My Training Program, Suggestions welcome.

LEBisho

Great point....i also could plateau for months then make  a significant  advancement as knowledge eventually turns into practical skill. i think the reality will be more of a squiggly line slowly rising upwards.

Your definitely right about the improvement curve. there is a lot to think about!

Your program is far more than I ever did.
In fact, it looks like far too much drudgery work and it leaves out the most important training technique, which is this:
USE A PHYSICAL CHESS SET WITH REAL PIECES (preferably wooden) TO PLAY OVER HUNDREDS OF COMPLETE MASTER GAMES FROM BOOKS AND MAGAZINES.

This will burn the coordinate squares into your brain so that you can speak our chess language.

It also gives you openings, middlegames, endgames, tactics, and checkmates.

Play over lots of master level games at a rapid pace without dwelling on lots of sub-variations, and make sure you get a lot of old games 1850-1950, since they're much more clear and understandable than modern struggles between 2800 titans.

This is my old school approach.

1800 is easy.

Your goal is definitely achievable and realistic. We can say that with confidence because many, many people have started from where you are, and have got to where you want to be.  Whether you will achieve it no-one can say. The only way to find out is to try, and to give it your best effort.

 

But I think it is wrong to make too detailed a plan of how to get there. My view is that if you are at level n you can only plan what you need to do to get to level n+1.  You have to wait to get to level n+1 before you'll know what is needed to get to level n+2.

 

You certainly cannot set realistic target dates for any but the next step along the way.  It will only lead to disappointment when you find (as you will, unless you are the next Magnus Carlsen) that improving at chess is more difficult than is thought by relative beginners.  The best approach is to keep the long term wishes fairly vague and to concentrate on making the next step.  That way is not at all discouraging. 

 

 

p.s. @urk +2  (Well ... mostly agreement.  Except that plastic pieces are okay, and 1800 is not easy for everyone)

 

Happy new Year!

I have had a good scout around and the only book I have found which I feel would be appropriate to my level is this book.

 

 

Can anyone critique this book or have any other suggestions before I purchase it?

Anything by Silman is likely to be good.  But my impression is that you'll gain more from tactics than positional exercises at least until you hit 1500, and maybe beyond.  Positional matters will certainly become vital if you want to push beyond 1800, but it won't really help you to have a better pawn structure if you drop a knight to a simple 2-move tactic.

 Hmm. Now i am getting conflicting advice and i just don't know what to do!

someone else said that that positional exercises are more important  than tactical exercises, which is the polar opposite to what you just said!

 

I'M Confused!

 

Yeah, @vlcosmin's comment surprised me too.  Everything I've ever heard talks about tactics as the single easiest way to improve at this level, and NM @keisyzrk said that tactics alone would take you to 1800.

You will certainly gain from positional exercises, but at your current level, the quickest and easiest improvement will be from tactics.  Again, having a superior pawn structure is good, but if you hang a knight, you're still likely to lose.  Tactics will help you to not hang your pieces and to see when your opponent has done so, and people drop pieces all the time at your level.

 I think on your level you should learn first how to "see" the whole board. A way to train that is to use the training tools at chessgym.net which ask you to identify all protected/attacked pieces. Once you can do that easily and automatically, start studying tactical motifs and solve puzzles sorted by motif.

Tactics training is required for progress and will yield more short-term results. However, positional knowledge helps to develop in the long term and will give you a sense of the "big picture".

It's true you can reach intermediate level "on tactics alone", but then you're very likely to hit a wall and need to rethink all your chess thought process to go further. You'll also need to develop a very aggressive style to get there "on tactics alone", which may not suit everybody. Both schools of thought exist anyway, but every class B player has some positional knowledge, even if it doesn't come from book study.

I think it's good to try and gather some positional pointers along your tactics study, if only because you will reinforce these basics through playing and will then be able to develop your overall play in a more harmonious way. You don't need to overdo it, and you can skip chapters/ideas that don't make sense for you.

One difficulty with studying positional play is that it's not easy to find a good book aimed at beginners. I don't know any myself, but maybe the one you found is adequate.

The other difficulty is that adult beginners tend to put positional considerations in front of tactical ones, because they are more conceptual in nature, and our adult minds are more comfortable with them in a new field of knowledge. But tactics should take precedence when reading the board. As Tartakower very rightly put it "Tactics is knowing what to do when there is something to do. Strategy is knowing what to do when there is nothing to do"

9 out of 10 (at least) players and coaches will tell you tactic tactics tactics.

When you solve tactic puzzles, you're learning more than tactical patterns. You're practicing calculation and visualization, finding candidate moves, trying to falsify your candidate move, finding undefended pieces, looking at the whole board and probably other basic skills along these lines. These basic skills serve as a foundation for everything else. If you don't notice when an undefended piece is attacked (or when you can capture undefended pieces) then literally nothing else matters yet.

---

Having said that, soon after this, improvement is always about the complete package. There's no one thing to study to be _____ rating. If you analyze with the master who "only did tactics" you'll find they know plenty about strategy, endgames, openings, etc.

 I think you will improve a lot

A tip from someone who has overwhelmed himself with schedules like this in the past, it's better to maintain motivation by doing a little every day than it is to work really hard for a week or two, burn out, and then stop for a week or two.

Also, I wouldn't recommend trying to learn everything at once. I'd pick a focus like openings, endgames or whatever, and just do that for a while. My personal preference is to give a month a topic. It could be broad like tactics, or specific like rook endgames from Capablanca games.

Picking something interesting (instead of trying to follow a schedule I made a long time ago), and switching the focus, helps me stay motivated.

But maybe what motivates you is a detailed list made years in advance, in which case you can just ignore this post heh.

 

Telestu –

                  Thanks for your suggestions. Motivation is not going to be issue I hope. I have spent 20+ years as a pro Musician entirely focused on a single goal, so I know I have the self-discipline to see it through. Also, studying 3-4 hours a day is something I am used to and completely comfortable with.

I have always been a planner, I never been comfortable at leaving things to chance. I have always found having a wide variety of study material keeps boredom at bay. I Plan to study each topic/chapter long enough for it to sink in. That could be 1hr or a week!

I have tried to have three distinctive sections to my training,

1. Playing and analysing.
2. Studying new material and concepts
3. Practicing and drilling learnt material

 

Obviously club matches and tournaments will run along side 

If you're good at sustaining a demanding study program over time, I recommend you have a look at this blog for an example of someone being successful with this approach :

http://p-r4.blogspot.fr/

 That looks really interesting, thanks.

Elo not chess.com

I've got that Chess Training for Post-Beginners book. It's actually got some fairly difficult material. Definitely a lot more advanced than the title would indicate (in my opinion)

I am following my own training method and I think it works. You can read about it in my blog. I agree in many things you said but disagree in others, such as opening theory or annotated games (though I think this last thing can open your mind and help you understand some things).

I wouldn't advise a monthly plan for improving your rating, as you will hit multiple walls as you improve.  A yearly plan, or planning when you want to reach 1400, 1600, etc.  is probably good.  I would also suggest looking for stronger players who might be willing to give you advise - you can probably find a club in your area with some folks that would be glad to help you out.  A common theme among players that got really good is that they spent time with other strong players.

I've personally always been in disagreement with the notion that you should start by mastering tactics - you can't win a game with good positional play if you drop pieces left and right, but you also cannot set up good tactics if you don't know how to set up a good position in preparation.  I would suggest that you focus in the beginning on heading off your opponent's tactics and on getting your own pieces in good positions.  This kind of solid play style, once perfected, will ensure that you simply don't blunder much, so you'll be able to climb up by taking advantage of your opponent's mistakes.  Once your opponents stop blundering and you find you aren't winning much anymore, that is the time to start focusing on how to strike out with tactics and how to create positional advantages.

For endgames, I'd highly recommend Silman's endgame book - it breaks things down into what you should know when, so you don't end up studying complex endgames that won't come up in your games because everyone keeps dropping pieces.  I would also suggest Silman's Reassess Your Chess, but you shouldn't read through it until you're around 1400 (USCF - I imagine ELO is similar); until then, you might want to just glance through the first chapter to get a feel for his concept of positional imbalances, so you can start using those ideas to guide your piece placement.  The rest of the book comes into play once you have to start pressuring your opponents to make mistakes.  I would advise against studying openings too much - just look at them enough to get a feel for the ideas, but don't make the mistake of trying to memorize lines, because until you are much stronger nobody will play into the lines.

Probably the most important thing to remember is that the path to improvement in chess is different for everyone - hence why some people here favor positional concepts while others suggest focusing on tactics.  Everyone here will have their suggestions, but only you know yourself well enough to decide which ideas will probably work the best.  Good luck and have fun!

 

I’ve bought the kindle version now. I’ve worked through the first game 3-4 times, it seems interesting.

Let’s see how difficult it gets!