I play chess every day, but I've lost almost all interest in playing longer time formats. I only play bullet 1/0 games, and shuffle between a few fun openings. My rating will bounce between 800...
I play chess every day, but I've lost almost all interest in playing longer time formats. I only play bullet 1/0 games, and shuffle between a few fun openings. My rating will bounce between 800 and 1100 month to month which is a huge swing. I really should get back into learning and playing longer time formats, but bullet is just so much fun, even though there's no actual improvement in actual chess ability from playing it.
Came across this article recently and feel like it's worth a discussion here. I've known how to play chess since I was a kid, but I plateaued pretty early. Would love to know some tips on how...
Came across this article recently and feel like it's worth a discussion here. I've known how to play chess since I was a kid, but I plateaued pretty early. Would love to know some tips on how y'all improved your game over time, or any (fun) books you'd recommend. FWIW the article recommends 4 Chessable courses: 1. Learn Chess The Right Way, 2. Tactics Time, 3. Common Chess Patterns and 4. Improve Your Chess Tactics. The article does read like a Chessable advert? Not sure, that's why I wanted to have this discussion here.
Learning opening theory and some chess theory for the midgame is worthwhile at the beginning. After that you should just play a lot to put it into action. At some point it becomes worthwhile IMO...
Learning opening theory and some chess theory for the midgame is worthwhile at the beginning. After that you should just play a lot to put it into action. At some point it becomes worthwhile IMO to just spam a lot of chess puzzles. There's just a lot of times where as a new player you just won't see a line, and tbh you're not going to for a while, so chess puzzles gets you thinking out of the box and use to thinking out of the box.
Spamming puzzles got me to 2200 bullet (current) / 2100 (peak) blitz on lichess. Although I've probably done 10k+ slow puzzles and several thousand runs of puzzle rush. Almost zero opening theory....
Spamming puzzles got me to 2200 bullet (current) / 2100 (peak) blitz on lichess. Although I've probably done 10k+ slow puzzles and several thousand runs of puzzle rush. Almost zero opening theory. I think openings are probably more important in slower time controls, but just playing a lot of games will teach you, if not optimal opening theory, at least how to avoid a lot of common pitfalls.
I’ve really been enjoying Eric Rosen’s rating climb speedrun. He really takes time to explain why he’s making the moves that he’s making, and the way he evaluates a position has helped me to slow...
I’ve really been enjoying Eric Rosen’s rating climb speedrun. He really takes time to explain why he’s making the moves that he’s making, and the way he evaluates a position has helped me to slow myself down and think about what the opponent is planning to do. I’ve been sitting around 1000 on Chess.com for a while, and I think this has bumped me up to around 1100, and in a way that I feel I can sustain.
The how of learning chess is well covered by this and many other articles, books, websites, apps, courses, etc. If you truly wish to learn chess, you'll probably find the resource that is right...
The how of learning chess is well covered by this and many other articles, books, websites, apps, courses, etc. If you truly wish to learn chess, you'll probably find the resource that is right for you. But what about the why?
In a world where more games are released in a year than I could play in two lifetimes, why would I choose chess? The evidence that playing chess aids in overall reasoning is dubious. From my own experience, I've met plenty of chess "geniuses" (on a local level) who did not display an elevated intellect. All of them, in fact!
A top chess player is like a high-performance athlete -- being great at chess only means that you are great at chess.
With that out of the way, what is the pleasure of chess? I won't waste anyone's time with platitudes about beauty and elegance: the joy of chess is winning. I don't know a single person that finds enjoyment in a chess defeat, and if I lost to Kasparov tomorrow I would still be a little pissed. Chess is not about the journey, if you stop to smell the roses good luck always losing.
Losing is always bad, but at least modern games (electronic and otherwise) provide other stimuli, an assortment of tiny pockets of joy that provide the losing side with meaning and enjoyment. Not to mention cooperative games.
My enjoyment of chess is directly proportional to my opponent's misery. I don't care enough to treat this as a research project just so I can learn how to move my pieces in a way that most efficiently ruins the last hour for someone. If I were to give that much energy to study I'd rather learn something I can apply in more than one situation.
I'm glad I learned chess. But I think I'm done.
I guess I'm a disillusioned chess player :P
EDIT: if you want a vision for my whole argument, just compare Ding Liren's "celebration" of winning the World Chess Championship and Argentina's celebration of the FIFA World Cup...
If you want to hear an interview with him check out the link below. Fun listen. https://www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2021/12/7/ep-256-alex-crompton-adult-improver-series
If you want to hear an interview with him check out the link below. Fun listen.
I play chess every day, but I've lost almost all interest in playing longer time formats. I only play bullet 1/0 games, and shuffle between a few fun openings. My rating will bounce between 800 and 1100 month to month which is a huge swing. I really should get back into learning and playing longer time formats, but bullet is just so much fun, even though there's no actual improvement in actual chess ability from playing it.
Came across this article recently and feel like it's worth a discussion here. I've known how to play chess since I was a kid, but I plateaued pretty early. Would love to know some tips on how y'all improved your game over time, or any (fun) books you'd recommend. FWIW the article recommends 4 Chessable courses: 1. Learn Chess The Right Way, 2. Tactics Time, 3. Common Chess Patterns and 4. Improve Your Chess Tactics. The article does read like a Chessable advert? Not sure, that's why I wanted to have this discussion here.
Learning opening theory and some chess theory for the midgame is worthwhile at the beginning. After that you should just play a lot to put it into action. At some point it becomes worthwhile IMO to just spam a lot of chess puzzles. There's just a lot of times where as a new player you just won't see a line, and tbh you're not going to for a while, so chess puzzles gets you thinking out of the box and use to thinking out of the box.
Spamming puzzles got me to 2200 bullet (current) / 2100 (peak) blitz on lichess. Although I've probably done 10k+ slow puzzles and several thousand runs of puzzle rush. Almost zero opening theory. I think openings are probably more important in slower time controls, but just playing a lot of games will teach you, if not optimal opening theory, at least how to avoid a lot of common pitfalls.
I’ve really been enjoying Eric Rosen’s rating climb speedrun. He really takes time to explain why he’s making the moves that he’s making, and the way he evaluates a position has helped me to slow myself down and think about what the opponent is planning to do. I’ve been sitting around 1000 on Chess.com for a while, and I think this has bumped me up to around 1100, and in a way that I feel I can sustain.
The how of learning chess is well covered by this and many other articles, books, websites, apps, courses, etc. If you truly wish to learn chess, you'll probably find the resource that is right for you. But what about the why?
In a world where more games are released in a year than I could play in two lifetimes, why would I choose chess? The evidence that playing chess aids in overall reasoning is dubious. From my own experience, I've met plenty of chess "geniuses" (on a local level) who did not display an elevated intellect. All of them, in fact!
A top chess player is like a high-performance athlete -- being great at chess only means that you are great at chess.
With that out of the way, what is the pleasure of chess? I won't waste anyone's time with platitudes about beauty and elegance: the joy of chess is winning. I don't know a single person that finds enjoyment in a chess defeat, and if I lost to Kasparov tomorrow I would still be a little pissed. Chess is not about the journey, if you stop to smell the roses good luck always losing.
Losing is always bad, but at least modern games (electronic and otherwise) provide other stimuli, an assortment of tiny pockets of joy that provide the losing side with meaning and enjoyment. Not to mention cooperative games.
My enjoyment of chess is directly proportional to my opponent's misery. I don't care enough to treat this as a research project just so I can learn how to move my pieces in a way that most efficiently ruins the last hour for someone. If I were to give that much energy to study I'd rather learn something I can apply in more than one situation.
I'm glad I learned chess. But I think I'm done.
I guess I'm a disillusioned chess player :P
EDIT: if you want a vision for my whole argument, just compare Ding Liren's "celebration" of winning the World Chess Championship and Argentina's celebration of the FIFA World Cup...
If you want to hear an interview with him check out the link below. Fun listen.
https://www.perpetualchesspod.com/new-blog/2021/12/7/ep-256-alex-crompton-adult-improver-series