I did an experiment: puzzles for 4 hours a day for 4 weeks.

It ended yesterday and I gained 83 points on this site. I lost a few points on Lichess. I tend to play more on there. I didn't do it woodpecker styleel per se, but wondered how hammering puzzles would work out. 
I don't think it's going to be an ongoing thing. 
Anyone done the woodpecker thing? Or other puzzle marathons? I started it but gave up, it was a few years ago.

You didn't do them here. I thought it would be interesting to look at what had happened to your puzzles rating.

How did it go

I started doing the woodpecker method on another site. My first cycle wax 1000 tactics over 6 weeks. I just started the second cycle of 3 weeks. Always heard about it but never did it until my coach suggested it.

No, I did them all on chessable.

I bought that book a couple of years ago and only got part way through it. I then bought the Chessable version and only got part way through it. I have ADHD, so sticking with things is a challenge. I think I'll start it again. I'm guessing that you have to do the puzzles in the same number of hours per day with each successive cycle.

I gained 83 rating points here. It was a good challenge. I've taken early retirement and live alone so the time commitment wasn't an issue. I wouldn't want it to do it over a longer period. Although, these days I only do puzzles for 25 minutes at a time and do other activities too, like playing guitar and art. So on some days I may hit the 4 hours in a different way.

It did. I like that idea of sticking with things for 30 days. To get a real idea of how effective it is. Sticking with things is tough for me.

I use chesspeckerdotcom. Its not a matter how "hours per day". Chess study is about quality of study, not quantity of study.

Isn't the idea to do the puzzles in half the time of the prvious cycle? If you're doing the puzzles in the second cycle in two weeks but spend twice the time each day, I'm not sure that is right, because you get to the point where there aren't enough hours in the day.

What course did you use? I'm a big fan of chessable.

Hi, i used Keep it Simple 1.E4, 1001 Engame Excercises, !00 Endgames You Must Know, Preventing Blunders in Chess(Dr Can), Fundamental Chess Calculation Skills(Dr Can0, The Value of Pawns etc (Dr Can), Keep it simple for Black, Alex Banzea Caro Kann course.

Thanks! I'm working through Introduction to Chess Calculation by Azel Chua, really liking his approach. (Basically he says the CCT is bad once he get past a certain level.) I've already purchased the followup course Calculation: A Complete Guide for Tournament Players for when I finish and am comfortable with the first course materials. I highly recommend the first course with the video, it integrates really well with Move Trainer. I was tempted by Fundamental Chess Calculation but I like Chua's beginner/tournament player approach, that it scales.

I'm currently doing about an hour of chessable learning a day and about an hour of lesson review a day. I'm not seeing a huge increase in my ELO because part of my trainings is learning a new opening, so I'm stumbling a lot there.

I like Azul Chua's work. I have all of his courses. I never finished the workbook or the punishing opening mistakes. Must get around to that. The trick, I guess, is being able to see all of this in a game. For openings I play Scotch Game and the Caro. I remember well, that uncomfortable feeling when I get out of book and the mess I can make by getting the move order incorrect.

That is the trick, isn't it? For the Calculation course I've made up a 1 page PDF that shows me the Chua thought process. I really try to solve all my puzzles while referring to that. The intent is for this to become automatic. Right now it isn't.

Oh, another good one is Typical Tactical Tricks: 500 Ways To Win! The first two chapters are super easy, so just pause them. Then if you are a Pro subscriber, put it on Random, so you won't know , for example, if it is a knight for or a checkmate exercise.

My only concern with the Azul stuff is that everyone else in chess states that forcing moves are best. He makes a good argument and the examples he gives are great, but I do wonder about real world application. I like CLAMP from Dr Can, Checks, Loose pieces, Alignment, Mobility and Pawns. I'm sure there will be a Youtube video about it. His YT content is brilliant. It's remembering to go through the list in the heat of battle. I just missed a mate in one and lost the game as a consequence. If I'd gone through the list, I'd have seen it. Too interested in the bishop that was in danger. It's all part of the challenge though. When I lose, it is very often from a winning position. Frustrating. Being able to convert. 
How are you finding it with puzzles in general?

Chua wants you to "find the targets" and the Kings are targets. Since they are very important targets you analyze them first. (He actually doesn't come right out and says this, but it is implied.)

I'm not doing too many puzzles right now, except for his, and the 500 class I mentioned in my next post. In his, I already "know" the answer so I'm concentrating on getting the right reasoning. The 500 class has very mixed difficult examples, and that's good. Since I can't possible have memorized them, when I get a harder one, I just my Chua PDF and go down the list. Kings safety, Unprotected pieces, Trapped, Forks, Pins etc...

So far it seems useful but I'm using a cheat sheet. It will be interesting to see how I do without the cheat sheet.

I remember it by CIUXMTP. Count, immediate threats, undefended pieces, X ray attacks, mate threats, trappable pieces, pinned, pinnable, forkable, skewerable pieces. It's just remembering to use it ;o)