I have noticed something on chess-twitter and in the chesspunks community. It can feel as if there is a vigilante rating police who check if you have improved enough for you to be allowed to have a say. If you have not improved you should listen and rather not speak.
I don't know if he was advocating for a return to those times, just reflecting on how different the challenges are. There is so much chess advice from titled players and coaches that you could never even consume it all, let alone follow it all. So the problem really is one of filtering. I actually think this is part of the attraction people have to The Chess Gym or the Chess Dojo program - it let's you stop worrying about and second guessing your training plans every-time you hear new advice.
I'm a VERY low rated player, so I feel entitled to share what DOESN'T work! lol
Every chess improvment experiment is good if there are good foundations.
Sometimes I think no one knows what they’re doing and some of us just fake it better. But I’m willing to try new things and hope something sticks.
I think of Ben Johnson from Perpetual Chess. He’s heard all the advice from GMs and others and still struggles to gain ground.
Chess is hard and I think we should support each other if we can.
I don't know if he was advocating for a return to those times, just reflecting on how different the challenges are. There is so much chess advice from titled players and coaches that you could never even consume it all, let alone follow it all. So the problem really is one of filtering. I actually think this is part of the attraction people have to The Chess Gym or the Chess Dojo program - it let's you stop worrying about and second guessing your training plans every-time you hear new advice.