Hi SG.
Sorry for mis-quoting Capa - You have to lose 100's of games.
(where did he say this? Is it in his Chess Fundementals?)
Not too sure if losing 100's of games does any good.
You may need to lose more.
A quick search on here revealed a player graded under 1300 with 8,000+ losses.
They actually appear to be very happy and content. This often the case
with players who have decided just to play and have fun.
Taking it all serious and being hell-bent on improving just brings woe.
The real bonus in only entering the graded section you are entitled to
is that it is often a lot cheaper than entering the Open.
To play in the 2013 British Champonship Open it cost you £200. (9 games)
A 1600 player entering in that graded section it cost £40.00.
If you go skipping along with £200 and a grade of 1600 and expect to be welcomed
then forget it.
Nobody will want to play you. It's not chess snobbery (well part of it will be)
But in some cases ties are settled with sum of opponents grades and getting
drawn to play against a 1600 will put their score down and give their opponents the advantage.
Players will howl in discontent if they get drawn to play you.
You will be the tournament outcast.
Friendless, unwanted and no wins to show your mates back in your home town.
Your score will be 000000000 and the wits who hang around the
scoreboard will be saying "Look, he has castled Queenside 3 times."
They will be the longest 9 days of your life, try putting your confidence
back together after that.....and you paid £200 for it!
Originally posted by greenpawn34I don't know the original source of the Capa quote. I have heard quoted by various websites for years.
Hi SG.
Sorry for mis-quoting Capa - You have to lose 100's of games.
(where did he say this? Is it in his Chess Fundementals?)
Not too sure if losing 100's of games does any good.
You may need to lose more.
A quick search on here revealed a player graded under 1300 with 8,000+ losses.
They actually appear to be very happy and content. This ofte ...[text shortened]... r life, try putting your confidence
back together after that.....and you paid £200 for it!
I bet the 1300 player with 8000 losses is playing mostly other 1300 players. 🙂 But you're right. For most people, they will discover that improving beyond a certain point requires a lot of work and great pain to the ego at times. It's only worth it to handful of people. The rest resign themselves to, or perhaps even learn to be content with, their level of play.
Our tourneys don't usually have a lower entry fee in the lower sections. But I imagine the 2013 British Championship has less trouble getting sponsors than some of our local tournaments. The local masters (sometimes just masters and not GMs) would like to keep weaker players out, but they need their entry $$.
Originally posted by SwissGambitI doubt if masters would like to keep weaker players out. If I were a master, I would not mind beating weaker players to build my ego and rating. However, to lose to a weaker player like me would be a humiliation to a master.
I don't know the original source of the Capa quote. I have heard quoted by various websites for years.
I bet the 1300 player with 8000 losses is playing mostly other 1300 players. 🙂 But you're right. For most people, they will discover that improving beyond a certain point requires a lot of work and great pain to the ego at times. It's only worth it ...[text shortened]... st masters and not GMs) would like to keep weaker players out, but they need their entry $$.
The Instructor
Originally posted by greenpawn34Hi GP at £3.24 on amazon what can I lose.
Hi Eladar,
I'm pretty sure I have done nothing wrong and thing are not over my head.
You are making it sound like learning to play chess is akin to being a doctor.
I'm saying my 'Advice for Beginners' is join a club and keep playing.
You don't need to lose a hundred games before you learn anything.
You may lose your first dozen or so and then y ...[text shortened]... y Chernev.
I've heard so many players say this book helped. It helped me along.
Hi SG.
"improving beyond a certain point requires a lot of work and great pain to
the ego at times."
Honestly, I know loads of players who just play because the enjoy playing.
You show them things and maybe suggest a book but they just smile
and tell you they are perfectly happy being who they are.
I'll sit at a board on the brink of defeat knowing my next two moves
are critical. I'll sweat and agonise over these moves for maybe ½ an hour.
These lads will just play a move, most likely lose and forget all about it.
Who is enjoying the game more?
Hi Kaminsky,
It's a good chess book. There is no question about that.
Originally posted by greenpawn34If you are trying to learn on your own without the help of someone like yourself who is willing to go over games and make hints and suggestions, then it is more difficult than you'd think.
Hi Eladar,
I'm pretty sure I have done nothing wrong and thing are not over my head.
You are making it sound like learning to play chess is akin to being a doctor.
I'm saying my 'Advice for Beginners' is join a club and keep playing.
You don't need to lose a hundred games before you learn anything.
You may lose your first dozen or so and then y ...[text shortened]... y Chernev.
I've heard so many players say this book helped. It helped me along.
There is one other thing that I don't think many people take into account, people are different. Some people pick up things faster than others. The really good players are most likely people who pick up the game pretty easily. What these people naturally understand and see takes others much time and effort.
The people who do things best usually aren't the best coaches. It is the people who have to work really hard to get where they are and still fall short of greatness that usually make the best coaches. When I say best coaches, I mean coaches for most people. How are you going to understand and help people if you've never had to experience what they are having problems with? Answer is that you aren't. How can you understand?
As SG points out, some people who just start playing chess achieve a rating of 1400 right out of the box. I'll assume this is true, although I've never met such a person.
Originally posted by greenpawn34I think it's great that people are able to enjoy the game despite not being the best at it. I'm just saying if you are aiming for rapid improvement, you should play up as much as possible.
Hi SG.
"improving beyond a certain point requires a lot of work and great pain to
the ego at times."
Honestly, I know loads of players who just play because the enjoy playing.
You show them things and maybe suggest a book but they just smile
and tell you they are perfectly happy being who they are.
I'll sit at a board on the brink of defeat ...[text shortened]... the game more?
Hi Kaminsky,
It's a good chess book. There is no question about that.
Originally posted by EladarWell, you look on rating graphs and that's where some start. Unless you know them personally, you can't tell what they did before their first tourney.
If you are trying to learn on your own without the help of someone like yourself who is willing to go over games and make hints and suggestions, then it is more difficult than you'd think.
There is one other thing that I don't think many people take into account, people are different. Some people pick up things faster than others. The really good players ...[text shortened]... 0 right out of the box. I'll assume this is true, although I've never met such a person.
Originally posted by SwissGambitTheir first rating probably isn't their first experience with chess. They've probably been playing for a while. I don't have a rating yet and I'm sure that if I figure out a thing or two in the next couple of years I could achieve at least 1400 for my first official rating.
Yes - meaning that is their first rating.
My First OTB rating (1975) was 1720 (the same as Bobby Fischer)
My second OTB rating (1976) was 1845 (the same as Bobby Fischer)
After that mine and any comparison to Fischer's grade seem to drift apart.
I soon got to 2000+ then drop a tad to mid 1900 I stayed mid 1900 for
10 years then I stated that Chess Club in Bells.
And although I won 21 drew 3 and lost 1 in div 3/4 my grade dropped to 1845 (again).
You can only get graded v the strength of the players you are playing against.
When I took Bells up the 1st Div and played higher graded players
I went to 2000+ again.....(the + was 1 point, I was 2001.) 🙂
During that I time I never got any stronger or weaker. (I should know more than anyone.)
Yet I dropped from 1980 to 1845 and back to 2001.
Gradings are not a measure of chess playing strength, they reflect on your
score against the strength of the opposition you are playing against.
Originally posted by EladarThe starting rating doesn't really matter. The only reason I even mentioned 1400 was to answer your question. As a provisional, if you lose 20 games to 1800 players, you will get a 1400 rating without winning a game. 🙂
Their first rating probably isn't their first experience with chess. They've probably been playing for a while. I don't have a rating yet and I'm sure that if I figure out a thing or two in the next couple of years I could achieve at least 1400 for my first official rating.
Originally posted by SwissGambitThe question you answered wasn't the question I was asking, or intending to ask. What I meant to ask was how good a person is when the person first picks up the pieces. When the person is just learning to play the game, how good is that person?
The starting rating doesn't really matter. The only reason I even mentioned 1400 was to answer your question. As a provisional, if you lose 20 games to 1800 players, you will get a 1400 rating without winning a game. 🙂
Sorry about that.
Originally posted by greenpawn34Even though ratings don't mean much, they do mean something. There is a bottom and there is a top, which means you are probably somewhere between.
My First OTB rating (1975) was 1720 (the same as Bobby Fischer)
My second OTB rating (1976) was 1845 (the same as Bobby Fischer)
After that mine and any comparison to Fischer's grade seem to drift apart.
I soon got to 2000+ then drop a tad to mid 1900 I stayed mid 1900 for
10 years then I stated that Chess Club in Bells.
And although I won 21 d ...[text shortened]... h, they reflect on your
score against the strength of the opposition you are playing against.
Since ratings are there to simply give a person a general view of other people you can enjoy playing, ratings do help.
When I first started playing my FICS rating got down to 650 or so in blitzes. I didn't see much back then. 😀