I wish I could say I know an opening...
On a serious note: tactics, studying and practicing typical endgame positions, playing and analyzing lots of games in certain pawn structures that occur in "your" openings to get a feeling of how they should be treated. Sports, good nutrition, belief in your powers, love for chess and desire to improve!
I'm getting kind of misty...
I am playing appoximately 2 rated tournaments/month:
One Open
One Scholastic
Wow. You have a lot of time for chess.
Going from 1800-2100 will require quite a lot of effort, but it is technically possible in that time frame (although not realistic because you have to play so many tournaments). At 1800, you are still missing basic tactics (3 move tactic to win a piece, as an example) where at 2100 you are able to beat masters on occasion (but still making subtle mistakes).
Really, just focus on tactics and some end game play. Dvoretsky's manual is actually the book I'm going through right now (first one in like 6 years ) and I would find it mind-boggling for an A class player (and my tactics are FM/low-IM strength) to be able to keep up. You can pretty much get to master on tactics alone, which is something I had done at the time.
I am rated about1700 (granted after only a couple tournies). But, I can occasionally beat a life master that I play consistently and the last time I played any other master he said I completely outplayed him the whole game(Yes, got hit by a tactic. But, I saw it and under time pressure forgot about it). I think your assessment of an A class player is not quite correct.
Ok... Was this in an OTB tournament or just casual play (big difference, especially if the master no longer plays seriously)? I'm not trying to rag on the players but give a fair assessment; I have been there and had to work through that. Sometime ago I went through a database of my games from around that time period and realized some of the bone-headed mistakes I was making (you may not realize these as you are playing the game). Here was a position, literally one week ago in a G/30, against an 1800 player (he reached 1866 at one point). I will note my opinion is not based solely on this game, but is only used as an example.
He had just played Rg3-g1 in fear of f4 (I am better regardless, at this point). The rook on the 3rd rank prevents the solution above because instead of cxd3 he has Rxd3. Not realizing this key point, he retreated the rook.
If you are able to completely outplay any master (on a consistent basis) then you will be expert, at least, in no time at all.
I am playing appoximately 2 rated tournaments/month:
One Open
One Scholastic
Wow. You have a lot of time for chess.
Ah.. the marvels of home education. Our kids loved it - time to develop their own interests (okay, it did also involve a fair amount of Staring At Screens).
Absolutely ridiculous to claim you can catch all 2 and 3 move combinations... that goes for any player but much more for a class A player. I've had 2100 on chesstempo but have missed simple tactics in real tournament games.
Someone help me with the source here, but I think it was Bronstein who said after a tournament that he needed to work on seeing more 2 move combinations.
You might as well claim you've mastered a phase (opening, endgame, etc).
-----------------
As for how weak class A players are... it's all relative. But they do make tons of mistakes in every phase and of every type (tactical and positional). Many of them are small mistakes... allowing a passed pawn... allowing a fork... going for play where there is none. Sure you're not as bad as a beginner, but if you seriously take stock of your chess... if anything iFancisco is being a bit generous to class A players.
Going from 1800-2100 will require quite a lot of effort, but it is technically possible in that time frame (although not realistic because you have to play so many tournaments). At 1800, you are still missing basic tactics (3 move tactic to win a piece, as an example) where at 2100 you are able to beat masters on occasion (but still making subtle mistakes).
Really, just focus on tactics and some end game play. Dvoretsky's manual is actually the book I'm going through right now (first one in like 6 years ) and I would find it mind-boggling for an A class player (and my tactics are FM/low-IM strength) to be able to keep up. You can pretty much get to master on tactics alone, which is something I had done at the time.
I am rated about1700 (granted after only a couple tournies). But, I can occasionally beat a life master that I play consistently and the last time I played any other master he said I completely outplayed him the whole game(Yes, got hit by a tactic. But, I saw it and under time pressure forgot about it). I think your assessment of an A class player is not quite correct.
Ok... Was this in an OTB tournament or just casual play (big difference, especially if the master no longer plays seriously)? I'm not trying to rag on the players but give a fair assessment; I have been there and had to work through that. Sometime ago I went through a database of my games from around that time period and realized some of the bone-headed mistakes I was making (you may not realize these as you are playing the game). Here was a position, literally one week ago in a G/30, against an 1800 player (he reached 1866 at one point). I will note my opinion is not based solely on this game, but is only used as an example.
He had just played Rg3-g1 in fear of f4 (I am better regardless, at this point). The rook on the 3rd rank prevents the solution above because instead of cxd3 he has Rxd3. Not realizing this key point, he retreated the rook.
If you are able to completely outplay any master (on a consistent basis) then you will be expert, at least, in no time at all.
It was a casual game.. Right after a short tourny (which he went undefeated apparently). I played a blumenfeld (one of the few openings which I understood very well at the time and he didn't play the most testing line. In my eyes the declined with b-g5 if I remember correctly) and got a great position.
Obviously at the time I wasn't outplaying masters consistently-pretty sure that would have made me a master at some point ;P. The other guy doesn't play a game that isn't serious. He just hates to lose so bad. Granted its about 1 in 20 that I would win. But, most of the other games I would be in it for the most part.
But, I do understand your point. Playing pool when its for the cash I play a whole different game than playing with friends(even if I am still trying to kill them)
I am really rusty now and am hoping the work I am putting in will at least get me to the playing strength I was then. Someone told me I probably played about 2100 strength. But, I think that is pushing it. I thought with some tourny practice I could get to 2000 though.
Good luck with that. Even if you work very hard,the chances of you gaining 300 points in less that a year are slim. It's one thing to go from 1300 to 1600. But to go from 1800 to 2100 is difficult and takes time.
Don't worry about the opening theory too much. You should know enough theory to get you through a playable middlegame. Also,you should know how to play the middle games arising from your openings. Study master games that showcase your opening of choice. Also,you should concentrate more on black than white.
Work on your tactics and endgame,and good luck.
I don't think 1800 to 2100 is too difficult, 2100 players still are not very good and make alot of mistakes. They just play more consitent than 1800s. 300 points in one year I belive is very attainable.
I did it in 3 months then again some years later in 5months.
Here is my study plan so far per day:
Opening:
Review 2 master games in one of my openings.
Learn at least one new line.
Play 5 blitz games and analyze the opening stage.
Middlegame:
30 Minutes on the tactics trainer.
Read the works of Kotov.
Endgame:
Keep reading Dvoretsky.
Endgame puzzles.
General:
Review 2 Karpov games.
Watch at least 1 chess.com 30 minute video.
Complete a Chess Mentor course.
Will this work? Should I do anything else? Thanks!
when you first started this training what was your rating and how long did it take to reach the rating your at now. if the answer isn't 6months or less it's not enough to just do that that's sorta common sense although if the answer is it took you say a year then double everything. So question remains what was you rating when you started and how long did it take you to reach your current rating.
Thanks guys, playing an Open tourney over the weekend, let's see how it goes!
Thanks guys, playing an Open tourney over the weekend, let's see how it goes!
Hey fo rthe ACO tourney can anyone get invited if they reach 2100 by then like how do you enter whats the entrance fee etc... where can I get this info I'm only rated in the Class C range but I would like to go to this event aswell.
All 3 of us should study sometime as i am roughly the same lvl as you gys
Its a goal! That where it starts. Good luck
http://www.amateurchess.com/paris.html
The open tournament went very badly. I got 1/2 out of 4 against a pool of 1600-2000 rated players, adopted a new strategy in the last game, and drew a 1911, so at least I learned something.
if anything iFancisco is being a bit generous to class A players.
Sorry, but I don't agree.
Haters gonna hate. Work your tail off for those 6-8 hrs a day and you will be a much improved player I am sure. The key is to stick with it... and that's why everyone ISN'T a National Master or beyond.
http://www.amateurchess.com/paris.html
The open tournament went very badly. I got 1/2 out of 4 against a pool of 1600-2000 rated players, adopted a new strategy in the last game, and drew a 1911, so at least I learned something.
Dont worry keep playing in opens frequently and you'll improve. In my first open 9 months ago i only got 1.5/6. I won an open a few weeks ago.
Haters gonna hate. Work your tail off for those 6-8 hrs a day and you will be a much improved player I am sure. The key is to stick with it... and that's why everyone ISN'T a National Master or beyond.
+10000
Haters gonna hate. Work your tail off for those 6-8 hrs a day and you will be a much improved player I am sure. The key is to stick with it... and that's why everyone ISN'T a National Master or beyond.
+10000
or a much burned out player. ALthough I agree with the rest of the post
Yes, since I couldn't chat I had to kill a lot of time by improving.
I know this feeling ! I made NM in 1984 and didnt even know you could play chess on the internet until the mid 90's and didnt have a computer, so that I could, until 1996 . I now wonder if I would have ever made NM and 2200+ if I had internet access from the time I started playing chess ? I think internet chess can be such a distraction from more serious study and playing of the game that it may hurt as many people as it helps .
I wish I could say I know an opening...
On a serious note: tactics, studying and practicing typical endgame positions, playing and analyzing lots of games in certain pawn structures that occur in "your" openings to get a feeling of how they should be treated. Sports, good nutrition, belief in your powers, love for chess and desire to improve!