@eladarsaid Back when my rating on FICS was 650ish, I was playing chess with high school students during lunch and down times.
A German exchange student was watching so I asked him if he wanted to play. His answer was that he did not like chess because it is too much work.
At the time I thought his response was odd. Now I can see where he was coming from, at least if he was taught to play chess "right".
So what is the balance? When are you good enough?
So what is the balance? When are you good enough?
The answer to these 2 questions depends on the individual. If you're happy with some occasional games at the beginner level, then the balance is OK for you and you're good enough. If however, you want to play at a higher level, more study and games against stronger players will be required. To put it another way: The only problem with moving up in class is you have to work harder to stay there.
@mchillsaid So what is the balance? When are you good enough?
The answer to these 2 questions depends on the individual. If you're happy with some occasional games at the beginner level, then the balance is OK for you and you're good enough. If however, you want to play at a higher level, more study and games against stronger players will be required. To put it another way: The only problem with moving up in class is you have to work harder to stay there.
After watching Eric Rosen talk his way through a 10 minute games, the calculations he made seemed effortless.
I guess just like anything we do, results will vary. If nothing else, learning chess as an adult helps develop different parts of the brain.
Just have to keep it rewarding enough to not simply quit playing because it is not worth it.
@eladarsaid That is what I mean about chess being too much work for most people.
Three things would help me to maximize my game at the moment.
Greatly increased skill in visualizing calculations, taking time to look for moves as I would doing a tactics puzzle and board vision.
Taking the time to look at the board as if it were a tactics puzzle would greatly help with board vision.
Carrying this out consistently would take a lot of work.
If I may suggest, setting aside 1 hour everyday for some tactics book training, and a few 30 min. games a week on chess.com or other sites is really not a lot of work. Most people spend more time than that everyday in front of their TV's. It all comes down to priorities.
@mchillsaid If I may suggest, setting aside 1 hour everyday for some tactics book training, and a few 30 min. games a week on chess.com or other sites is really not a lot of work. Most people spend more time than that everyday in front of their TV's. It all comes down to priorities.
No, it is the constant thought that is a lot of work. I do not do tactics books, I do chesstempo.
Playing multiple 10 minute games is a lot more fun than playing one 30 minute game.
@eladarsaid No, it is the constant thought that is a lot of work. I do not do tactics books, I do chesstempo.
Playing multiple 10 minute games is a lot more fun than playing one 30 minute game.
I do know the syndrome which you're referring to. In a problem or study the instruction will be something along the lines of "White to play and Mate in 3.", so it's quite clear that something tactical is available. In an actual game, unless there's a kibitzer to say, one doesn't receive that kind of instruction. So practicing keeping track of checks, captures and threats - in order of importance - is the way forward. I tend to agree that treating each position in an otb game as a problem is just too much work. However, I think it's possible to work out a system where maintaining awareness of these three aspects, both your own and your opponent's checks, captures and threats, should provide the warning that it's time to go into problem solving mode and find a way to checkmate them. I don't know how to do that yet, I rely on intuition, but this is a helpful debate - I now know what I have to work on - other than endings.
Enjoyment Balance
27 Oct '20 18:16
Back to Top