Merry Christmas
Robert helped me to identify the things that caused me trouble in two of my games. It turns out that I screwed up in the following cases:
- Opening (I remember ideas, but mix them from different openings)
- Endgame, especially rook endings and pawn endings (extended Trebuchet)
- Bishop pair (don't know how to handle them without losing them)
- Knight moves (especially those pesky beasts from the enemy)
The good news is that since a few weeks I can fully concentrate on the holes in my bucket, now the method to acquire skill is clear and somewhat definite. The next step is to prepare the right problem sets in order to address the problems.
At tactics I'm already making a steady progress, albeit I have to face the following problems:
- A steady decline in rating points since 2008 of about 100-150 points
- A decrease in cognitive abilities due to my illness
- An increase in tactical ability in people under 40 due to daily training
Ad point 3: intensive first time exposure to tactics leads to an increase in 250 points (no matter the method).
I deem that I already have reached my earlier capabilities of 2008.
Merry Christmas to all!!
ReplyDeleteThis has been a banner year for this blog! The articulation of a practical training method that works must be the high point of so much speculation and experimentation over 25 years. At last, the method is clearly spelled out for successful adult chess improvement.
THANK YOU!
If IQ is based on skills, which I guess due to the fact that tempo of solution plays a big role in IQ measuring, then I can't help to see the similarities between IQ build up and chess improvement.
ReplyDeleteWhen growing up, IQ is correlated to the environment. When grown, it is correlated to the genes. Sounds like older people are plateauing at a certain moment.
I wonder whether we can improve a stalling IQ too when being a grown adult with this method.
It had long been thought that intelligence was largely immutable. Then two researchers from the University of Bern came along and stunned the world by showing how around 20 sessions of a working memory exercise called “dual n-back” sufficed to significantly raise one’s IQ. More than a decade’s worth of subsequent research has largely corroborated the gist of their findings. But dual n-back is tough. By design, it demands maximum concentration at every moment. Is it worth the pain?
Deletehttps://nbackchallenge.com/articles/why-its-worth-the-pain-to-complete-20-sessions-of-dual-n-back
Maybe we should invent a WM-Training for Chess
Apparently I'm out of my league here. I thought that intelligence was about gaining a cognitive skill. Like music intelligence, math intelligence, chess intelligence et cetera. Any area where you have prodigies which plateau at a later age. I developed a method that is not a pain in the lower Nnd-back.
DeleteI received Frank Erwich's book 100 Tactical Patterns You Must Know: Learn to Recognize Winning Chess Moves for Christmas. [I made sure I got it: I ordered it for myself on Amazon!]
ReplyDeleteWe have "speculated" (SWAG) that it takes approximately 30-50 exercises per pattern to "cement" a given “pattern” into long-term memory so that System 1 can use it to recognize and recover it in any position.
Master Erwich provides 441 exercises for 100 patterns - averaging 4-5 examples per pattern. That implies that patterns can be learned with far fewer exercises than previously expected. If you want more predigest exercises, he has a follow-on book The 100 Tactical Patterns You Must Know WORKBOOK which contains 516 exercises (approximately 4 exercises per pattern) based on the exact same patterns as the original book. Combining the two books gives 8-10 exercises per pattern, which should be more than adequate to drill these patterns into System 1 memory.
The most interesting thing about these two books is the approach taken. It mirrors the approach recommended by Temposchlucker!
Temposchlucker wrote (in part):
The good news is that since a few weeks I can fully concentrate on the holes in my bucket, now the method to acquire skill is clear and somewhat definite. The next step is to prepare the right problem sets in order to address the problems.
He also has recommended letting someone else (or GM Stockfish) do the “heavy lifting” of collecting the training materials. IMHO, Master Erwich has done just that. The logical Narrative around each pattern example is oriented toward WHAT to focus on in each specific example that will “trigger” pattern recognition, encompassing both foreground (positive image) and background (negative space; context). He also includes Flash Cards for each pattern, and a “label” to aid in recalling it. A lot of the examples are taken from games (which can usually be found online).
Aox’s observation is apropos:
“By design, it demands maximum concentration at every moment. Is it worth the pain?“
As the heavy lifters say, “No pain, no gain!”
A collateral effect of my training the past 1.5 year is that I start to remember parts of my games. The 23 years before that are more of a blur. Hence there is room for feedback now. Furthermore, I start to dream about chess positions again.
ReplyDeleteThe last time that happened was when I was under 16 yo. When I used to remember my last game move by move, until I played a new game, even when it was a few months later.