Well I am not rated above 2000 (I am just 1743) but i believe that you can use chess programs like
1)Deep Fritz ---->For Training, engine analysis, and other such stuff
OR
1)Deep Rybka ---->For Training, engine analysis, and other such stuff
2)Chessbase ---> for the database work
I Hope that this was helpful 
Quick question (players rated above 2000)
Sort:
Programs could mean courses rather than engines. Personally I don't think engines help you improve. Problem is that while they give an evaluation they don't give a reason and playing against them just makes you overly cautious and afraid to enter complications.
Best way to improve is playing strong opponents and studying game. Books exist. For example Grandmaster Preparation series by Jacob Aagaard but it's be no means unique source of material and different people learn in different ways
I would probably suggest an online website that teaches you checkmates, endgame, and tactics. The websites I suggest are this one (chess.com) and IdeaChess. (ideachess.com)
Chess.com member hicetnunc has a blog post you might find useful
http://www.chess.com/blog/hicetnunc/resources-for-systematic-training
Mar 30, 2015
0
#6
hayabusahayate16 wrote:
KMcGeoch wrote:
Programs could mean courses rather than engines. Personally I don't think engines help you improve. Problem is that while they give an evaluation they don't give a reason and playing against them just makes you overly cautious and afraid to enter complications.
Best way to improve is playing strong opponents and studying game. Books exist. For example Grandmaster Preparation series by Jacob Aagaard but it's be no means unique source of material and different people learn in different ways
Engines are good for training. Not for general study. When training endgame positions a good engine will test your knowledge more than a human ever could and you can also lower its level to train against sub optimal moves (its good to do this because sometimes in technical positions you will know the best moves against the best moves but may not know the best moves against second or third best moves) also with an engine you can blundercheck your games and create a set of excercises to find the best moves in positions where your opponent blundered and you missed it or where you blundered and now you have to find the best move. But analysis, good books and annotated games are better for general study. This should be quite apparent as you cant drill positions against a book or an annotated game 👌
Engines aren't really good for training nor studying imho because most players don't try to analyze themselves why they lost or smth and don't put the effort into it, or even worse, don't try to look at key ideas about WHY THEY WON. Most players don't even pay attention to win analysis, they concentrate on losses. Even though wins have much more information on combos that can help you, or positional ideas (you may need antoher person to help you tho)
its probably near impossible for you to get 2000 in 1 year where you're starting.
i would honestly just do basic tactic exercises and play lots of games until you're not dropping pieces to simple 1-2 movers.
Training has nothing to do with analysis?
Other than memorization, what other kinds of training are there?
I mean... I guess we're using the words to mean different things.
In any case, I don't think an engine is so important.
Words have different meanings and a lot depends on context.
You seem to be using the word "training" in a very deliberate way, but in regards to chess I've only ever seen it used loosely i.e. training is anything you do to improve.
Mar 30, 2015
0
#11
bryanfromnamreborn wrote:
if you were to suggest chess programs to an intermediate player wanting to reach 2000 on here by the end of the year what would you suggest
I recommend the Chess.com Chess Mentor program.
(I'm only over 2000 in correspondence, i.e. Online, now Daily Chess on this site). My peak OTB rating is a tad under 2000.
For my correspondence chess, I use ChessBase software for tracking my games and to access other games. I also use Chess Informants, which I have in electronic versions. A recent game here followed through move 27 a game won by Judit Polgar with the Black pieces. I had White.
The annotations in Informant 112 by Dejan Antic pointed out that White's move 28 was an error, offering a better move that retains the advantage. I played Antic's improvement and won a few moves later.
Mar 30, 2015
0
#12
hayabusahayate16 wrote:
leiph18 wrote:
Training has nothing to do with analysis?
Other than memorization, what other kinds of training are there?
Correct. Analysis is study not training. I dont know what you are asking? What does analysis have to do with training memory?
Analysis trains thinking processes. This assertion, however, refers to analysis performed by you, not your engine. Analysis performed by your engine cultivates laziness.
I'm over 2000, so I'll answer :-)
The single best product ever created for chess improvement is ChessBase (of course this implies having the MegaBase with it).
if you were to suggest chess programs to an intermediate player wanting to reach 2000 on here by the end of the year what would you suggest