Just use the Formula:
Offering serious chess lessons. NO JOKE
Sort:
Idrinkyourhealth3 wrote:
RonWeasleyMyGoat wrote:
Why would we need a coach when we could just ask Stockfish ourselves? Not to be rude, but I think I know more about chess and how to work a chess engine than a 1300
That's not the question. The question is why would you refuse a free extra help from a 2500 chess engine that teams up with a human being for a better comprehension ?
the real question is how many people will join
edited moderator AndrewSmith
What's the point, or what could be the point of that underskilled chess lessons offer?
I suppose the OP wants to see if it can, sort of, "beat the sytem" and mimic credibly enough real high level lessons with the help of a chess engine, and maybe some chatgpt thingie on top of it.
I'll spare you the endeavour: strong players will soon go "wtf???" reading your advices and comments. Then, some lower rated players may fall for it with various impacts on their chess performances.
That's all there is to say about it.
Idrinkyourhealth3 wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
Idrinkyourhealth3 wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
The whole point of having experienced, talented coaches is to reduce the use of the engine. It’s a lot easier to understand a person’s analysis than the engine; and it’s a lot easier to learn from someone who’s at least at a humanly attainable level.
In fact, one of the first things many coaches will tell you is to analyse positions without the engine specifically, as this helps your calculation and chess understanding.
your proposed coaching is counterproductive, I’m afraid. But if you want to play high level players, I recommend you enter tournaments.
I am somewhat curious, though. What do you think you could tell me about my games that I couldn’t find out from a deep dive into even my game review? Because the engine can tell me where my mistakes are, and then I can look at the position and work out why, and presumably I can do that faster and deeper than a 1300?
Hello? You said this was a serious forum topic, but didn’t answer my question?
I will find leaks in your game and we'll work on it. We will dive deep in the best strategy for you once the fundamental flaws are cleared up. We will work on chess memory and future board visualisation to get you to the next level when I see you ready and comfortable for absorving the new info
My question was what can you do that I can’t? If I’m a stronger player than you, it stands to reason I can better use resources to improve my game - if you were better at it, surely you’d improve your own game too?
What, simply, do you offer as a coach that I can’t already do by myself?
I can already notice flaws in your thinking process. No coach will offer you anything that you can't do on your own. Its just a matter of time and optimization
Having had a coach before, they can work as an excellent bridge between your current level and engines. It makes no sense having a coach who isn’t at least similar in level to you. At the top level, they have to have coaches less strong but that’s different… at every other level, coaches are higher rated because they know more about the game and can pass on knowledge to help you improve. There’s nothing you can tell me about chess that I don’t already know, do you see?
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
Having had a coach before, they can work as an excellent bridge between your current level and engines. It makes no sense having a coach who isn’t at least similar in level to you. At the top level, they have to have coaches less strong but that’s different… at every other level, coaches are higher rated because they know more about the game and can pass on knowledge to help you improve. There’s nothing you can tell me about chess that I don’t already know, do you see?
Precisely. Because anyone can use ChatGPT and anyone can use Google and AI. So the only purpose of such a coach is (as they stated themselves in post #4), "and I Will do the human part ( cheer up the player, say "keep working on it" every now and then and check their progress, ask 'what have you learned today' etc)."
Heck, those are things my grandmother could provide even without chess knowledge! Me thinks someone has an overinflated opinion of themselves and are believing their own press clippings. Just my opinion, of course!
DavidWills99 wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
Having had a coach before, they can work as an excellent bridge between your current level and engines. It makes no sense having a coach who isn’t at least similar in level to you. At the top level, they have to have coaches less strong but that’s different… at every other level, coaches are higher rated because they know more about the game and can pass on knowledge to help you improve. There’s nothing you can tell me about chess that I don’t already know, do you see?
Precisely. Because anyone can use ChatGPT and anyone can use Google and AI. So the only purpose of such a coach is (as they stated themselves in post #4), "and I Will do the human part ( cheer up the player, say "keep working on it" every now and then and check their progress, ask 'what have you learned today' etc)."
Heck, those are things my grandmother could provide even without chess knowledge! Me thinks someone has an overinflated opinion of themselves and are believing their own press clippings. Just my opinion, of course!
Agreed. That or it’s a bout of attention seeking. But if it is just an ill-informed genuine offer, I encourage them to go and coach local kids at a school or a church group or whatever and get beginners into chess, a level they can actually help, rather than try and coach an incredibly broad range of intermediate to experts in 1600-2400 😂
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
Idrinkyourhealth3 wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
Idrinkyourhealth3 wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
The whole point of having experienced, talented coaches is to reduce the use of the engine. It’s a lot easier to understand a person’s analysis than the engine; and it’s a lot easier to learn from someone who’s at least at a humanly attainable level.
In fact, one of the first things many coaches will tell you is to analyse positions without the engine specifically, as this helps your calculation and chess understanding.
your proposed coaching is counterproductive, I’m afraid. But if you want to play high level players, I recommend you enter tournaments.
I am somewhat curious, though. What do you think you could tell me about my games that I couldn’t find out from a deep dive into even my game review? Because the engine can tell me where my mistakes are, and then I can look at the position and work out why, and presumably I can do that faster and deeper than a 1300?
Hello? You said this was a serious forum topic, but didn’t answer my question?
I will find leaks in your game and we'll work on it. We will dive deep in the best strategy for you once the fundamental flaws are cleared up. We will work on chess memory and future board visualisation to get you to the next level when I see you ready and comfortable for absorving the new info
...
What, simply, do you offer as a coach that I can’t already do by myself?
I can already notice flaws in your thinking process. No coach will offer you anything that you can't do on your own. Its just a matter of time and optimization
... At the top level, they have to have coaches less strong but that’s different..
huh, really ? I honestly had no idea about that but it makes total sense. And so, why is it so different from what I am offering ?
Kenji129_4 wrote:
I'd like to get a coaching session. But with a twist: i'll coach you
I'm not interested in getting coached, thanks
Idrinkyourhealth3 wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
Idrinkyourhealth3 wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
Idrinkyourhealth3 wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
DoYouLikeCurry wrote:
The whole point of having experienced, talented coaches is to reduce the use of the engine. It’s a lot easier to understand a person’s analysis than the engine; and it’s a lot easier to learn from someone who’s at least at a humanly attainable level.
In fact, one of the first things many coaches will tell you is to analyse positions without the engine specifically, as this helps your calculation and chess understanding.
your proposed coaching is counterproductive, I’m afraid. But if you want to play high level players, I recommend you enter tournaments.
I am somewhat curious, though. What do you think you could tell me about my games that I couldn’t find out from a deep dive into even my game review? Because the engine can tell me where my mistakes are, and then I can look at the position and work out why, and presumably I can do that faster and deeper than a 1300?
Hello? You said this was a serious forum topic, but didn’t answer my question?
I will find leaks in your game and we'll work on it. We will dive deep in the best strategy for you once the fundamental flaws are cleared up. We will work on chess memory and future board visualisation to get you to the next level when I see you ready and comfortable for absorving the new info
...
What, simply, do you offer as a coach that I can’t already do by myself?
I can already notice flaws in your thinking process. No coach will offer you anything that you can't do on your own. Its just a matter of time and optimization
... At the top level, they have to have coaches less strong but that’s different..
huh, really ? I honestly had no idea about that but it makes total sense. And so, why is it so different from what I am offering ?
Because they don’t have other options, and at least they’re still grandmasters. It’s a different sort of coaching entirely.
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:
I'm interested, but I need to see your skills in some live blitz/bullet games first.
I only coach players in the range 1600-2400. Your rating is too high; it would't make much sense. Sorry
kenji can u coach me
Zipho_Lunika wrote:
I offer mine over 7 hours of lessons for $20 dollars, once off. I'm 2500 rated with lots of experience.
I would join your class, seems WAY more serious
Please Sign Up to comment.
If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.
You can try to coach me