So far I have been investigating 12 problems from Polgars middlegame brick. I wasn't able to solve a single problem without aid. When I read the solution, I often had still no "aha"-experience. Only after 4 hours messing around with Arena, I got the feeling that I began to grasp the essentials of the position.

From the 12 solutions, 6 were busted by Rybka. Which means that even grandmasters are often wrong in complex tactical positions. Hisbestfriend posted about the same phenomenon in Euwe's book.

It is time to draw a few conclusions, in order to direct my future study. After an impressive detour I'm back again at complex tactical situations. I used to have the idea that if I do enough simple problems, that would be the road to learn to do the complex problems. After solving 100k+ problems it is proven that this idea is wrong. I couldn't even solve a single problem from Polgar's book! (since I restarted a week ago)

The coming time I will focus on complex tactical problems from Polgar's middlegame book. I don't know a better method than to use 4 hours per problem. At least I skip the unviable approach with trial and error during the first half hour or so, hoping for inspriration. After a few minutes I go immediately to the solution. Of course I will try to find a method that takes less than 4 hours per problem, but at the moment I haven't a clue how that kind of study should look like.

Difficult Pairings

23 hours ago

One thing you could try: have Margiet go over some solutions and if Rybka doesn't break it, then she'll circle that problem number and you don't even bother with the others.

ReplyDeleteYou might have to pay her. :)

Blue,

ReplyDeleteI'm not bothered by the flaws of Rybka. If I learn to win 50% of my games with brilliant yet flawed combinations I will be happy:) There is so much to learn from those positions that I don't mind.