x
Chess - Play & Learn

Chess.com

FREE - In Google Play

FREE - in Win Phone Store

VIEW

I can't improve and get stronger.

  • #41

    This is reason why Logical Chess Move by Move by Chernev is the best chess book for  beginners and intermediate; here is the review by IM John Watson  

     

     Lastly, we look at two reprints of classic instructional books, both converted into algebraic notation from their original descriptive-notation editions. Batsford's new edition of Logical Chess: Move by Move, written in 1957 by Irving Chernev, is a collection of 33 games with a famous player on at least one side of the board. Chernev's idea was to 'explain' every move of every game, mostly with a paragraph or more of prose, and sometimes (but not often) with supporting analysis. Since he has to justify every move, the book is replete with advice, principles, axioms, and tips to guide one's play. These are at the most elementary level, and the first thing to realize about Logical Chess is that it is definitely for beginners and players who are just starting to learn about development, weak squares, the centre, standard attacking ideas, and the like. In many ways, it would a wonderful 'first' book (or first 'serious' book, after the ones which teach the rules and elementary mates, for example), and a nice gift for a young player just taking up chess. For one thing, the games are clearcut and instructive. In one of the Dvoretsky books, a point is made about classical games being more instructive than modern ones, not because they are better, but because the ideas are so simple and because players allowed their opponents clear, one-sided advantages. This is very true of Chernev's games, which are almost all examples of miserable defence by the loser, or of utter lack of understanding (by modern standards). But precisely for that reason, they contain powerful thematic lessons for the beginning player. My only warning would be that the impressionable student should be gently reminded by a friend or mentor that most of the rules and principles Chernev so dogmatically states do not actually have any consistent validity in real-world chess, so that the book should be looked at as a way to get started thinking about positions, not as a reliable guideline to what chess is really about. With that proviso, I would recommend it heartily to anyone just starting to explore the game, and therefore, to scholastic chess teachers as well.

  • #42

    To get better, you should get a coach to help figure out what best course of action is given your strengths and weaknesses.

    I am a National Master with 10+ Years of Teaching Experience, available for private and group lessons. To learn more about my chess services and general chess news, see www.premierchess.com or www.facebook.com/premierchess.

     

    Email me at erabin66@gmail.com or call (917)776-1306 today to set up a free 30 minute consultation or ask any questions.

  • #43

    @torrubirubi -

    I enjoyed your post #39.  Particularly your detailed information about Chessable.  I have visited the site, and although I am not a member it appears impressive in terms of its instructional and training resources.  The post should prove very informative to many chess.com members, notwithstanding the objections of the naysayer, purveyors of negativity. 

    Speaking of which...

    You are correct about DeirdreSkye, who is apparently knowledgeable about chess, but is clueless about how to engage respectfully and courteously with humans - indicative of a personality disorder coupled with immaturity.  Better to ignore and not waste energy on people like this, who need to elevate their self image by diminishing others...

  • #44

    all of my pupils improved approximately 200 rating points in a few months (4-9 months).

    for detailed information visit https://improveinchess.wordpress.com/training/private-lessons/

  • #45
    RussBell wrote:

    @torrubirubi -

    I enjoyed your post #39.  Particularly your detailed information about Chessable.  I have visited the site, and although I am not a member it appears impressive in terms of its instructional and training resources.  The post should prove very informative to many chess.com members, notwithstanding the objections of the naysayer, purveyors of negativity. 

    Speaking of which...

    You are correct about DeirdreSkye, who is apparently knowledgeable about chess, but is clueless about how to engage respectfully and courteously with humans - indicative of a personality disorder coupled with immaturity.  Better to ignore and not waste energy on people like this, who need to elevate their self image by diminishing others...

       They are so many that mislead or try to mislead people in these forums that it is a personality disorder indeed not to.

    If I  had to choose between being a polite hypocrit like you and personality disorder I would choose the second all the time.

     

  • #46
    DeirdreSkye wrote:
    RussBell wrote:

    @torrubirubi -

    I enjoyed your post #39.  Particularly your detailed information about Chessable.  I have visited the site, and although I am not a member it appears impressive in terms of its instructional and training resources.  The post should prove very informative to many chess.com members, notwithstanding the objections of the naysayer, purveyors of negativity. 

    Speaking of which...

    You are correct about DeirdreSkye, who is apparently knowledgeable about chess, but is clueless about how to engage respectfully and courteously with humans - indicative of a personality disorder coupled with immaturity.  Better to ignore and not waste energy on people like this, who need to elevate their self image by diminishing others...

       They are so many that mislead or try to mislead people in these forums that it is a personality disorder indeed not to.

    If I  had to choose between being a polite hypocrit like you and personality disorder I would choose the second all the time.

     

    How about  being  polite, respectful? Not an option for you? It can't be that you  go through  life insulting  everybody who is some point  under  your  rating. Or can be that you are so courageous because  you can hide in the internet-anonimity? Because in the country I come  originally you  have to know exactly what you are doing when calling people polite hypocrite.

    Perhaps  something  very  bad happened with you once, perhaps  you would be a great guy if growing in a better  environment, who knows. I just feel sorry  for you.

  • #47
    torrubirubi wrote:
    DeirdreSkye wrote:
    RussBell wrote:

    @torrubirubi -

    I enjoyed your post #39.  Particularly your detailed information about Chessable.  I have visited the site, and although I am not a member it appears impressive in terms of its instructional and training resources.  The post should prove very informative to many chess.com members, notwithstanding the objections of the naysayer, purveyors of negativity. 

    Speaking of which...

    You are correct about DeirdreSkye, who is apparently knowledgeable about chess, but is clueless about how to engage respectfully and courteously with humans - indicative of a personality disorder coupled with immaturity.  Better to ignore and not waste energy on people like this, who need to elevate their self image by diminishing others...

       They are so many that mislead or try to mislead people in these forums that it is a personality disorder indeed not to.

    If I  had to choose between being a polite hypocrit like you and personality disorder I would choose the second all the time.

     

    How about  being  polite, respectful? Not an option for you? It can't be that you  go through  life insulting  everybody who is some point  under  your  rating. Or can be that you are so courageous because  you can hide in the internet-anonimity? Because in the country I come  originally you  have to know exactly what you are doing when calling people polite hypocrite.

    Perhaps  something  very  bad happened with you once, perhaps  you would be a great guy if growing in a better  environment, who knows. I just feel sorry  for you.

         And you are a hypocrit too.You didn't mention anything about RussBell calling that I have personality disorder but it annoyed you that I said that he is a hypocrit.So it's not politeness your problem.You accept rude and it doesn't bother you when it comes from those that agree with you.Disagreeing with you is your real problem(the definition of hypocritic politeness)

       Honestly I couldn't care less.I want to discuss the essential parts of your message.  

    Dear torrubirubi when did I ever said anthing about your rating?The problem with your rating is yours and you think everybody else has it too.

        I disagreed, and expressed that in the clearest way possible way, with your effort to provide guidance that is actually misleading and I would do the same no matter which your rating was.I would disagree with Bartholomew himself if he was here.

        I don't really need to see the rating to understand who understands  chess and who doesn't.It is obvious that you don't and you shouldn't try to give advices just like I don't try to give advices in driving or cooking(I might kill someone , lol).

        Your problem and what you call "rude" is that I said that Chessable is for the lazy.I'm sorry but I am not going to apologise for something I firmly believe and I am not going to be hypocritically polite and mislead people just to be likeable by you and the bully Boss RussBell.

        Those seriously interested to improve must know that chess needs a lot of personal work and almost military discipline.Those who try to do it another way are either lazy or  unable to study seriously for various reasons(I am among them since I have neither the time or the concentration to study chess, that is why I am a chessable member) and they will eventually pay the cost(like me who knows I will never improve).

        Polite or rude ,like it or not , that's the truth.

    You are right about one thing though.Something very bad happened to me.I learned chess.If it ever happens to you (quite doubtful) you will realise how right I am.

     

    p.s. "quite doubtful" was rude ,  but since I have declared rude anyway why not enjoy it?

     

  • #48

    Looking for online drama will get you one thing...online drama.

  • #49
    DeirdreSkye wrote:
    torrubirubi wrote:
    DeirdreSkye wrote:
    RussBell wrote:

    @torrubirubi -

    I enjoyed your post #39.  Particularly your detailed information about Chessable.  I have visited the site, and although I am not a member it appears impressive in terms of its instructional and training resources.  The post should prove very informative to many chess.com members, notwithstanding the objections of the naysayer, purveyors of negativity. 

    Speaking of which...

    You are correct about DeirdreSkye, who is apparently knowledgeable about chess, but is clueless about how to engage respectfully and courteously with humans - indicative of a personality disorder coupled with immaturity.  Better to ignore and not waste energy on people like this, who need to elevate their self image by diminishing others...

       They are so many that mislead or try to mislead people in these forums that it is a personality disorder indeed not to.

    If I  had to choose between being a polite hypocrit like you and personality disorder I would choose the second all the time.

     

    How about  being  polite, respectful? Not an option for you? It can't be that you  go through  life insulting  everybody who is some point  under  your  rating. Or can be that you are so courageous because  you can hide in the internet-anonimity? Because in the country I come  originally you  have to know exactly what you are doing when calling people polite hypocrite.

    Perhaps  something  very  bad happened with you once, perhaps  you would be a great guy if growing in a better  environment, who knows. I just feel sorry  for you.

         And you are a hypocrit too.You didn't mention anything about RussBell calling that I have personality disorder but it annoyed you that I said that he is a hypocrit.So it's not politeness your problem.You accept rude and it doesn't bother you when it comes from those that agree with you.Disagreeing with you is your real problem(the definition of hypocritic politeness)

       Honestly I couldn't care less.I want to discuss the essential parts of your message.  

    Dear torrubirubi when did I ever said anthing about your rating?The problem with your rating is yours and you think everybody else has it too.

        I disagreed, and expressed that in the clearest way possible way, with your effort to provide guidance that is actually misleading and I would do the same no matter which your rating was.I would disagree with Bartholomew himself if he was here.

        I don't really need to see the rating to understand who understands  chess and who doesn't.It is obvious that you don't and you shouldn't try to give advices just like I don't try to give advices in driving or cooking(I might kill someone , lol).

        Your problem and what you call "rude" is that I said that Chessable is for the lazy.I'm sorry but I am not going to apologise for something I firmly believe and I am not going to be hypocritically polite and mislead people just to be likeable by you and the bully Boss RussBell.

        Those seriously interested to improve must know that chess needs a lot of personal work and almost military discipline.Those who try to do it another way are either lazy or  unable to study seriously for various reasons(I am among them since I have neither the time or the concentration to study chess, that is why I am a chessable member) and they will eventually pay the cost(like me who knows I will never improve).

        Polite or rude ,like it or not , that's the truth.

    You are right about one thing though.Something very bad happened to me.I learned chess.If it ever happens to you (quite doubtful) you will realise how right I am.

     

    p.s. "quite doubtful" was rude ,  but since I have declared rude anyway why not enjoy it?

     

    You can have your opinion; it's only how about to say. You call 30 thousand people learning in Chessable as "laizy", although I have the impression that for a guy who knows exactly how to improve in chess and so "hard working" you are prety weak. I prefer to say on the side of the polide and laizy people instead of the guys who stand up in the morning to tell everybody how hard working they are and how laizy other people are. As I said, I am really just feel sorry for you. I

  • #50
    DeirdreSkye wrote:

    ... I said that Chessable is for the lazy.I'm sorry but I am not going to apologise for something I firmly believe and ...

        Those seriously interested to improve must know that chess needs a lot of personal work and almost military discipline.Those who try to do it another way are either lazy or  unable to study seriously for various reasons(I am among them since I have neither the time or the concentration to study chess, that is why I am a chessable member) and they will eventually pay the cost(like me who knows I will never improve). ...

    You are right about one thing though.Something very bad happened to me.I learned chess. ...

    As a chessable member yourself, do you consider yourself to be lazy? As for other chessable users, is it possible that they simply do not have what you refer to as serious interest to improve?

  • #51
    kindaspongey wrote:
    DeirdreSkye wrote:

    ... I said that Chessable is for the lazy.I'm sorry but I am not going to apologise for something I firmly believe and ...

        Those seriously interested to improve must know that chess needs a lot of personal work and almost military discipline.Those who try to do it another way are either lazy or  unable to study seriously for various reasons(I am among them since I have neither the time or the concentration to study chess, that is why I am a chessable member) and they will eventually pay the cost(like me who knows I will never improve). ...

    You are right about one thing though.Something very bad happened to me.I learned chess. ...

    As a chessable member yourself, do you consider yourself to be lazy? As for other chessable users, is it possible that they simply do not have what you refer to as serious interest to improve?

       Of course I am lazy and completely given up any hope or possibility of improvement(I haven't used my real board for more than a decade).

        I don't mind that Chessable has users ,I wish them 1.000.000 users soon , tomorrow if possible , I actually couldn't care less.I suggested Chessable in a couple friends after I was absolutely sure that these guys will never have the patience to take a book and study on a real board.It is actually an extremely clever idea that covers the needs of a quite large target group that seeks to improve from youtube videos(and Chessable is much better from the vast majority of youtube videos).It will make Bartholomew rich , I have no doubt about it and I don't mind at all.

        What I do mind though is ignorants trying to  misguide people in thinking that Chessable is the best way to improve.It's not , not even close.

  • #52
    torrubirubi wrote:
    DeirdreSkye wrote:
     

    As I said, I am really just feel sorry for you. I

         Thank you man for feeling sad for me.It is nice to know that there are such nice guys in this shitty world.

    Your kindness fills me with hope for tomorrow.

  • #53
    DeirdreSkye wrote:
    kindaspongey wrote:
    DeirdreSkye wrote:

    ... I said that Chessable is for the lazy.I'm sorry but I am not going to apologise for something I firmly believe and ...

        Those seriously interested to improve must know that chess needs a lot of personal work and almost military discipline.Those who try to do it another way are either lazy or  unable to study seriously for various reasons(I am among them since I have neither the time or the concentration to study chess, that is why I am a chessable member) and they will eventually pay the cost(like me who knows I will never improve). ...

    You are right about one thing though.Something very bad happened to me.I learned chess. ...

    As a chessable member yourself, do you consider yourself to be lazy? As for other chessable users, is it possible that they simply do not have what you refer to as serious interest to improve?

       Of course I am lazy and completely given up any hope or possibility of improvement(I haven't used my real board for more than a decade).

        I don't mind that Chessable has users ,I wish them 1.000.000 users soon , tomorrow if possible , I actually couldn't care less.I suggested Chessable in a couple friends after I was absolutely sure that these guys will never have the patience to take a book and study on a real board.It is actually an extremely clever idea that covers the needs of a quite large target group that seeks to improve from youtube videos(and Chessable is much better from the vast majority of youtube videos).It will make Bartholomew rich , I have no doubt about it and I don't mind at all.

        What I do mind though is ignorants trying to  misguide people in thinking that Chessable is the best way to improve.It's not , not even close.

    Why  do you  think  Chessabler do not use a board to train? I have paper copies from some of the books I am using there and spend quite a lot of time to understand moves,  moves,  orders,  to go through  whole games.  30.000 people there,  and all are lazy,  right? All training  the same way,  all them never saw a physical chess board  in their whole life,  all them in the ocean but drowning. And you expect  everyone  will  take you  seriously 🙄

  • #54

    This chessable thing is pretty awesome...Lol I just favorited this page too. I do actually like the list of links from kindaspongey. 

    This other guy isn't worth responding to. Most likely an engine user anyway...He sounds like the Debbie Downer store associate I dealt with at Home Depot on Sunday, angry I was there 10 minutes before they closed because of a plumbing emergency. 

  • #55
    DeirdreSkye wrote:
    kindaspongey wrote:
    DeirdreSkye wrote:

    ... I said that Chessable is for the lazy.I'm sorry but I am not going to apologise for something I firmly believe and ...

        Those seriously interested to improve must know that chess needs a lot of personal work and almost military discipline.Those who try to do it another way are either lazy or  unable to study seriously for various reasons(I am among them since I have neither the time or the concentration to study chess, that is why I am a chessable member) and they will eventually pay the cost(like me who knows I will never improve). ...

    You are right about one thing though.Something very bad happened to me.I learned chess. ...

    As a chessable member yourself, do you consider yourself to be lazy? As for other chessable users, is it possible that they simply do not have what you refer to as serious interest to improve?

       Of course I am lazy and completely given up any hope or possibility of improvement(I haven't used my real board for more than a decade).

        I don't mind that Chessable has users ... It is actually an extremely clever idea that covers the needs of a quite large target group that seeks to improve from youtube videos ... What I do mind though is ignorants trying to  misguide people in thinking that Chessable is the best way to improve.It's not , not even close.

    Do you have in mind a specific example of someone claiming "that Chessable is the best way to improve"? Is "lazy" an appropriate assessment for someone who does not choose the best way for serious improvement (with the "almost military discipline" and everything)?

  • #56

    @kindaspongey -

    Keep posting your content as you have been.  At least you are trying to add positive value to the forums, which is more than can be said about the immature forum bullies and purveyors of negativity such as DeirdreSkye...

  • #57

    Thank you for your kind words. I am not exactly a big fan of DeirdreSkye, but I do think it is of some value to see a representation of the best-way-to-seriously-improve point of view. I just wish we would not see things like the "lazy" assessment for people who make a different choice.

Top

Online Now