Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 08:40:07 02/04/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 04, 2002 at 10:38:04, David Rasmussen wrote: > >Thanks for the link. Great article! I too am a weak chess player, and I have >also recently had an insight about focusing on tactics instead of positional >knowledge. I have 40 chess books or so, and of course some of them are about I found this kind of things too dogmatic. The most important part of learning is interest and motivation. If you despise going through thousands of tactical exercises with nothing in between for a year most probably your are going to quit after two weeks. This is like the magic diets where you have to juggle your day around the diet. As always, improvement is an individual effort and depends very much on the individual. That's where the importance of the teacher comes, NOT TO EXPLAIN WHY Ba4 is better than Bxc6 in the Ruy Lopez. Tactics will be a key for a player, but might not be for another. There hundreds of details that are important and some of them are not even related to chess (like attention etc.). In general, tactics are very important particularly at that level, but it is not wise to separate it from everything else. Tactical exercises are good, but it is never good to be 100% of the training. Ah! do not forget to play real OTB chess, but not too much. 60-80 slow paced (anything that last more than 3 hours) games a year, select some and analyze them to death WITHOUT A COMPUTER, show it to a stronger player or a friend. Share analysis... Then, use your computer. Keep a notebook with everything... Regards, Miguel >tactics, and I have read them, and solved the excercises, but to actually >improve from it, I haven't really been able. I know from my experience with >running (I like to run), what regular excercise will do for your ability. >Studying chess, I have missed something similar to this regular repetitive >training from physical training. In physical excercise and in learning in >general, small isolated repetitive excercise is the foundation for development. >And most chess books just have a lot of example of knowledge. No chess books >that I have read have had the intension of practically making the player improve >as much as possible in the shortest time, given the space of the book. > >/David
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.