In search for mysterious factors

 Currently I'm working my way through 1001 Chess Endgame Exercises for Beginners. That may sound  not as effective as it can be. After all, I'm no beginner anymore. And the problems in the course are relative easy and fast to solve:

• Mate in 1
• Win a piece in 2
• Mate in 2
• Win a piece in 3
• Defend your king
• Defend your pieces

It are not the problems that causes me a loss in my average games. Since if I cannot solve the problem with System 1 immediately, I certainly can solve these problems with the aid of System 2 within a reasonable short time. So why bother?

I can solve about 75% of the problems solely by working with System 1. That means that I can answer a barrage of questions  in no time. What IF then THAT. In 25% of the cases I need System 2 to kick in. Since it are relative simple questions, it doesn't take much time to answer, and the error percentage is quite low. Learning to solve these puzzles is probably not going to get me many rating points.

In the previous post I asked the question: do all mini skills together add up to the Trick? I reserve the word "Trick" for a chess prodigy that becomes grandmaster at 18 or younger. I extend that definition to any plateauting adult above 24 who gains 300 rating points. Like MDLM or Stoyko. The question can be extended with: "or are there some mysterious factors I do not know about?"

The puzzles contain 1237 variations. GM Jesse Kraai solved them in 2 hours. That averages to 6 seconds per variation. I take my time to fiddle around with all problems It will probably take me 3 months (90 x 3 hours = 270 hours) to complete the task.

I hypothesize that plugging all the little holes in my bucket will end up with more speed, better visualization end being less error prone. The standard bonuses from the Trick. And that that will have a measurable, or at least perceivable effect on more complex problems.