Wednesday, October 19, 2005

Nothing to say

I don't expect to see convincing and measurable results before I have done 100,000 at CTS (see an old post)
It is not done to have a big mouth before I have measurable and convincing results.
It's remarkable how little I have to say now I'm not allowed to have a big mouth.
I'll bide my time. . .

circle 0: 1470
circle 1: 1500
circle 2: 1520
circle 3: 28,000 /70,000
Highest rating 1567


  1. Hi tempo, nice to see your results with CTS. Now that I've got back to chess, I decided to give it a try, let's see what some thousands of problems can do for me, aehea

  2. Have you totally put aside the secret of pawn endings? Do you feel the additional tactical study benefits will far outweigh the additional endgame study?
    also good luck with your upcoming


  3. Jim, for the moment I have put the endings aside. CTS proves me on a daily basis how dramatically bad I am in even the simplest tactics, that it would feel rather idiot to do more sophisticated training at this moment. It would be nice if it was possible to keep both things going (endgames and CTS). But to give the work on CTS enough momentum and to keep the space between repetitions within reasonable limits I concentrate on CTS. There will for sure come a moment I will go back to pawn endings again, but it can take a year or so before I'm content with my performance at CTS.

  4. Glad to hear CTS is helping you with your weaknesses. Good luck in your tournament.


  5. new rating increase:1565. Post it Quickly before it falls!

  6. I saw a comment in someones profile on FICS that said "We all suck at chess; it's just that Kasparov sucks less than most of us."
    My problem seems to be visualizing every posssible response the opponent can make to my move. When I try to do it for 2 or 3 moves it's impossible.

  7. Silicon, it seems logical that you play better chess when you look at more candidate moves for you and for your opponent. But that is not the way the human mind works. Research has shown that a professional chessplayer considers LESS moves than an amateur. But the quality of the candidate moves he considers is much better in the first place.

    You can't visualize long lines when the short ones don't jump on you immediately.