I would like some sincere opinions. The article is being proofreaded, but is readable. Hope you all like it.

http://chess4real.com/ten-ways-to-know-when-a-chess-coach-is-good/

The Registration is totally voluntary. If you want to skip it, just close it in the upper right (the X) and that's it; enjoy the content.

The Registration is totally voluntary. If you want to skip it, just close it in the upper right (the X) and that's it; enjoy the content.

In the other hand, for what I have read of the rules, I'm not making any competence to chess.com, Im not selling nothing, I dont have even advertising, just for the sake of chess.

thanks

Hello, Charly

See a post-edit version below. I have the original with Edits in Word, should it interest you. See also my Comments at the foor.

I coach children and adult friends (this latter, in an unpaid capacity). Your article reminded me that the danger for me is the blizzard of variations [Why can't you follow? Oh, you're rated 600-1200 points below me - that's why]

Writing: cut, cut and cut; never use 12 words when six will do; use "do not" rather than "don't" and similar. [I used to be an editor and a journalist]

Best wishes.

Ten marks of a poor chess coach

This continues from “10 ways to get free chess lessons for Masters.” – an article for those on limited budget, or no budget at all. This current article assumes you have the funds and aims to guide you in choosing a coach.

The very best way to assess a coach is to have lessons with him – but such free ‘taster’ sessions are rarely available. A next-best option is to speak to some of the coach’s students – perhaps showing them this article..

But before the ten tips, a brief introduction about chess coaches and chess computers:

Deep Rybka 4 the world champion chess engine

There is debate among fans as to whether or not to hire a coach and, for me, the debate is much like the belief that chess engines can replace a chess master when game analysis are addressed. How, you ask, if those two things are totally different.

Well, the root of evil is the same, the belief that the best coach is whom plays the best chess. For starters, it is not even recommended a grand master teach how to play chess or some lessons to newbies. The thinking processes are totally different, and also you have to understan the human component: he would be bored teaching the moves of the pieces as a mathematician at NASA will be bored to tears teaching children from 4 years how to count numbers.

To teach beginners the best is someone not very strong and with love for the game, nothing more. And then, after the beginner reach some level, someone with 150-200 rating points above him, 300 maximum, no more than that, because the experience for both may be strenuous trying to understand each other. Of course there are exceptions.

With computers there is no communication: it will tell your blunders, but not the subtle concepts behind an inocuos move; from your serious mistakes you wont get much benefit, because there is no way to explain to it what was the mental process by which you got to do it. Also, if the mistake is a move purely tactical, the more likely you will do it again, because the advice on how to improve that kind of mistake that you did wont leave its “mouth”, and of course it wont be able to correct your mental processes of selection of moves.

Also, in most cases, assessments of positional moves by the computer are not entirely correct, since they are based on a mathematical model that has nothing to do with our way of thinking, without saying that in such positions they often make mistakes like anyone else, or more!

[AGB1] A chess coach is not good when:

1- He solely plays blitz chess with you. Some coaches do this because they do not know how to teach. Playing stronger players is valuable – but only at longer time controls and with post-game analysis[AGB2] ..

2- He does not analyze your games. Such analysis is the best way for a coach to see your errors and weaknesses.

3- He likes to teach you his openings, not yours. A coach should be able to help you choose openings and defenses that suit you. If you already have an opening repertoire that you understand and are comfortable with, he would rather convince you to play some other kind of defense / opening in which he has knowledge but for which you may not be prepared.[AGB3]  

4- He specializes in just one area – eg, openings, middle games; endings, or just tactics. Specialised coaches benefit only aspiring grandmasters with large budgets. Unless you are such an aspirant, you need a coach who can help you in every area.

5- He bombards you with exercises (usually tactical ones) with no specific plan. He may just have taken the first book to hand without considering its suitability for you. Tactics is the easiest skill to teach and acquire (and also the most prone to get rusty) so one should also look at positional and end-game exercises

"...and then it will come a dizzying shower of variants..." //from Vankie

6- If, when analyzing your games, he points out the mistakes, but not why they are mistakes – eg, saying, “That’s a bad move,” accompanied by a blizzard of variations or just a short “because you gave away the bishop pair,” and let´s go for another thing [AGB4] .

7- If he analyzes your game, but he does not have a plan to eradicate your errors. The analysis was great; you understood where you went wrong – but how can you improve for next time? The coach should help eradicate the faults in your thinking and  knowledge. You should agree on what you should do when he is not with you: eg, exercises against the clock (no matter whether they are tactical, positional, or endgames); tips to apply in your future games; or writing about an opening line or a positional issue  - ie, , there should be a plan to address what you lack.

8- He does not provide you with an extra-curricular study. The key word is extra: He may be a good coach, but he is human and he can have lapses, because he is focused on trying to fix your errors, rather than increasing your chess knowledge. Chess is wide enough to be monotheme[AGB5] , so if he has not recommended a book to study outside what you have planned, then ask. It need not be on exactly the same subject – eg, maybe you are working on your middle game, but it would be useful to look at endgames

9- If he does not address your chess psychology problems – eg, if you suffer from time trouble, but he never mentions it (and blitz is not the solution)[AGB6] ; if you have problems in certain openings; if you always lose to a certain player whose rating is lower than yours.. sometimes the advice wont come up from the pure chess chat; he needs to deepen in you, and some do not know.[AGB7] 

10- He does not push you. Instead, he should say things like, “You cannot see more than five moves? Well, take this: start with six. You cannot analyze more than three side variations? Really? Look at five. So you do not like endings: ok, , next week you must bring a report about rook and pawn versus rook endgames. You think Karpov is boring? Ok, take these five (ten, 15) Karpov games, and I want you to tell me why he won…”. These are all concrete challenges.

Another example, I coach an 1860 15 year old and his 1400 ten year-old brother. Once I set up a difficult calculation exercise and as it got into variations and sub-variations, I saw that the younger one was starting to lose track of the position, but he was not giving up. We therefore stopped every four moves, allowing him to describe the position [AGB8] before continuing. It took us a while to get to the end, but he did not give in – firstly he did not want to be out-done by his brother and, secondly, I did not give in to the temptation to look for an easier problem.

I understand coaches who give in to students, teaching only what the students want to know and only in the way they want to learn, but we should resist pressure from people who do not know what is best for them

Of course, this is for you, dear reader, the opposite: if a respected coach (who scores well on the points mentioned above) says you need something and you disagree, think twice before refusing and forcing the coach to do something against his will, because, believe it not, you are doing yourself two bad favors: your savings and your chess will be affected.

Noel Gonzales, my first chess coach ever, and later my colleague. Respected and loved by his students and others that were touched with his kindness and joy of life. I found this pic on Facebook, where there are many comments from his former pupils,  scattered around the world, who remember him dearly.

Finally, compatibility between student and coach.
There is an excellent article on this, written by Jeremy Silman, a coach, author and international manster, in his questions and answers column on chess.com – an excerpt of which is below (used with kind permission)

“Even the most highly regarded coach can be wrong for you if there’s no connection, or if his expertise is in areas that don’t affect your needs. But a chess coach (private lessons) can be hugely beneficial if he’s a skilled/experienced teacher, if his rates fit your budget, if he genuinely wants to help your game, and if you feel in tune with him.

A good chess teacher will tell you how to maximize your tournament experience. He will help you create an opening repertoire that suits your tastes, style, and skills. He’ll make sure you know basic endgames. And he’ll work on tactics and positional chess to make sure you’re as well rounded as possible.”

Never better. For those who want to read the whole article, here is the link.

***

I hope this article benefits you. If you think so, then help me spread the word. Now is easier than ever: with just one click on the Facebook “Like” button  or on the Twitter one will be enough. If you want to go for something extra, then hover the mouse where it says “Share” and look for your favorite social network or send a link to a friend via email tool. Thanks!

And as always: Ad Majorem Caissa Gloriam!

[A teaser for the next article: analysis of your games is the best tool to improve your chess... but do you know how to analyze a game?]

Hi Arneson!

I really really apreciate the time you took trying to fix my poor english. What I read I liked, but I promise tomorrow I will answer you the questions chess related you just did (here is almost 3am, Im dead tired). I realize there is a lot of things about training that are not clear, but your questions just gave me some material for new articles. :)

Thanks again

 Hi Firebrand,

sorry take to long answer your post:

of course beginners should start with main lines, as classical as possible. I mean, They should understand the principles of chess, development, force, initiative, etc and nothing better than the classic openings (starting with the italian, king's gambit, etc). Playing side lines, and flank opennings you are restricting the development of the beginner and cutting out the chance to get creative. That kind of approach results in an unimaginative player.

@ ArnesonStidgeley

Hi! it took a while, but Im here. Well, that day I had already a person proofreading the article (take a look over there), so I could not take yours because I had my word compromised. Anyway, I will answer your questions:

agb2: I had a previous article answering this question. http://chess4real.com/ten-ways-to-get-free-chess-lessons-from-masters/ (still not proofreaded, but I have the corrections, but after this Im already done for today :)

agb3: of course is a bad thing. Only will be good if the style and and the student's repertoire is the same as the coach. of course it could be some exceptions.

agb4: it's what the coach should not say

agb5: mono-themed, single sided, only one way to approach to something... I'm not sure if is correct...

agb6:usually time trouble occur because

• a-bad time management
• b-distracted, not focus
• c-some kind neurological problem
• d-lack of calculation technics (more likely)
• e-insecurity (and usually go toghether with d point) very likely to repeat to yourself the lines again and again, without taking a decision, whatever it is.
• f-a transcisional phase in the student. (this is when some students are getting new knowledge and still he/her is strugling with it; another way to say this: he still is being concious of his thinking process; this is an intuition or pattern recognition issue)
• g- you are bronstein and you think the first move like an hour because you dont remember where you left the keys :P

Nothing to do with blitz. You can be a fast one, and still be a timetroubler.

agb7: chess coach need to develop a bond with the student. Is better that way because you will spot things easily if you know him better. Of course, you can pass on this, but is more difficult for both.  Thats why compatibility is important.

agb8- describe the position... every person has its limits, one comes to fail at calculation at the 5th move, or the 4th, etc. So if a position requieres more than that, and the player knows his range, the picture technique is to stop at certain quantity of moves to describe yourself the position, and then continue the calculation. 4 moves is a fair number for most people when many sidelines arise.

Well, thanks for your questions, is clearer this way (I think).