In last week’s newsletter, I mentioned two questions I had received from Sholom about what had been the biggest factor in my improvement. The question took me in another direction.
However, Sholom is not one who gives up easily, so he asked again. I thought about it and asked back what he was doing and what he had done. Sholom e-mailed a reply with a lot of details. And I will try to find out why Sholom is stuck on the plateau.
My reply to Sholom is found in the end. I would like to note that I have focused on the mistakes in Sholom’s games. He also plays a lot of good games! I hope you will find the answer useful.
E-mail from Sholom:
In answer to your other questions:
Books/materials I've studied:
I'm glad you asked that, rather than a list of all the books I have <g>. I have studied/gone through:
Annotated game collections (on Dan Heisman's list, which is conveniently listed in a suggested order-by-level of difficulty). And so, I've gone through
Chernev, Logical Chess;
Heisman, Most Instructive Amateur Game Book
McDonald, Chess, the Art of Logical Thinking
Del Rosario, A First Book of Morphy (the first half -- I have some thoughts about this one)
Wilson, Simple Attacking Plans (<-- just started this one, which I'm excited to do, because Andras (and others) have criticized my play for being too timid and nowhere near attacking enough)
Chandler, How to Beat Your Dad at Chess (extremely misleading name -- it'd be better called "50 Checkmate Patterns You Should Know") (<-- just started this one)
Puzzles/Tactics
Bain, Chess Tactics for Students (I think it's a perfect first book -- or, perhaps was, until the following one was published pretty recently)
Giannatos, Everyone's First Chess Workbook
Polgar, 5334 Puzzles (ChessDojo recommends it -- I have mixed feelings about it)
Justesen, Tactics Ladder (1400 Level), Vol 2 (at my level, I think I'd better get through Vol 2 before I do the Vol 1 endgames) (<-- btw, I wrote to the Chess Dojo folks and told them to consider adding this one to their program. They thanked me for my input. I have no idea what they thought of the idea!)
Nunn, Learn Chess Tactics (<-- just started this one; I really like his explanations)
Etc
Silman's Endgame Course (stopped when I got to Lucena and Philidor positions <-- Dan Heisman is correct, while learning that kind of calculation is beneficial, it's not like it ever comes up at my level)
A ton of opening books (I was told, and I agree with this: "don't study openings yet". Nevertheless, read them from time to time just to get a sense of how "good games' are played that use the openings I use -- it's helped. Everybody says "you should at least know the basic plans of your opening", but where can I find what the "basic plans" are for opening x, y, or z?)
Emms, Discovering Chess Openings <-- a fantastic "first book" for someone just starting and doesn't much really know opening principles. This helped me a lot when I first started (two years ago).
Note: nothing chessable!
Weekly Study
Funny you should ask. I did use to enter all my stuff in your accountability group (cool software, btw), but after a while I got tired of entering stuff, and questioned its usefulness, particularly since I had never once looked back at my own data. I sort of feel like: I study/play when I can, end of story (I have a too-busy non-chess life, between family and community commitments -- like almost everybody else). It would be useful now, however, to answer your question! My current non-structured routine:
- Monday nights at the club (OTB games -- this is great -- although it's informal, no clocks, and good/bad karaoke going on in the background). (I'm the only one that writes my games down, and I analyze every game afterwards when I get home)
- Coaching session, average around 1-1/4 hours, each week. About 3/4 of that time I go over games.
- Flash Cards -- this is a very important component, and it's been helpful. Somewhere from 30-45 minutes every morning. I use Anki, which is great freeware, does automatic spaced repetition, etc.
- Blitz games -- probably only about 10-12 per week. I try to analyze every game and write down 1-3 "takeaways" from each game (I need to go back and make flashcards for some of those takeaways)
- OTB tourneys. I love them. Alas, at most I average around 1 tourney every second month. I definitely go over each game with either Dan or Andras
- Tactics, Tactics, Tactics. Over the past two months or so, I've rededicated my effort to spend some time on your Ladder book every day. And, indeed, there are some days when the only chess activities for me are my morning flashcards, and evening time with Ladder. The 1400 level is pretty challenging for me (you sent me some pages from the 1000 series, that seemed too easy -- I wonder if the 1200 series (when?! <g>) might be just right. Sometimes it'll take me a 1/2 hour to do one page (6 problems), (other times I can do 15 in that time) but I'm just "trusting the process" and doing them.
My weaknesses
- Well, I'm weak at everything, except that I do know openings and/or opening theory more than most other people at my level. I'd guess (I wonder if this is true) that at least 2/3 of my games I'm ahead after 8-10 moves. But past that: tactics (weak), calculation (weaker), strategy (very weak). Endgames? Not so much, but at my level it's not much of a hindrance.
- I've been told by multiple coaches: I play too timidly, not attacking enough
and . . .
- my stamina is awful. Surely some of it is my age. Some might be residual effects of Covid I had last summer. I also have a sleeping problem (I can get to bed fine, but wake up too early) which makes me tired all day, which cuts into my study time, as well as affects my tourney play.
Frustrations:
I think I've worked pretty hard over the past year. And -- I swear this is true -- at so many tournaments (it's almost a running joke) I will have at least one opponent who beat me (usually in the first round, because I play a section up) tell me "what's the deal with your rating, you are much better than what your rating says". And my answer's the same ("remember that one bad move I played? Well, that's why my rating is where it is!"). I'm right in there in most of my games, even guys who are 200-400 pts higher than me. I know much more than others of my rating. But I just can't put it all together over the board. And then I lost over 100 points last tourney, back to where I sort of started (upper 900's!) two years ago! I have always been successful (or reasonably successful) at whatever I've tried to do for my whole life (career, other intellectual pursuits, music, sports, and more). Except chess!
OTOH, I love OTB. It's the only time during my waking hours that I'm detached from my phone for 3-4 straight hours. It clears my mind to be engrossed in a purely intellectual pursuit, single mindedly focused with quiet-time for hours at a time. The love of doing that is why I've been able to keep my frustrations at bay.
Whew. And this is all the short version! Well, if anything, it was fun summarizing my thoughts and writing them out.
I am touched by your moral support, and taking the time to engage with me like this.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts on all of this!
Best wishes,
-- Sholom
Answer to Sholom:
First, let us start by taking a look at your profile on chess.com:
The account is around 630 days old and you have played 639 games in this period. That is around 1 game of chess per day. Besides that, you have informed me that you also have played around 100 rapid games (most of which were 30/30 or longer) and an additional 236 classical games. You also wrote:
“I'm an older guy, and I just can't think so fast. I find blitz pretty hard (as you no doubt noticed, my rapid on chess.com is a whopping 500 points higher than blitz). So, my missing tactics is *partly* due to that. Perhaps your 14-day challenge might be good for me. 2. But missing tactics is also partly due to board vision.”
My first thought was that you do not play enough, but when taking into account all the OTB slow games you have played it seems sufficient. However, I’m a bit more worried about your ability to recognize and spot tactics within 60 seconds.
In the following position from a 90+30 game, you only spend around 90 seconds and played Ne4 allowing Rd8#.
In another game 45+45 your opponent has just played Bd5. You spent around 30 seconds and took on e4. Then after your opponent took the Queen you resigned. I would even argue that you could play on after exf3 and test your opponent.
There are several other games where you have time to think but quickly move into a fork or blunder. So I think you would be able to add some rating points by spending some time checking your opponent’s threats and what your planned moves changes in the position.
The stat that pops into my eyes is that you resign 75.4% of the blitz games you lose and 80.6% of the rapid games! To be honest you are way too friendly. You are playing against players that blunder as much as you do, and it is very much likely that another blunder will come if you keep playing. In comparison, I have only lost by resignation in 35.9 % of my blitz games. Here is an example of a too-early resignation from one of your recent games.
Your opponent just played Ne3 forking your Queen and Rook, but why not play Qf3 and play on?
In another game, you resigned in a position that is about equal. Qxf3 and all is fine.
Playing on in worse positions will also improve your ability to create traps and generate counter-play. So my advice would be to practice playing on until mate (or dead lost). The early resignations are also reflected in your resourcefulness stats (from Aimchess). Also, remember that in your rating range, a +4 advantage only results in a win in around 70% of the games.
Tactics
You mention that you are currently solving the Blue Tactics Ladder, which is aimed at 1400 FIDE level. When I look at your blitz games I think you need to lower the difficulty and aim for solving more puzzles at a lower difficulty. Here are two examples from your recent blitz games.
Here is another tactic or simple hanging piece that will gain you many points if you spot them.
You played Ree4 instead of simply Rxd4. Therefore my advice would be to stop spending time on difficult tactics and become a master in the basics first.
Sholom my advice to you is therefore:
- In your 5+5 blitz games focus on the fundamentals (do not hang stuff / look for hanging pieces + tactics), while in your longer games invest some more time looking for threats and tactics.
- Stop resigning! You will never win if you resign. See it as a chance to test your defensive skills and learn to set traps for your opponent.
- Practice basic tactics. I think this should be your main focus for a long time. As you write you know a lot more than your opponents in your rating group. Therefore it should be all about practicing the basic skills. Aim for spending max. 3 minutes per puzzle. I would also like you to try solving mixed puzzles that are rated -300 under your puzzle rating to make sure that you drill a lot of basic tactics.
I hope you will be willing to test this out.
Best,
Martin
If you would like me to take a look at your chess training and stats as I have done with Sholom, I would like to offer it to anyone who has subscribed for 1 year to Say Chess.
Just upgrade and send an email to saychess1@gmail.com with your chess info.
Do you agree with me? Or what do you think would help Sholom make progress?
Finally, I can recommend this interview with Sholom on the Chess Journeys podcast.
/Martin
Practicing basic tactics until you never get them wrong is such a huge thing. This is much harder than it looks. But when I do tactics I try to mix in both the simple and the complex. Too many of my blitz games are lost because I miss simple stuff
I like this format of feedback! In poker we would call it a database review. More coaches should offer this as a service.