How Much Time Do You Put Into Chess

Hey There,

     The subject of improvement came up in a post so I thought I'd ask a question of everyone: How much time do you put into chess. Here's my answer:

     To make a living playing guitar, you have to put a lot of time into it, especially when you first start. I simply applied this concept to learning chess and use essentially the same training program (just swapping out scales, etc for training sofftware). I have the time to do this and the desire to improve. I put about four hours a day, on average, into chess. I play games against people, use training software and read chess books. What about everyone else. I really want some thoughts from you highly rated players so I can pick up some extra thoughts about training etc. I also want to hear from people that are novice players like myself because you may hold information that could help us all.

i spend way too long on chess. period.

I think if you study chess, try really hard in games to become better, or the best that you can be -then your putting time into chess. Like you do Hugh T Patterson.

However, if you come on this site (or what ever you do) and just batter out games and what not, your not really putting anything into chess.

I've spent a lot of time on tactics trainer. Now this may seem like study - or putting some time towards chess, but this is not the case. I play through the problems, try to understand them to a degree, but there is definitly a cut off point regarding effort. Because of this, again I feel that I'm not actually investing myself into chess.

Do you know what I mean?

So, I'd say I invest close to nothing, but play alot :)

Thats the great thing about chess Maradonna! You can get a lot out of the game by simple things such as the tactics trainer (not that the problems are simple)! Thanks for the input!

I spend one to two and a half hours of chess a day. I need the practice!

If you can read this join The Checkmate Club

Well... for me i spend about 2 to 3 hrs a day (during vacation or holidays) on my most obvious weaknesess in chess ( end game). I also study the game i lost. And for my won games, I re-play the game but i take the side of my opponent so that I could see what my position looks like from his point of view and understand why my opponent blundered or why he chose his moves. I'm not sure if tactics works for me because, I have long been a "DOUBTER" on this. Soltis' book made a big impression on me "Attack and Defense" and the ones were I've seen both Korchnoi, Larsen and Botvinnik rebuffed Tal's play in their matches. This book opened my eyes on the "anti-climax" (ex. opponent sacrifices, i take it and soon returns it back, then simplify by exchanges or head for a simplified endgame) the sort of rejecting a brilliant game win or lose. I just don't find searching deep for tactical combinations were I would be speculating, appealing to me when I can go for a simplified won game (just my oponion). It's that kind of thing that urges one to ask "What if?'.

I'm not sure if my ratings here trully reflects my playing strength (it may be too high or lower you can check my profile or you can play thorugh my games). But when i spend time in studying chess I rarely made use of computers (although i know they are helpful). I beleive that when someone tries his best to study his game objectively and sincerity, sooner or later it will help him/her when playing over the board. For me the first step in learning is to first to know oneselfs weakness and strengths.  What opening suits your playing style or openings that tends to lead you to middle games that you prefer (closed, semi-open, open) or openings that gives you the jitters and cold feet in tournaments.

During my studies i also keep books at hand. A few months ago I was reading Eric Schillers book about how he became a master and Mickey Adam's father about his son's quest for the GM title.These books are inspirational.

Another great commentary baltic. Thanks!

approximately three hours a day.

Hugh, if you spend 4 hours/day playing chess, why is it that you can't beat anyone with over a 1200 Rating? 4 hours/day for at least a month doing software and playing annotated games should make you better than a flat out beginner =/

I beat someone with a rating (as of yesterday of around 1300). My best win was an opponent with a 1466 rating, both within the last month. I also nearly died of cancer last year, the side effects of which forced me to rebuild my memory skills. I'd say I'm doing ok.

Maybe the pretty face is just curious. And i agree with you on working on endgames.

2 hrs per day sometimes less or more. I try to play better players to learn and improve. I play the lower rated people to encourage and better there games

Every relationship in life you will learn or teach something, it is no different inthis realm!

What I've always found strange is the lack of chat about a game. I've played just over 200 games here and not really talked about the games with my opponents.

So, maybe it's because people don't want to bring it up. I'd say that it is probably best for the loser to bring up the discussion, because if you win and offer advice it may seem a wee bit rude.

However, when I get beat, I've not wanted to hassle folk for their opintions. It's a strange one. There's probably a group here that does encourage post game analysis between players - I'll go have a look.

I think that playing a game, knowing that afterwards you'll be talking about it, would sharpen the focus. It's like when I was at school the teacher used to say they'd test you after telling you something. 

Ach, I don't know - thinking out loud.

*edit* I searched the groups using keywords like analysis, post game, and never really got anything. Apart from a group devoted to middlegame analysis. There's so many groups -can't see the wood for the trees.

That is an excellent point Maradonna!

Hugh, I like to study with one question in mind...."How?". It started for me with "How do I win a chess game?" - The answer I found was that you must attack the opposing king with more force than he has defending him. Ok, easy enough. Next up, "How do I achieve a majority in force?" This led me to start studying endgames and tactical motifs. It seems terribly simple, and I know everyone is going to raz me for what an 'idiot' I seem to be, but it is the truth. I just keep this 'How' in my heart whenever I study chess. If you want to chat some more about chess improvement, just send me a message.

About 1 hour/weekday, plus a few games on weekends. One thing to be careful about is burning out. Too much chess, follow by frequent breaks from the game results in less progress than consistent chess study in smaller doses.

I am a newbie. The time I put into chess varies from week to week, but right now I would say about 5 hours per week, counting playing games. I put alot of time into studying tactics this summer, but once college started in the fall I had less time to spend. However, I try to play games and apply some of the ideas I've learned.

Maradonna- Chess is a visual game. Even if you aren't applying yourself, just playing games for fun or using the tactics trainer, you are unconsciously memorizing patterns. And by the sheer volume of posititions you've looked at, you learn. At least that is the way it has worked for me.

None of nobodies buisness!

I think it is important to live and breathe chess as something you DO rather than something you study. Because you do it so much you'll find yourself thinking about it in serious ways and this will amount to study but the important thing is the doing, not the study.

Too long and yet not long enough. I spend far too much of my free time on chess, my wife tells me so. However, if I want to improve I need to spend even more time on it! I think I should just stop and take up a less demanding hobby but I am addicted.