Intensive vs extensive study

What do you think is a proper balance between extensive and intensive study of chess games?

Intensive study means to select a game and make a thorough study of each detail and intricacy.

Extensive study would be for example to select a set of games, and go swiftly through each of
them in order to understand the typical plans of a given structure.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140627023809/http://www.chesscafe.com/text/heisman50.pdf

tomayto tomahto

That's not what it means, but I can understand why you wrongly think they are the same.

60-40

I heard somewhere that Jan Gustaffson goes through approximately 2000 games in a day.

Lol, it's a good day if I go through 2 games.

Jeremy Silman claims that he went through hundreds of games in a few hours day after day when he was young (in an age before computers and databases). He claims his books are short cuts to the pattern recognition that developed as a consequence.




I think his books are useful, albeit slightly overrated. These claims are part of my skepticism.

I went through all of Rezo Charousek's available games, five minutes each, a few years ago. One hour per day for about a month. It was useful. I then played the Ponziani in my next OTB tournament because a game that Charousek had lost inspired me. I had a worse position against a weaker player in the first ten moves in both games, but managed to win both. Then, I stopped playing the Ponziani, except in blitz.

I often will go through several dozen games very fast when exploring a particular move in an opening.

It's like reading a textbook in any non-technical field. Facile scholarship.

I hope this graph helps.

There are a variety of attitudes towards reading an opening book. In one of his books about an opening, GM Nigel Davies wrote (2005), "The way I suggest you study this book is to play through the main games once, relatively quickly, and then start playing the variation in actual games. Playing an opening in real games is of vital importance - without this kind of live practice it is impossible to get a 'feel' for the kind of game it leads to. There is time enough later for involvement with the details, after playing your games it is good to look up the line."

On the other hand, Hugh Patterson wrote (2015), "Because there are so many variations presented in these books [on various openings], many players try to skim through them. Don't do it. Play through every single example no matter how long it takes."

http://chessimprover.com/how-to-read-a-chess-book/

Sometimes, to percieve a writer's attitude, one can do a little reading between the lines. In 2014, GM David Smerdon wrote, "I recently took a train from Amsterdam to the quaint little Belgium town of Bruges. Looking for a book to keep me occupied for the four hour ride, I remembered ... Richard Pert’s Playing the Trompowsky ... And indeed, I was able to read the whole book, cover to cover, during the ride; ... It’s only 260 pages ... I decided to reread the book on the four hour return journey to Amsterdam. ..." That is about 1.08 pages per minute.

http://www.chess.com/article/view/review-playing-the-trompowsky

(In case anyone is wondering, the movie, In Bruges, was about six years earlier.)

I find post mortems of one's own games useful. eg I recently resigned too early when having rook against queen with pawns on both sides. I spent some time looking at Keres Practical Endgames on the subject. I will also try and make sur my openings are up to scratch based on game review. So OTB play win or lose is an ongoing diagnostic and a means of improvement !

I agree with Zirab.  Silman's books are overrated.  I use both methods of study, the second survey method to learn various ideas in chess, and the first to go deeper into why those ideas work or don't in some positions.  I am not sure of the correct balance.  I am of the belief that any study is good, as Rowson said that chess is not just conscious study.  Then again, I do not think any study is limited to the concious mind only.

yes, but I think it's important to try to optimize your time