get quicker at spotting tactics rather than doing just rated puzzles where the tactics become harder and harder to spot" puzzles are good, but rated harder puzzles are better than easy unrated puzzles. Tactics in a real game are not easy, it is the harder tactics that lose or win games.

"- Studying e4 openings (Currently really invested into fried liver opening theory and also Guico Piano" This is a waste of time. You progress faster if you do not study openings.

"- Trying to learn how to attack more efficiently in the middle game (this one is especially tricky for me but I feel like the more games I play the more natural this will become)" Yes play and analyse lost games. Also study annotated grandmaster games. Learn to attack from games by Kasparov, Fischer, Spassky, Tal, Bronstein, Nezhmetdinov...

I agree with these points, except why do you believe studying openings is a waste of time? I feel like memorizing might be a waste of time, but even then, knowing opening traps and counter-intuitive situations feels like a better foundation than just focusing on the middlegame. I totally agree with analyzing lost games instead of won games, except sometimes I make blunders in won games that my opponent may not catch and punish me for. Just for that, I like going through missed tactics or mistakes positionally to get a better grasp on these. For example, I missed a tactic that would win me 2 points of material in a recent game, which I caught while analyzing. This helps in future games for me playing against the Scandinavian defense.

tygxc

#15
"why do you believe studying openings is a waste of time?"
1) That which you study will not happen and when it finally happens you will have forgotten
2) Openings help to beat weak players, which you should beat anyway, but do not help against strong players, where you need most help. The stronger player will either deviate, or know more about it from experience.
3) Openings are largely fashion and opinion. What was true yesterday is false today. What is true today will be false tomorrow. Middle game tactics and endgames can be taught exactly: you know it is true.
4) Thinking in the opening helps you reach a state of concentration.
5) The most you can get out of an opening is an advantage of 1 pawn. That is useless if you lose middlegame tactics or if you cannot convert the 1 pawn advantage in the endgame.
6) Opening study is high effort, low reward. The time spent on openings is better spent on tactics and endgames in terms of half points gained per hour of study.
7) Proof: play the good side of a bad opening against a strong engine and watch how the engine destroys you with middlegame tactics despite the bad opening imposed on it.

"knowing opening traps"
You do not have to know opening traps: if you play soundly you do not fall for them and by thinking you can avoid falling into these as well. If you need knowledge to avoid opening traps, then how will you avoid middlegame traps?

"except sometimes I make blunders in won games that my opponent may not catch and punish  me for"
Yes, but the joy of the win will eclipse the mistake and make you forget it, while the pain of a loss helps you remember your mistake. Focus on losses also counteracts the natural tendency to drool over your own maginificent wins and to quickly turn away from a loss, dismissing it with some lame excuse like just a stupid blunder, not slept well, stupid opening...

50kg

"including analyzing every game after I play it"

What do you mean by that?

Mpirani
50kg wrote:

"including analyzing every game after I play it"

What do you mean by that?

The game report function. I go over my inaccuracies and blunders from my games to hopefully understand the positions better

50kg
Mpirani wrote:
50kg wrote:

"including analyzing every game after I play it"

What do you mean by that?

The game report function. I go over my inaccuracies and blunders from my games to hopefully understand the positions better

It's hard to do it in some(rather closed) positions without experience. And without logic behind moves we (human) are powerless.