hicetnunc wrote:
DrCheckevertim wrote:
A lot of being a good chess player is being a good performer.
That's very true.
Yes, I wouldn't disagree.
What does it take to get to a 2000-2200 rated player? Really.
Sort:
I mean, you can memorize a chess concept and a grammatical rule, but you can only really "analyze" the former. With a grammatical rule, what else is there really to say than "those are just the rules?" And that's not a bad thing, but it doesn't work well for your analogy. And certainly the latter's rules would apply way more often than those of the former (e.g., capture towards the center).
Jul 2, 2014
0
#164
Elubas wrote:
The funny thing is, the end product between the finding of a chess pattern and the memorization of the abc's is kind of the same -- they have a memorizable answer. Yet, each chess pattern that may happen to be memorized, unlike in the abc's, serves a purpose that one will benefit much from understanding.
In other words there is a reason to why we are memorizing a pin and not the move a2-a4. Whereas with the abc's why a comes before b is totally arbitrary. Understanding won't guide you at all. In chess the stuff is easier to memorize when it means something to you. If you had a game where an outpost was really important, you'll remember that because it was important, not because you are amazing at memory. So understanding is always a big guide, even if the end product may be lots of patterns that no longer have to be thought about.
I'm like you. When I meet a new pattern, I usually add some 'meaning' to it, some words. And I find it helps me memorize the idea.
Still, some people don't do it this way. For example children absorb patterns like sponges, but are usually unable to give much explanation about them (show them an IQP position, and you can be sure they'll stick their Knight on d5 next time, but don't ask them to explain what an IQP is all about in the first place).
I've also a friend at my club, 50+, 2000+ for a long time, who just won't give any explanation in words when he meets somethin new. His routine is to replay the variation on the board, show the sub-variations of the tree ("and if he does this, then I can do that"), and that's it. He has the pattern stored.
Maybe different learning styles at work here ?
Post #181: Yeah, maybe. It could be that, strictly speaking, you don't need to understand patterns to do well, but doing so cuts down on the workload. It's like how an engine can get away pretty much with just tactics. If we could memorize billions of things like a machine, we could do great. But understanding divides the amount of patterns you need astronomically, and so it's the smart thing to do. More satisfying too.
Something like that. If you think of chess like a puzzle, and computers (which don't really understand anything at all) can beat all humans... 
Jul 2, 2014
0
#167
DrCheckevertim wrote:
Something like that. If you think of chess like a puzzle, and computers (which don't really understand anything at all) can beat all humans...
No, they can't. I just pull the plug.
Scottrf wrote:
How do so many who haven't done something know what it takes?
And even more daunting, those who are over 2200 are often bias by their own experience 
Ideally the OP could get a post from someone who has trained many different players up to 2200. Different i.e. not just talented youth.
nobodyreally wrote:
DrCheckevertim wrote:
Something like that. If you think of chess like a puzzle, and computers (which don't really understand anything at all) can beat all humans...
No, they can't. I just pull the plug.
lol
In any case, I always want to understand something new about the game. Ideally, it'll result in a rating boost; but it doesn't have to. I'm not necessarily going to do something I consider less educational just because my results might improve faster.
Jul 2, 2014
0
#171
I'd give you a personal example. I studied Arts. I'm an artist, and I draw. When I entered a contest to earn the Arts' scolarship among the first 60 to qualify I was ranked 26. It disapointed me as I though of myself to be better than most, or the best. Realizing my skills were average just enough to make it humbled me, yet game mea huge motivation. There was this guy who was ranked 1st, and by coincidence he was asigned in the same class I was. To tell he was a talented guy is an understatement. He was exeptionally good. He was ahead of the rest by at least 2 years. When we drew the models given to us I would often compare my artworks with his, and the difference was stark. I had no chance. Other peers would literally surround him and watch in awe of his work, while I was there in the empty corner watching him enjoying the attention while a helplessnes feeling would burn inside coupled with envy and anger toward the lack of my abilities. But I was determined to surpass that guy. By the end of the 4 years I wanted to turn the tables. As crazy as I though that thinking was, I never gave up that goal. Every day he would be there to remind my weakness and test my resole. I would find myself practicing every single day for hours. Sometimes for 6 hours straight after school. I became very demanding of myself. I'd picture him in my mind mocking me, and as a result I'd work even harder. I'd meet my professor in lunch time when others were eating or having fun, and spend some more time even after the school. Gradually his artwork wouldn't impress me anymore, and I realized why. My skills were refined, my technique was well rounded and my efforts were showing. Suddenly I started having others pass by and stop to admire my work. By the 3rd year I was the center of attention, and by the end of the 4th year in the final test, not only I was placed 1st, but I was offered another higher scholarship where only the finests artists would atend, and I had the honor to be praised by the director of the school himself as a rare talent that weren't seen in the school for years. That guy was placed second, and little improvement were shown after 4 years. Sorry for the long post, but if you really love chess and you have set a goal to achieve, then put in the effort and you won't regret it 
Jul 2, 2014
0
#172
Jesse_Marku wrote:
I'd give you a personal example. I studied Arts. I'm an artist, and I draw. When I entered a contest to earn the Arts' scolarship among the first 60 to qualify I was ranked 26. It disapointed me as I though of myself to be better than most, or the best. Realizing my skills were average just enough to make it humbled me, yet game mea huge motivation. There was this guy who was ranked 1st, and by coincidence he was asigned in the same class I was. To tell he was a talented guy is an understatement. He was exeptionally good. He was ahead of the rest by at least 2 years. When we drew the models given to us I would often compare my artworks with his, and the difference was stark. I had no chance. Other peers would literally surround him and watch in awe of his work, while I was there in the empty corner watching him enjoying the attention while a helplessnes feeling would burn inside coupled with envy and anger toward the lack of my abilities. But I was determined to surpass that guy. By the end of the 4 years I wanted to turn the tables. As crazy as I though that thinking was, I never gave up that goal. Every day he would be there to remind my weakness and test my resole. I would find myself practicing every single day for hours. Sometimes for 6 hours straight after school. I became very demanding of myself. I'd picture him in my mind mocking me, and as a result I'd work even harder. I'd meet my professor in lunch time when others were eating or having fun, and spend some more time even after the school. Gradually his artwork wouldn't impress me anymore, and I realized why. My skills were refined, my technique was well rounded and my efforts were showing. Suddenly I started having others pass by and stop to admire my work. By the 3rd year I was the center of attention, and by the end of the 4th year in the final test, not only I was placed 1st, but I was offered another higher scholarship where only the finests artists would atend, and I had the honor to be praised by the director of the school himself as a rare talent that weren't seen in the school for years. That guy was placed second, and little improvement were shown after 4 years. Sorry for the long post, but if you really love chess and you have set a goal to achieve, then put in the effort and you won't regret it
Congratulations, this is a testament to the adage desire(to work hard) trumps talent.
Jul 3, 2014
0
#173
Taunting_Troll wrote:
Ahhh, we all the love the good Hollywood storyline where the underdog works and toils and sweats and practices and trains and eventually overcomes and defeats their nemesis.
Jesse Marku's story is taken right from ROCKY IV. Just pull a sled full of logs through waist deep snow and you too can overcome.
Nice. But for every underdog triumphs story, there are a 1000 stories where the underdog gets pummeled.
COUNTERPOINT: My buddy never, ever practices golf. Never goes to the driving range, never works on his short game. Owns junky clubs. He routinely shoots in the low 80s upper 70s.
I hit wiffle balls til I have blisters. Have nice clubs. I video tape my swing to analyze it. I hit chip shot after chip shot in my backyard. I set up my own putting green in my backyard.
We are the same age, same height, nearly the same weight. Guess what, I have NEVER beaten him in the last 20 years. Not once.
There ya go. That's a more accurate protrayal of real life. No Hollywood script, feel good, underdog, happy ending storyline. The real deal.
That about covers it.
Taunting_Troll wrote:
Jesse Marku's story is taken right from ROCKY IV. Just pull a sled full of logs through waist deep snow and you too can overcome.
actually, the story of rocky IV is about this old boxer guy who fights this big russian guy, not some guy learning to draw better than some other guy.
but not sure what the I and the V stood for? maybe that was something to do with drawing?
"What does it take to get to a 200-2200 rated player?"
I find if you stare at them during a game and once in a while say 'gneep-gneep', this will get to them.
Jul 3, 2014
0
#176
I started chess at 32 and am currently rated 1917 USCF. I have been playing chess for just under 5 years.
Jul 3, 2014
0
#177
nobodyreally wrote:
Taunting_Troll wrote:
Ahhh, we all the love the good Hollywood storyline where the underdog works and toils and sweats and practices and trains and eventually overcomes and defeats their nemesis.
Jesse Marku's story is taken right from ROCKY IV. Just pull a sled full of logs through waist deep snow and you too can overcome.
Nice. But for every underdog triumphs story, there are a 1000 stories where the underdog gets pummeled.
COUNTERPOINT: My buddy never, ever practices golf. Never goes to the driving range, never works on his short game. Owns junky clubs. He routinely shoots in the low 80s upper 70s.
I hit wiffle balls til I have blisters. Have nice clubs. I video tape my swing to analyze it. I hit chip shot after chip shot in my backyard. I set up my own putting green in my backyard.
We are the same age, same height, nearly the same weight. Guess what, I have NEVER beaten him in the last 20 years. Not once.
There ya go. That's a more accurate protrayal of real life. No Hollywood script, feel good, underdog, happy ending storyline. The real deal.
That about covers it.
hire a coach ...Probably Bagger Vance...A man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client...A man who is his own teacher...and then says '20 yrs i've beens doin this, nuthin!' ....seriously?! Your teacher might suck...
Jul 3, 2014
0
#178
Berkmaster wrote:
I started chess at 32 and am currently rated 1917 USCF. I have been playing chess for just under 5 years.
If you really only learned the chess rules at 32 that ain't too bad.
Jul 3, 2014
0
#179
I knew a young adult (24 ?) who'd played since a child. They committed 6 months of intensive study at 2150. Six months later ?....2170....and they played in 12 tournaments - some at national level. After that, they gave up on the seriousness of it all.
Jul 3, 2014
0
#180
The_Ghostess_Lola wrote:
I knew a young adult (24 ?) who'd played since a child. They committed 6 months of intensive study at 2150. Six months later ?....2170....and they played in 12 tournaments - some at national level. After that, they gave up on the seriousness of it all.
Awful story.
I was stuck at the same rating for 3.5 years before I went up 250 points in 9 months.
Someone turned the light on upstairs 
.
A lot of being a good chess player is being a good performer.
That's very true.