The result was that my score against the computer became much better.
There were a few important drawbacks: it was complex, it costed an enormous amount of time and energy. So I decided to split things up and train them apart.
A part of this target-evalution existed of a scan around all possible attackers.
To train this I invented rake-scanning. I need now 20% of the time for this rake-scanning due to training. In my previous post I evaluated this.
The point is that scanning of the attackers, is only a tiny part of the target evaluation. I should say about 10 - 20 %. So the main drawbacks still exist.
Because of the drawbacks my approach is somewhat different from Mousetrappers.
A post of Tackchess about the book of Rolf Wentzel inspired me to make a picture of all times I fall victim to an oversight playing against the computer at 6 ply thinking depth.
I intend to use these pictures in two ways:
I want to use them as flashcards to improve my weakest patterns.
I want to analyze the pictures, to distill the most important questions about targets, specially suited for my weaknesses.
Basically my ideas about target scanning don't differ from Mousetrappers'.
For the developing of theory it is good to have a broad approach.
But for practical play a workable subset has to be made from this broad view.
I hope that analizing the flashcards will help me with that.
Ratingprogress due to training with the Chess Tactics Server.
A few Knights allready posted on this subject.
Here is a table of everyone who did more than 10,000 problems on CTS.
|Date old rating|
I wonder what most contributes to this phenomenon:
The short time per problem or the fact that the problems are scarcely repeated.
Or is there something else?