PDA

View Full Version : Improving in chess really fast.



aransandraseg
02-08-2009, 08:06 PM
I reckon there are many methods of improving fast in chess e.g coaching.
This post is to find out methods of improving fast unknown to the common man.
i.e. repertoire suggestions.
I have great repertoire already but if there are ways to improve fast that I dont know...
well I guess thats the aim of this thread.

shan_siddiqi
02-08-2009, 10:27 PM
That depends a lot on what level you're at. What rating level are you playing at right now?

Repertoire is VERY overrated at times. Having an elaborate repertoire is of very little use until you're playing at a very high level. As long as you're under 1800 or so, you should focus more on tactics and positional basics. I strongly recommend doing organised tactics problems (my personal favorite is the CT-ART program).

black
03-08-2009, 07:32 PM
That depends a lot on what level you're at. What rating level are you playing at right now?

Repertoire is VERY overrated at times. Having an elaborate repertoire is of very little use until you're playing at a very high level. As long as you're under 1800 or so, you should focus more on tactics and positional basics. I strongly recommend doing organised tactics problems (my personal favorite is the CT-ART program).

^ Good suggestion from someone who has been demonstrating the benefits of such work in the City of Sydney.

Tactics of all sorts. Lots of them.

Axiom
03-08-2009, 08:08 PM
Employ Igor Goldenberg IM as coach

Nicholas D-C
03-08-2009, 09:16 PM
I have great repertoire already but if there are ways to improve fast that I dont know...

Chess improvement is a gradual thing. It takes many years of dedication, study and practice to become a good player. There are no shortcuts in chess.:( Master level players must have solid opening repertoires (you say you have one, but I don't know what it is so I can't recommend anything), a good feel for positional chess (understanding strategy and planning), the ability to calculate variations accurately and in depth (this can be trained through analyzing games and using tactics books) and thorough endgame knowledge (this can be learnt from books that analyze endgames). You will have to work to improve!

cadd1ct
03-08-2009, 10:21 PM
Chess improvement is a gradual thing. It takes many years of dedication, study and practice to become a good player. There are no shortcuts in chess.:( Master level players must have solid opening repertoires (you say you have one, but I don't know what it is so I can't recommend anything), a good feel for positional chess (understanding strategy and planning), the ability to calculate variations accurately and in depth (this can be trained through analyzing games and using tactics books) and thorough endgame knowledge (this can be learnt from books that analyze endgames). You will have to work to improve!

What NDC said. Ask him how he gained over 150 ACF rating points in two tournaments. I bet you my fortune it would be hard work and endlessly preparation and training. If you really want to know how to get good.... I suggest asking a coach on where to improve and work hard. I heard that Peng works on his chess for more than 3 hours a day, and Zong Yuan Zhao stated in an article once (in the NSWJCL magazine) that he dedicated himself to over 6 hours of chess study a day.

shan_siddiqi
03-08-2009, 11:08 PM
It depends on how good you want to get. If you want to get to Zhao's level, then you have to spend a lot of time. But if you just want to get from 1000 to 1500, it's not that hard.

aransandraseg
03-08-2009, 11:13 PM
yeah positional chess and tactical chess are all good, but I guess a lot of people do that. I do a couple of tactics a day and George Xie has told me how to solve positional problems using the four questions.
I study like two hours a week to (before tournaments) 4 hours a week.
My JCL went up to 721, which converts to nearly 1400 ACF.
What I am thinking of is studying opening traps. Studying games to improve strategy seems interesting. I really want to break the 800 barrier asap cause by year 10, 11, 12 I won't have much time to study chess.
BTW
has anyone got any good suggestions for F4.
I have got any theory for that and I need to help a school team mate of mine prepare against John Papantoniou.
Any advice there.

aransandraseg
03-08-2009, 11:14 PM
I already have a coach.
George Xie.
But I got my yearlys coming up so no time for classes, but I still want to improve fast.

black
04-08-2009, 01:50 AM
I already have a coach.
George Xie.
But I got my yearlys coming up so no time for classes, but I still want to improve fast.

Oh? George offers lessons?

shan_siddiqi
04-08-2009, 12:12 PM
yeah positional chess and tactical chess are all good, but I guess a lot of people do that. I do a couple of tactics a day and George Xie has told me how to solve positional problems using the four questions.
I study like two hours a week to (before tournaments) 4 hours a week.
My JCL went up to 721, which converts to nearly 1400 ACF.
What I am thinking of is studying opening traps. Studying games to improve strategy seems interesting. I really want to break the 800 barrier asap cause by year 10, 11, 12 I won't have much time to study chess.
BTW
has anyone got any good suggestions for F4.
I have got any theory for that and I need to help a school team mate of mine prepare against John Papantoniou.
Any advice there.

There's a reason why a lot of people study position/tactics - it works!

Opening traps are nice at the junior level, but you rarely get a chance to use them at the upper level. 90% of opening traps require you to play a weak opening line to start with - and if you're playing a 1600+ player, your opponent probably won't fall for it. In the end, you're stuck digging your way out of a weak position.
Also, opening traps will teach you how to win some fast games, but they won't teach you how to play better chess.

Studying games is great, but it's not that useful if you don't know what you're looking for. If you have a strong understanding of tactics/positions/endgames, you'll understand why the GMs do what they do.

I'm sure George is a great coach, but a lot of experts recommend that your coach should be about 200-400 points higher than you. George is almost a GM-level player; a lot of times, it may be hard to understand what he talks about.

Don't worry too much about openings. If you want to look up lines, check out the Shredder opening database (available for free at www.shredderchess.com). But if you start to memorize detailed lines, you'll waste a lot of time trying to learn something that you'll rarely ever get the chance to use until you reach the master level. Every time I've tried to book up on a line (i.e. to prepare for an opponent, etc.), my opponent ends up going out of book on move 6 or 7. I do the same - I always try to get out of book as fast as possible.

Nicholas D-C
04-08-2009, 06:27 PM
Opening traps are pretty cheap, and like Shan said, they often require you to play weaker openings (but if you are comfortable getting worse positions if the trap doesn't work that's your choice). The bird's opening can't be considered dangerous, so just look up some lines on the internet (why doesn't your friend prepare himself? It's his game, so if he doesn't care enough to prepare himself that's not on you!). Like I said before, there is no way to get good fast! You have to give up on that idea. Regarding ratings, I believe that the NSWJCL ratings use a weird system, and aren't as reliable as the ACF. The two can't be compared! You said that 700 translates to 1400, but that's not really true. The magazines say that 2000 JCL is world champion standard, but none of the world champions have had a rating of 4000!:P :cool:

cadd1ct
05-08-2009, 06:02 PM
yeah positional chess and tactical chess are all good, but I guess a lot of people do that. I do a couple of tactics a day and George Xie has told me how to solve positional problems using the four questions.
I study like two hours a week to (before tournaments) 4 hours a week.
My JCL went up to 721, which converts to nearly 1400 ACF.
What I am thinking of is studying opening traps. Studying games to improve strategy seems interesting. I really want to break the 800 barrier asap cause by year 10, 11, 12 I won't have much time to study chess.
BTW has anyone got any good suggestions for F4.
I have got any theory for that and I need to help a school team mate of mine prepare against John Papantoniou.
Any advice there.

ACF Ratings are alot of reliable than JCL... if you really want to look at it this way.. Max is top of JCl list and is 1234.. (I think) but he's ACF is like 2200+.. but using the converter method his ACF should onyl be 1800... its too unreliable... I seriously think all JCl events should be ACF rated... one to encourage juniors to challenge adults and 2 I think the JCL system is a little dodgy.. I dunno it's your choice. Well it really doesn't help asking someone to give you good advice on f4.. because if they really do... they wouldn't give it to you.. and why isn't your friend going to prepare?... Let him do it... if he doesn't want to.. you can't force him. p.s. John doesn't always play f4!

shan_siddiqi
05-08-2009, 07:00 PM
By the way, if you want to get better fast, look for a book called "Rapid Chess Improvement." I haven't read it myself, but I've seen it help a lot of people get up to the 16-1800 level.

Also, you should realize something. As a general rule of thumb, every 200-point rating gain will take about as much effort/knowledge as all of your previous improvement combined. In other words, it's as hard to get from 1400 to 1600 as it is to get from 0 to 1400.

berniechau
05-08-2009, 07:44 PM
For me as a nswjcl player with a rating of 1000 (about to plummet back), reaching it is very hard
i barely spend anytime on chess, only on icc at times.
i also agree that the jcl are very inflated and that about 5 years ago, an 800 would be considered able to win tournemnts
thing is that my acf is only 1200 due to the fact of less exposure to adults games, bridging equally for me is quite hard and it takes time.

Watto
06-08-2009, 04:27 PM
Opening traps are nice at the junior level, but you rarely get a chance to use them at the upper level. 90% of opening traps require you to play a weak opening line to start with - and if you're playing a 1600+ player, your opponent probably won't fall for it.
Yes, I only know a couple of opening traps and I've lost count of the number of times I've won material with them online but only once have I had the chance to win material in a tournament game (and I had to stop myself from smiling - it was like seeing a long lost friend)


I'm sure George is a great coach, but a lot of experts recommend that your coach should be about 200-400 points higher than you. George is almost a GM-level player; a lot of times, it may be hard to understand what he talks about.
I can't say I agree with this. 200 to 400 points isn't that much in the lower ranks. I'd alter that to AT LEAST 200 to 400 points higher, not make it the recommended limit.
The stronger the coach, the more fortunate the student I'd say (provided the strong player knows how to teach.) If George is a great coach, he'll be able to get the level right.

Saragossa
06-08-2009, 04:52 PM
Buy lots of books and study them hardcore. Even construct a table of what to study and for how long. If you have plenty of free time then you can do this pretty easily. Although you will have to spend a bit of money building a good study library.

Remember also to communicate with your coach. Tell him your problems and analyse your games before showing him. This cuts down alot of time and makes it way easier for him to isolate not only mistakes in play but also mistakes in thinking.

Vlad
06-08-2009, 10:29 PM
I can't say I agree with this. 200 to 400 points isn't that much in the lower ranks. I'd alter that to AT LEAST 200 to 400 points higher, not make it the recommended limit.
The stronger the coach, the more fortunate the student I'd say (provided the strong player knows how to teach.) If George is a great coach, he'll be able to get the level right.

I think there are 2 sides to a coin. It is true that the higher rating of the coach the better it is. However, if the coach is too strong relative to the student it is very likely that the coach will get bored and will not put enough effort.

On the other hand, if the coach is relatively weak he is only able to pick up basic mistakes. This may lead to bad habits which will be difficult to get rid of later on.

Vlad
06-08-2009, 10:41 PM
ACF Ratings are alot of reliable than JCL... if you really want to look at it this way.. Max is top of JCl list and is 1234.. (I think) but he's ACF is like 2200+.. but using the converter method his ACF should onyl be 1800... its too unreliable... I seriously think all JCl events should be ACF rated... one to encourage juniors to challenge adults and 2 I think the JCL system is a little dodgy.. I dunno it's your choice.

The basic conversion which was used in the past works as follows...

If under 600 JCL you need to multiply it by 2 to get your approximate ACF,
If above 600 JCL you need to calculate (JCL-600)*1.25+1200... That means 800 corresponds to 1450, 1000 corresponds to 1700, while 1200 corresponds to 1950.

However, this formula does not work for top players like Max because he literally does not have any competition in JCL and because of that his JCL is too high. It also does not work for kids who mainly play games in one rating system.

It is also true that recently there has been some inflation in JCL.

trappistnight
27-08-2009, 03:23 PM
Employ Igor Goldenberg IM as coach
Tank you.

ER
27-08-2009, 03:26 PM
I would definitely include Michael Baron in my list of very effective coaches!

Alana
27-08-2009, 04:33 PM
I think there are 2 sides to a coin. It is true that the higher rating of the coach the better it is. However, if the coach is too strong relative to the student it is very likely that the coach will get bored and will not put enough effort.

On the other hand, if the coach is relatively weak he is only able to pick up basic mistakes. This may lead to bad habits which will be difficult to get rid of later on.

During and after the Aus Juniors this year I had a coach who's ACF is only about 1400 (ex 1700-1800) but who was the best coach I had had to date (apart from at ERGAS and the coaching I'm getting now).

Saragossa
27-08-2009, 05:32 PM
You could try to minimise study by incorperating middlegame study and opening study together. For instance. Select an opening repertoire that gives you an IQP in most vars (Panov attack against the CK, exchange french c4 lines, c3 sicilians (Your opponant will have to be nice enogh to play the 2...d5 lines or similar) etc). Then you could just study IQP structures intensively with the idea that a heap of your games will have them.

samantha
03-09-2009, 12:45 AM
I truly believe that if you study hard with stronger players,and set yourself a goal that you can make,you will reach it.No more need be said!Cheers,Sam:wall:

Capablanca-Fan
03-09-2009, 09:04 AM
Shouldn't this be in the Chess Training thread?

Rincewind
03-09-2009, 09:15 AM
Shouldn't this be in the Chess Training thread?

Good point. Now move to the "Chess Training" forum.

claranow
22-07-2017, 01:46 AM
I found the nice harmony between study and action very good in past and I still prefer this system. Especially with the accessible books, where you can combine it. They just had a new one on ending, which is very helpful and it's just breather, sometimes. While I prefer the old fashion books, sometimes, you wanna enjoy all that java :)

The mentioned book (https://www.chessable.com/endgame-book/100-endgames-you-must-know/5193/), for anyone interested

MichaelBaron
24-07-2017, 02:07 AM
I found the nice harmony between study and action very good in past and I still prefer this system. Especially with the accessible books, where you can combine it. They just had a new one on ending, which is very helpful and it's just breather, sometimes. While I prefer the old fashion books, sometimes, you wanna enjoy all that java :)

The mentioned book (https://www.chessable.com/endgame-book/100-endgames-you-must-know/5193/), for anyone interested

Also can try Averbakh's endgame books.

claranow
22-10-2017, 05:08 PM
Books, daily games, and a bit of flash magic at chessable (https://www.chessable.com/opening-book/im-john-bartholomews-scandinavian/79/) books gets me going. I think the main key is not to give up, and to be ready to learn. Mindless play is not suited for this game.

onionlord77
22-10-2017, 06:32 PM
Boris Gelfand's books are quite nice

MichaelBaron
23-10-2017, 10:55 PM
Boris Gelfand's books are quite nice

They are great indeed - particularly for 1700+ rated players~!

Max Illingworth
24-10-2017, 05:26 PM
In fact, I spend most of my time working on this exact question - but for other players, rather than myself. I would rather wait and present a complete answer to the question, but I will say that it is very important to be passionate about chess, if you want to improve rapidly.

Max Illingworth
12-11-2017, 10:35 PM
The first part of my answer to this question is now up, at https://www.patreon.com/ChessLearning. You can even find some free instructional content now, to give you an idea of the difference Grandmaster feedback and direction can make to your chess improvement.

FM_Bill
11-11-2019, 02:58 PM
I have made big jumps in ratings by changing my attitude.

I played at about 200 points my current rating by not getting short of time.

Some juniors would benefit greatly by slowing down.

Another time I gained 200 points after being open to sacrificing material for the initiative.

Another time I had an improvement jump by making a decision to play more carefully.

Lower rated players may benefit by spending more time checking moves for blunders.

Other simple bu powerful ideas may be don't take unnecessary risks, don't play a move you don't think a master would play or
place your pieces on good squares.

MichaelBaron
15-11-2019, 01:39 PM
I have made big jumps in ratings by changing my attitude.

I played at about 200 points my current rating by not getting short of time.

Some juniors would benefit greatly by slowing down.

Another time I gained 200 points after being open to sacrificing material for the initiative.

Another time I had an improvement jump by making a decision to play more carefully.

Lower rated players may benefit by spending more time checking moves for blunders.

Other simple bu powerful ideas may be don't take unnecessary risks, don't play a move you don't think a master would play or
place your pieces on good squares.

I do not believe that ''fast improvement'' is that easy. Even if improvement looks ''fast'' - thee is usually a lot of long-term work behind it...unless its kids :)

antichrist
16-11-2019, 04:44 PM
I find the question marks come when I can't find a good constructive move that I think improves my position so make do with what even may be a weakening move. This may be due to it being decades since reading texts or being out of good and consistent competition.

paulo101977
10-07-2020, 02:01 AM
I reckon there are many methods of improving fast in chess e.g coaching.
This post is to find out methods of improving fast unknown to the common man.
i.e. repertoire suggestions.
I have great repertoire already but if there are ways to improve fast that I dont know...
well I guess thats the aim of this thread.

I was once told to blindly play chess against the computer, observing the descriptive notation or simply memorizing the position of the pieces which improves concentration and short-term memory.