dfw@ll1.UUCP (Dan Webster) (01/01/86)
I have a question that I hope someone out there has an answer for. My USCF rating is stuck at 1860, I own over 200 chess books that I have read piece meal cover to cover. I would like to get my rating to that magical 2200, but am at a loss for where to start. I know there are players on this net with ratings above that. (I've played a few of you!) Could you please send me (or the net) a quick and dirty study method! I promise to employ it and feedback the results. Thanks in Advance, Dan (Tired of "A" Class!) Webster *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
bithead@ihlpf.UUCP (P. Stein) (01/02/86)
>I have a question that I hope someone out there has an answer >for. My USCF rating is stuck at 1860, I own over 200 chess books >that I have read piece meal cover to cover. I would like to get >my rating to that magical 2200, but am at a loss for where to start. >I know there are players on this net with ratings above that. (I've >played a few of you!) Could you please send me (or the net) a quick >and dirty study method! I promise to employ it and feedback the >results. > > Thanks in Advance, > > Dan (Tired of "A" Class!) Webster There are no "quick and dirty" study methods. There seems to be a misconception that the 2200 mark is reached by either magic or application of a cut-and-dried technique. Neither is true. Memorizing openings can be quick, but you can end up with egg on your face when a lower rated opponent deviates from "book". The one instance where memorizing is ok, is when it adds a new continuation to an already existing understanding of an opening. The masters that I'm acquainted with have all worked at the game. Books certainly are important, but a point that can't be stressed enough is: play more chess! Strive for more games against stronger opponents and analyze the game afterwards with your opponent. In addition carry it a step further and perform home analysis on your games ("homework"). Playing is an excellent way to add to your powers of pattern recognition. In addition you gain valuable insights about yourself such as your style. For instance, do you prefer sharp tactical meles or a positional squeeze? As an "A" player you probably have some idea as to what type of game you prefer. You may even have some emotional attachment or aversion to specific openings. Try to be emotionally detached and completely objective. In fact study openings which you don't like and try them over the board. In summary keep up with the books (I recommend game collections and texts on combinations) and by all means - play more chess !! Pete Stein
ray@rochester.UUCP (Ray Frank) (01/03/86)
> I have a question that I hope someone out there has an answer > for. My USCF rating is stuck at 1860, I own over 200 chess books > that I have read piece meal cover to cover. I would like to get > my rating to that magical 2200, but am at a loss for where to start. > I know there are players on this net with ratings above that. (I've > played a few of you!) Could you please send me (or the net) a quick > and dirty study method! I promise to employ it and feedback the > results. > > Thanks in Advance, > > Dan (Tired of "A" Class!) Webster I once discussed with a master his methods of improving his chess game. He told me that one of the most effective methods he employed was to simply play through hundreds or thousands of published games. He did not dwell on the games, he simply looked at the games and moved the pieces accordingly. He believes that this intense association will through osmosis improve his game. One source of games can be your chess magazines. good luck ray
kovalsky@spp2.UUCP (Bruce Kovalsky) (01/04/86)
> I have a question that I hope someone out there has an answer > for. My USCF rating is stuck at 1860, I own over 200 chess books > that I have read piece meal cover to cover. I would like to get > my rating to that magical 2200, but am at a loss for where to start. > I know there are players on this net with ratings above that. (I've > played a few of you!) Could you please send me (or the net) a quick > and dirty study method! I promise to employ it and feedback the > results. > > Thanks in Advance, > > Dan (Tired of "A" Class!) Webster Becoming a chess master is no easy task, even if you spend hours and hours studying the game. I believe that you must have quite a bit of innate ability in order to reach a Master's rating, something which not many people have. I know tournament players that have been competing in tournaments for 20 years, yet they cannot break a certain rating barrier no matter how hard they try. I'm not trying to discourage you, but you must face the statistical facts that only a very small percentage of players of the many who play are capable of playing master level chess. I finally made it to master a couple years ago, but not without sacrifice. I won't go into too much detail on all that I did to make it, but I can give some general tips based on my experience: 1) Come up with an opening repitiore. In other words, study enough opening books until you come up with a basic opening system for white and black that you know well and that you can employ for anything you run across. The key here is to be prepared and come out of the opening with at least equal chances. You don't want to be caught in an opening your opponent knows well and you don't know. The choice of openings you play should suit your style, I.e., choose gambits or open lines if you are a tactical player, and choose quiet, sound lines if you are more positional. One word of warning though - if you play wild lines all the time you are bound to get burned alot, too. Achieving a master's rating requires you to be consistent, and this calls for an understanding of positional chess at some point. Not all games can be steered into tactical lines. 2) Go over master's games. This is a very important practice - easy to do, too. By seeing what the stonger players play, you can gather a subtle knowledge of what type of moves to play in common positions that may arise in your games. And you would be surprised at how often certain themes occur in each game of chess, whether it be master or novice. It is better to go over current games, such as the ones in Chess Life each month, or the Chess Informants, but games collections of the great players is good also. The more exposure to games you have seen, the better the chance you have of using their ideas to your advantage in your games. 3) Study endgames. This is a key if you want to improve to higher levels, as many games among masters are won and lost in the ending. It's not even the endings themselves, but knowing when to simplify a middlegame into a won endgame, for example. Endgames are some of the toughest positions in chess to understand and master, but if you can improve your ability here, you are bound to win more drawn/lost games and draw more lost games just on technique alone. These are the main areas I advocate people to study if they want to improve their chess. As I mentioned, not everyone is cut out to be a master, but the only way to find out is to try. I wish you good luck and good chess! ----- Bruce Kovalsky ..{decvax,hplabs,ihnp4,scdrdcf,ucbvax}!trwrb!trwspp!spp2!kovalsky "Chess players do it 40 times in 90 minutes!"
tim@ism780c.UUCP (Tim Smith) (01/04/86)
[ How does one improve at chess ] I have been told that postal chess will help. People I know who have played in postal tournements say they find that their over-the-board rating goes up quite a bit after a postal tournement. In article <840@spp2.UUCP> kovalsky@spp2.UUCP (Bruce Kovalsky) writes: > > Becoming a chess master is no easy task, even if you spend hours > and hours studying the game. I believe that you must have quite > a bit of innate ability in order to reach a Master's rating, > something which not many people have. This could be an intersting topic for discussion here: How good should one be able to get at chess without any innate chess skill? Opinions I have heard range from "Any reasonably intellegent person can reach World Championship level if he/she tries hard enough" to "you should be able to reach expert, but to get past that you have to be special" Reply to the net. -- Tim Smith sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim || ima!ism780!tim || ihnp4!cithep!tim
tedrick@ernie.BERKELEY.EDU (Tom Tedrick) (01/04/86)
In article <417@ll1.UUCP> dfw@ll1.UUCP (Dan Webster) writes: > [ ... ] Could you please send me (or the net) a quick >and dirty study method! [ ... ] Steinitz suggested memorizing master games and playing them over from memory, without notes, so as to improve chess perception and memory. What I have been doing lately is applying this method to Capablanca games which have a nice ending (won by Capa of course). It seems to be pleasant and helpful. This "kills 2 birds with 1 stone" by giving me better insight into the endings as well. (My OTB rating is only 2125, though I am a master in postal chess).