how to progess past 1200

Sort:
llamonade

Your links are good, but IMO it's information overload to a new player.

If someone has already read some books, maybe they're 1600 or have been playing a few years etc, and you give them 20 links they'd probably appreciate it.

kindaspongey
llamonade wrote:

Your links are good, but IMO it's information overload to a new player.

If someone has already read some books, maybe they're 1600 or have been playing a few years etc, and you give them 20 links they'd probably appreciate it.

Don’t know what thread you are talking about, but it doesn’t seem to be this one. Again, here, I am largely providing information about the suggestions of others.

llamonade
kindaspongey wrote:

Don’t know what thread you are talking about, but it doesn’t seem to be this one.

Oh it wasn't this topic?

Well, whatever thread it was, you know the one, where you had roughly 50% of the posts, and over 50% of the content all by yourself, which included over 60 links, even though the question was something simple. wink.png

kindaspongey
llamonade wrote:
kindaspongey wrote:

Don’t know what thread you are talking about, but it doesn’t seem to be this one.

Oh it wasn't this topic?

Well, whatever thread it was, you know the one, where you had roughly 50% of the posts, and over 50% of the content all by yourself, which included over 60 links, even though the question was something simple. wink.png

Again, here, I am largely providing information about the suggestions of others. If you ignore that, there is not much for me to do, but remind you.

llamonade

7 of the first 13 posts are yours.

If they're in reply to the suggestions of others, then we have to ignore the first two posts.

So according to you, you wrote 7 posts and gave 26 links in reply to just 4 posts.

This is the very definition of information overload... and this only the first page of this topic.

kindaspongey
spencerg2017 wrote:
... Jeremy Silman’s book “Reassess your chess” ... a similar book on endgames ...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

kindaspongey
SchaakVoorAlles wrote:
  • ... Essential Chess Endings ...
  • Mammoth Book of the World's Greatest Chess Games ...
  • Learn Chess Tactics (by John Nunn) ...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

llamonade

Yes, those are 2 of the 4 I mentioned.

Good for you, you know how the quote button works.

kindaspongey
llamonade wrote:

7 of the first 13 posts are yours.

If they're in reply to the suggestions of others, then we have to ignore the first two posts.

So according to you, you wrote 7 posts and gave 26 links in reply to just 4 posts. ...

What I actually wrote: “... here, I am largely providing information about the suggestions of others.” Note the word, “largely”. Also note that I was not referring to only my first seven posts. The first 7 included my own reaction to the original, along with reactions to five book suggestions from others.

llamonade

Me:  You're giving too much information

You:  But it's mostly information on other's suggestions

Me:  You gave a hell of a lot of that on the first page

You:  But also my own reactions!

---

Ok, but now you're undermining your own defense. Remember my original assertion was that you gave too much information.

kindaspongey
llamonade wrote:

Me:  You're giving too much information

You:  But it's mostly information on other's suggestions

Me:  You gave a hell of a lot of that on the first page

You:  But also my own suggestions!

---

Ok, but now you're undermining your own defense. Remember my original assertion was that you gave too much information.

You have to make up your mind about what you are attacking. If you are attacking my behavior in the first fifty posts, then it is quite accurate that I was largely providing information about the suggestions of others. If you are talking about my first seven posts, it is quite accurate to say that they included my reaction to the original.

kindaspongey
llamonade wrote (~6 hours ago):

... In the 50 posts that came before it, ...

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

llamonade

One doesn't undermine the other. I used the first page to highlight your uncommon amount of activity. I think any reasonable person would agree with that description.

llamonade

Anyway, this discussion isn't interesting or productive.

I hope you keep giving links to people in the future happy.png

hikarunaku

Hopefully not. 🙂

llamonade

His info is fine, I just think sometimes it's too much.

kindaspongey
llamonade wrote:

... I used the first page to highlight your uncommon amount of activity. I think any reasonable person would agree with that description.

Five of those posts were information on the suggestions of others - something I largely continued subsequently. I think that was a reasonable activity.

hikarunaku

I feel if someone asks a specific question you should give a specific answer. 

If people wish to purchase a book or anything they search for reviews by themselves or maybe if they want a review on the forum, they will ask it specifically. 

kindaspongey
hikarunaku wrote:

... If people wish to purchase a book or anything they search for reviews by themselves ...

I think it is reasonable to provide help without waiting for a request. A lot of suggestions are being made and I am not the only one reacting to them.

IMKeto
llamonade wrote:

Anyway, this discussion isn't interesting or productive.

I hope you keep giving links to people in the future

"Anyway, this discussion isn't interesting or productive."

By cracky, you just summed up the forums.