You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
The Secret of Chess
Sort:
Apr 26, 2018
0
#5442
Yenny, you do have a good point. However, I just don’t have a need of recognizing the pattern of a backwards pawn versus a double backwards one, or aligned pawns compared with advanced ones. When LT put in so much effort compartmentalizing his patterns, it kind of took away the ability to understand them. Now we have to memorize five times more patterns than we did before. I don’t need that. As a 1200, what I need is more of a strategy guide: like, what the h*ll do I do in this position? This book, according to LT himself, provides accelerated patter recognition, not strategy. Thus I do not believe the book is a good fit for me.
You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
Apr 26, 2018
0
#5443
hitthepin wrote:
Yenny, you do have a good point. However, I just don’t have a need of recognizing the pattern of a backwards pawn versus a double backwards one, or aligned pawns compared with advanced ones. When LT put in so much effort compartmentalizing his patterns, it kind of took away the ability to understand them. Now we have to memorize five times more patterns than we did before. I don’t need that. As a 1200, what I need is more of a strategy guide: like, what the h*ll do I do in this position? This book, according to LT himself, provides accelerated patter recognition, not strategy. Thus I do not believe the book is a good fit for me.
You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
I agree that you need a different set of directives or principles to improve from your level. If I were you I would look into the Botvinnik Principles that govern chess ( I can help you with it if you want ). I think it could easily bump you up 100-400 elo pretty quickly, but eventually you will need more than brute force memorization of database lines to help you and studying tactics to help you. A book like Lyudmil's helps guide you through. Eventually you will either know a system of openings that appeals to your nature and you will get so good at tactics that, you won't worry so much about memorizing lines of theory, but you will still need to have something help you when you get to certain middle games or especially end games that don't have immediate tactics, that also buck the typical trends for end games that result from your opening choices. You will need something to guide your choices. A book like Lyudmil's can help.
It is a strategy guide, but for intermediate and above players. If you try to implement it in your games without a good basic understanding of chess, you will be lost and still have troubles.
Apr 26, 2018
0
#5444
stewardjandstewardj wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Christopher_Parsons wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
What is there to attack? We are human we do not think like computers.
Actually computers think like some humans. After all, it was humans who taught them how to think. We all don't think like a GM either. That doesn't mean we can't examine how the computer or the GM was taught how to think and apply it to our own thoughts. This is partially what Lyudmil's book is expressing.
Actually, do you think people in the Middle Ages thought the way we think?
Saw the world in the same way?
Experienced and felt the same?
Of course, NOT, there is a HUGE mental superstructure built in the last 5 or 6 centuries in the human perception.
The man of the Middle Ages thought more with his senses rather than his brain.
We are slowly turning the trend, due to a large amount of formal and informal instruction.
We are more and more mental, computerised, and less so senses-based.
Like it or not.
This might not be immediately evident, but the trend is obvious.
At some point, the average human will be closer to a mental being, computerised system, than a senses-based one.
Of course, some people still live in the Middle Ages.
We think more logically than previous generations in the Middle Ages. You are definitely right about that. Gravity wasn't discovered until Newton, but now they teach about it in elementary school. We could not even calculate over 7 digits of pi in the Middle Ages, but now not only have we calculated trillions of digits, but we have people that memorized over 100,000 digits of it. There is much less racism, cruel & unjust government, and wars as back then. The Middle Ages was much more barbaric than now. Our technology has advanced more in the past century than all of the rest of history.
We have advanced our minds, society, and technology more than imagined, and will keep continuing to do so. In 100 years, throwing away recyclable items in the garbage might be illegal. Maybe the society will become vegetarians, and those who eat meat will be considered barbaric. Maybe humans will control the weather. Maybe there will be no wars. The possibilities are not reachable to our minds, in which was born in this society. Our ability to comprehend what is right and wrong, our life, and our advancement in knowledge is, in many ways, limited to when we were born on this Earth.
But that's not all we are limited by. We are limited by the human brain. And when we make computers that are limited by millions of positions per second, we will never beat the computers with our puny brain that can calculate less than 2 per second. Our ability to reason may help against a computer, but it's just impossible to even come CLOSE to matching a state-of-the-art chess computer. Hundreds of years from now, we will still not be able to catch up to these computers without using computers ourselves. The pure human brain will never catch up to computers, and there is nothing you can do about it.
Now that I'm done ranting, is there something you would like to say about how it's possible for any being that can calculate less than 2 positions per second end up drawing a computer that can calculate millions of positions a second?
The best way to look at humans and compare them to computers in my opinion is to use the parts of the computer to describe the parts of human brain function...
hard drive = long term memory storage
RAM = abstract thought ability
CPU = the ability ( speed and proficieny) to move information back and forth from the forefront of one's mind and their long term memory, while engaging in abstract thought
Some people are great at pattern recognition. Some are better calculators of positions as they encounter new ones. Some have both abilities on an astronomical level. Even with all of that talent, the proper guidance is essential. The best computer is only as good as the programming in it ( what we are taught or learn) . Some people have all of that working for them. They are chessic genius. EX. Magnus Carlsen, Bobby Fischer, etc...
If you have great pattern recognition and learn how to calculate ( some are very intuitive ), but they lack good coaching. Some can't afford it or develop bad habits early in their chessic development. If you miss your window in your youth, it can make the difference between being a FM or a GM.
Here is were a book like Lyudmil's is applicable to players who are good a pattern recognition and who can calculate. If they are able to learn the patterns for how engines calculate, without all of the use of their abstract thoughts, their minds are more free while they play. Also, if you better understand the criteria for how a computer chooses moves, it is going to help you pick moves that are stronger than the typical human who disgrees with the idea of trying to think like an engine is taught to choose it's moves. In fact, unless I study magnus Carlsen intently, for many years, I would have no idea what he would play or why. He may choose to play one type of position contrary to what he would in a similar type of position and it may make little sense to you. He may also base his moves on his opponent. An engine won't do that. It doesn't care who the opponent is or doesn't have another line memorized that it prefers to play, instead of taking an advantage that is obvious, but going down an unknown road.
If you learn to think like a computer, regardless of whether you are capable of out thinking one, it helps you to deal with anything. For the record, Magnus Carlsen plays more like a computer than anyone else I have ever seen and it isn't even close comparing him to anyone else.
Christopher_Parsons wrote:
hitthepin wrote:
Yenny, you do have a good point. However, I just don’t have a need of recognizing the pattern of a backwards pawn versus a double backwards one, or aligned pawns compared with advanced ones. When LT put in so much effort compartmentalizing his patterns, it kind of took away the ability to understand them. Now we have to memorize five times more patterns than we did before. I don’t need that. As a 1200, what I need is more of a strategy guide: like, what the h*ll do I do in this position? This book, according to LT himself, provides accelerated patter recognition, not strategy. Thus I do not believe the book is a good fit for me.
You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
I agree that you need a different set of directives or principles to improve from your level. If I were you I would look into the Botvinnik Principles that govern chess ( I can help you with it if you want ). I think it could easily bump you up 100-400 elo pretty quickly, but eventually you will need more than brute force memorization of database lines to help you and studying tactics to help you. A book like Lyudmil's helps guide you through. Eventually you will either know a system of openings that appeals to your nature and you will get so good at tactics that, you won't worry so much about memorizing lines of theory, but you will still need to have something help you when you get to certain middle games or especially end games that don't have immediate tactics, that also buck the typical trends for end games that result from your opening choices. You will need something to guide your choices. A book like Lyudmil's can help.
It is a strategy guide, but for intermediate and above players. If you try to implement it in your games without a good basic understanding of chess, you will be lost and still have troubles.
The problem with all of this is that Lyudmil himself said this book was not for anyone rated below 1800. He said such a player would not understand it. That probably includes me. The second, and much bigger problem, is the author himself. If the author habitually exaggerates, compulsively lies, and routinely bends the truth all in order to sell a book, what reason do I have to think such falsehoods wont be in the book also? As hitthepin wrote, the reasons for not buying are not because of the book itself, it's because of what the author has said.
Apr 27, 2018
0
#5446
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Christopher_Parsons wrote:
hitthepin wrote:
Yenny, you do have a good point. However, I just don’t have a need of recognizing the pattern of a backwards pawn versus a double backwards one, or aligned pawns compared with advanced ones. When LT put in so much effort compartmentalizing his patterns, it kind of took away the ability to understand them. Now we have to memorize five times more patterns than we did before. I don’t need that. As a 1200, what I need is more of a strategy guide: like, what the h*ll do I do in this position? This book, according to LT himself, provides accelerated patter recognition, not strategy. Thus I do not believe the book is a good fit for me.
You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
I agree that you need a different set of directives or principles to improve from your level. If I were you I would look into the Botvinnik Principles that govern chess ( I can help you with it if you want ). I think it could easily bump you up 100-400 elo pretty quickly, but eventually you will need more than brute force memorization of database lines to help you and studying tactics to help you. A book like Lyudmil's helps guide you through. Eventually you will either know a system of openings that appeals to your nature and you will get so good at tactics that, you won't worry so much about memorizing lines of theory, but you will still need to have something help you when you get to certain middle games or especially end games that don't have immediate tactics, that also buck the typical trends for end games that result from your opening choices. You will need something to guide your choices. A book like Lyudmil's can help.
It is a strategy guide, but for intermediate and above players. If you try to implement it in your games without a good basic understanding of chess, you will be lost and still have troubles.
The problem with all of this is that Lyudmil himself said this book was not for anyone rated below 1800. He said such a player would not understand it. That probably includes me. The second, and much bigger problem, is the author himself. If the author habitually exaggerates, compulsively lies, and routinely bends the truth all in order to sell a book, what reason do I have to think such falsehoods wont be in the book also? As hitthepin wrote, the reasons for not buying are not because of the book itself, it's because of what the author has said.
Even the most clever liar wouldn't fool a GM about chessic ideas. Whether any of you want to believe it or not, Lyudmil started putting together this collection of patterns in his own quest to improve as a player. So he wouldn't create lies to bolster his own play.
Christopher_Parsons wrote:
stewardjandstewardj wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Christopher_Parsons wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
What is there to attack? We are human we do not think like computers.
Actually computers think like some humans. After all, it was humans who taught them how to think. We all don't think like a GM either. That doesn't mean we can't examine how the computer or the GM was taught how to think and apply it to our own thoughts. This is partially what Lyudmil's book is expressing.
Actually, do you think people in the Middle Ages thought the way we think?
Saw the world in the same way?
Experienced and felt the same?
Of course, NOT, there is a HUGE mental superstructure built in the last 5 or 6 centuries in the human perception.
The man of the Middle Ages thought more with his senses rather than his brain.
We are slowly turning the trend, due to a large amount of formal and informal instruction.
We are more and more mental, computerised, and less so senses-based.
Like it or not.
This might not be immediately evident, but the trend is obvious.
At some point, the average human will be closer to a mental being, computerised system, than a senses-based one.
Of course, some people still live in the Middle Ages.
We think more logically than previous generations in the Middle Ages. You are definitely right about that. Gravity wasn't discovered until Newton, but now they teach about it in elementary school. We could not even calculate over 7 digits of pi in the Middle Ages, but now not only have we calculated trillions of digits, but we have people that memorized over 100,000 digits of it. There is much less racism, cruel & unjust government, and wars as back then. The Middle Ages was much more barbaric than now. Our technology has advanced more in the past century than all of the rest of history.
We have advanced our minds, society, and technology more than imagined, and will keep continuing to do so. In 100 years, throwing away recyclable items in the garbage might be illegal. Maybe the society will become vegetarians, and those who eat meat will be considered barbaric. Maybe humans will control the weather. Maybe there will be no wars. The possibilities are not reachable to our minds, in which was born in this society. Our ability to comprehend what is right and wrong, our life, and our advancement in knowledge is, in many ways, limited to when we were born on this Earth.
But that's not all we are limited by. We are limited by the human brain. And when we make computers that are limited by millions of positions per second, we will never beat the computers with our puny brain that can calculate less than 2 per second. Our ability to reason may help against a computer, but it's just impossible to even come CLOSE to matching a state-of-the-art chess computer. Hundreds of years from now, we will still not be able to catch up to these computers without using computers ourselves. The pure human brain will never catch up to computers, and there is nothing you can do about it.
Now that I'm done ranting, is there something you would like to say about how it's possible for any being that can calculate less than 2 positions per second end up drawing a computer that can calculate millions of positions a second?
The best way to look at humans and compare them to computers in my opinion is to use the parts of the computer to describe the parts of human brain function...
hard drive = long term memory storage
RAM = abstract thought ability
CPU = the ability ( speed and proficieny) to move information back and forth from the forefront of one's mind and their long term memory, while engaging in abstract thought
Some people are great at pattern recognition. Some are better calculators of positions as they encounter new ones. Some have both abilities on an astronomical level. Even with all of that talent, the proper guidance is essential. The best computer is only as good as the programming in it ( what we are taught or learn) . Some people have all of that working for them. They are chessic genius. EX. Magnus Carlsen, Bobby Fischer, etc...
If you have great pattern recognition and learn how to calculate ( some are very intuitive ), but they lack good coaching. Some can't afford it or develop bad habits early in their chessic development. If you miss your window in your youth, it can make the difference between being a FM or a GM.
Here is were a book like Lyudmil's is applicable to players who are good a pattern recognition and who can calculate. If they are able to learn the patterns for how engines calculate, without all of the use of their abstract thoughts, their minds are more free while they play. Also, if you better understand the criteria for how a computer chooses moves, it is going to help you pick moves that are stronger than the typical human who disgrees with the idea of trying to think like an engine is taught to choose it's moves. In fact, unless I study magnus Carlsen intently, for many years, I would have no idea what he would play or why. He may choose to play one type of position contrary to what he would in a similar type of position and it may make little sense to you. He may also base his moves on his opponent. An engine won't do that. It doesn't care who the opponent is or doesn't have another line memorized that it prefers to play, instead of taking an advantage that is obvious, but going down an unknown road.
If you learn to think like a computer, regardless of whether you are capable of out thinking one, it helps you to deal with anything. For the record, Magnus Carlsen plays more like a computer than anyone else I have ever seen and it isn't even close comparing him to anyone else.
Agreed, but once again, I don't really attack his book as much as the claims he makes about the book and himself
Christopher_Parsons wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Christopher_Parsons wrote:
hitthepin wrote:
Yenny, you do have a good point. However, I just don’t have a need of recognizing the pattern of a backwards pawn versus a double backwards one, or aligned pawns compared with advanced ones. When LT put in so much effort compartmentalizing his patterns, it kind of took away the ability to understand them. Now we have to memorize five times more patterns than we did before. I don’t need that. As a 1200, what I need is more of a strategy guide: like, what the h*ll do I do in this position? This book, according to LT himself, provides accelerated patter recognition, not strategy. Thus I do not believe the book is a good fit for me.
You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
I agree that you need a different set of directives or principles to improve from your level. If I were you I would look into the Botvinnik Principles that govern chess ( I can help you with it if you want ). I think it could easily bump you up 100-400 elo pretty quickly, but eventually you will need more than brute force memorization of database lines to help you and studying tactics to help you. A book like Lyudmil's helps guide you through. Eventually you will either know a system of openings that appeals to your nature and you will get so good at tactics that, you won't worry so much about memorizing lines of theory, but you will still need to have something help you when you get to certain middle games or especially end games that don't have immediate tactics, that also buck the typical trends for end games that result from your opening choices. You will need something to guide your choices. A book like Lyudmil's can help.
It is a strategy guide, but for intermediate and above players. If you try to implement it in your games without a good basic understanding of chess, you will be lost and still have troubles.
The problem with all of this is that Lyudmil himself said this book was not for anyone rated below 1800. He said such a player would not understand it. That probably includes me. The second, and much bigger problem, is the author himself. If the author habitually exaggerates, compulsively lies, and routinely bends the truth all in order to sell a book, what reason do I have to think such falsehoods wont be in the book also? As hitthepin wrote, the reasons for not buying are not because of the book itself, it's because of what the author has said.
Even the most clever liar wouldn't fool a GM about chessic ideas. Whether any of you want to believe it or not, Lyudmil started putting together this collection of patterns in his own quest to improve as a player. So he wouldn't create lies to bolster his own play.
He said that he is the best chess player in the world.
He said that he can fairly tie StockFish.
He even said that he was LITERALLY the gateway to another dimension.
Believe it or not, Lyudmil is lying.
Apr 27, 2018
0
#5449
stewardjandstewardj wrote:
Christopher_Parsons wrote:
lfPatriotGames wrote:
Christopher_Parsons wrote:
hitthepin wrote:
Yenny, you do have a good point. However, I just don’t have a need of recognizing the pattern of a backwards pawn versus a double backwards one, or aligned pawns compared with advanced ones. When LT put in so much effort compartmentalizing his patterns, it kind of took away the ability to understand them. Now we have to memorize five times more patterns than we did before. I don’t need that. As a 1200, what I need is more of a strategy guide: like, what the h*ll do I do in this position? This book, according to LT himself, provides accelerated patter recognition, not strategy. Thus I do not believe the book is a good fit for me.
You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
You, on the other hand, is not the same as me. You might want pattern recognition, and if so, this book might be for you! Lyudmil’s mistake is thinking this book applies to everyone. It doesn’t.
I agree that you need a different set of directives or principles to improve from your level. If I were you I would look into the Botvinnik Principles that govern chess ( I can help you with it if you want ). I think it could easily bump you up 100-400 elo pretty quickly, but eventually you will need more than brute force memorization of database lines to help you and studying tactics to help you. A book like Lyudmil's helps guide you through. Eventually you will either know a system of openings that appeals to your nature and you will get so good at tactics that, you won't worry so much about memorizing lines of theory, but you will still need to have something help you when you get to certain middle games or especially end games that don't have immediate tactics, that also buck the typical trends for end games that result from your opening choices. You will need something to guide your choices. A book like Lyudmil's can help.
It is a strategy guide, but for intermediate and above players. If you try to implement it in your games without a good basic understanding of chess, you will be lost and still have troubles.
The problem with all of this is that Lyudmil himself said this book was not for anyone rated below 1800. He said such a player would not understand it. That probably includes me. The second, and much bigger problem, is the author himself. If the author habitually exaggerates, compulsively lies, and routinely bends the truth all in order to sell a book, what reason do I have to think such falsehoods wont be in the book also? As hitthepin wrote, the reasons for not buying are not because of the book itself, it's because of what the author has said.
Even the most clever liar wouldn't fool a GM about chessic ideas. Whether any of you want to believe it or not, Lyudmil started putting together this collection of patterns in his own quest to improve as a player. So he wouldn't create lies to bolster his own play.
He said that he is the best chess player in the world.
He said that he can fairly tie StockFish.
He even said that he was LITERALLY the gateway to another dimension.
Believe it or not, Lyudmil is lying.
I think you clearly don't know when someone is being sarcastic. To me, it is no different than saying he could God with the white pieces...Bobby Fischer.
Apr 27, 2018
0
#5450
You’re exactly right Parsons. Only when I bring myself up to the level where I need it and can understand it will I consider the book. Also, thank you for your offer of help, but I will look into those principles myself.
all you Lydo disciples, please plug this in to your computers and tell me what's whites best move?
actually queen can move and at best black has a perpetual attack on the queen, I wanna know how Lydo and his disciples evaluate the position and what would they play.
ilovesmetuna wrote:
if it was a puzzle i might try b4 seeing how the Queen is just a slapper at this stage.
haha what does b4 do?
i know how the game plays out and so do you.
ok what you got after 24.b4 Rxc6 25.dxc6 cxb4
b6 doesn’t lead to anything. Even if white promotes
I would never have thought of b4, it just would not occur to me.
...Qxe4 and the black b pawn is protected.
What is there to attack? We are human we do not think like computers.
Actually computers think like some humans. After all, it was humans who taught them how to think. We all don't think like a GM either. That doesn't mean we can't examine how the computer or the GM was taught how to think and apply it to our own thoughts. This is partially what Lyudmil's book is expressing.
Actually, do you think people in the Middle Ages thought the way we think?
Saw the world in the same way?
Experienced and felt the same?
Of course, NOT, there is a HUGE mental superstructure built in the last 5 or 6 centuries in the human perception.
The man of the Middle Ages thought more with his senses rather than his brain.
We are slowly turning the trend, due to a large amount of formal and informal instruction.
We are more and more mental, computerised, and less so senses-based.
Like it or not.
This might not be immediately evident, but the trend is obvious.
At some point, the average human will be closer to a mental being, computerised system, than a senses-based one.
Of course, some people still live in the Middle Ages.
We think more logically than previous generations in the Middle Ages. You are definitely right about that. Gravity wasn't discovered until Newton, but now they teach about it in elementary school. We could not even calculate over 7 digits of pi in the Middle Ages, but now not only have we calculated trillions of digits, but we have people that memorized over 100,000 digits of it. There is much less racism, cruel & unjust government, and wars as back then. The Middle Ages was much more barbaric than now. Our technology has advanced more in the past century than all of the rest of history.
We have advanced our minds, society, and technology more than imagined, and will keep continuing to do so. In 100 years, throwing away recyclable items in the garbage might be illegal. Maybe the society will become vegetarians, and those who eat meat will be considered barbaric. Maybe humans will control the weather. Maybe there will be no wars. The possibilities are not reachable to our minds, in which was born in this society. Our ability to comprehend what is right and wrong, our life, and our advancement in knowledge is, in many ways, limited to when we were born on this Earth.
But that's not all we are limited by. We are limited by the human brain. And when we make computers that are limited by millions of positions per second, we will never beat the computers with our puny brain that can calculate less than 2 per second. Our ability to reason may help against a computer, but it's just impossible to even come CLOSE to matching a state-of-the-art chess computer. Hundreds of years from now, we will still not be able to catch up to these computers without using computers ourselves. The pure human brain will never catch up to computers, and there is nothing you can do about it.
Now that I'm done ranting, is there something you would like to say about how it's possible for any being that can calculate less than 2 positions per second end up drawing a computer that can calculate millions of positions a second?