I think the not playing is the one I struggle with. I suspect I am like other adult improvers. It’s easy to fit 15 minutes of Chessable openings or 30 minutes of tactics into our busy day. Here I think the meta narrative around long games and playing OTB (I know you push rapid but you are the minority there) hurts at least the adult improvers cohort. Spending a full Saturday or Sunday (or both) is a huge investment to make regularly. If something comes up at home while I am doing tactics, working on opening files, reading an annotated book, etc I can put it down and pick it back up in 5 minutes in a way I wouldn’t find acceptable in an online game.
It really is very unusual to sit across a table from someone for multiple hours while wanting the exact opposite of what they want. Most people don’t ever do anything like that.
Psh, I totally agree especially with the first 2. I am not as intimidated playing otb as I am online for some reason though but playing has become intimidating once I started wanting to get better when hitting plateaus. I love studying chess, there's no consequences when studying. It reminds me of how someone can feel good about themselves by thinking about doing the right thing without actually doing the right thing.
Guilty! After 3 decades plus away from chess I came back to it and have done all the things you are not supposed to do, including the ones you mentioned. It has taken me(and still working on it) almost a year to get to where those four things you mention are a priority for my improvement. And that’s really because of a new friend who is also an adult improver helping me. I will also add, I play online but I don’t like it. I much rather play OTB. But if you’re not in an area where there’s a decent chess club, those games are hard to find.
3. Study material at my level that addresses the gaps found in game analysis
4. Focus on one improvement area at a time.
5. Stick with a plan long enough for it to work. Chess improvement, like most things in life, is a marathon, not a sprint.
6. If I don't love 1 and 2, maybe chess is not the hobby for me. Evaluate periodically if I still love finding the answers to puzzles, playing, and putting on my detective hat in game analysis.
Note to #4. Currently, I have 2: time management and tactics. I think it will stay that way with time management always being a focus. I will change out the others as needed. I suspect it will stay this way for quite a while because I am at the beginner stage.
This all rings very true to me, especially liked the piece about both extremes of game review being counterproductive.
On the point about doing too much at once, I’ve been conflicted recently. I’ve always thought along the same lines, that focusing solely on the highest-ROI thing would be the way to go. I still think it’s probably largely correct, but it does seem to contrast with the finding that interleaving is more effective than chunking, in the science of learning literature. Curious if you were aware of those findings, or if you’ve already considered this?
My largest gains did come from focusing on one thing instead of doing a bunch of things, so at least anecdotally, the interleaving thing is somehow not applicable to chess study, but it’s not clear to me why.
I took a course on positional chess on chessable that wasn’t meant for my rating range. It’s probably the best course I’ve ever done on chessable, but since taking it, I always lose on time. I overthink so many positions where the first obvious move would actually be the best.
While doing this chessable course, I decided to change my opening repertoire and switch from the Trompowsky to 2. c4. Changes to the opening repertoire might also be a good reason for a plateau. I’ve only played a handful of games with 2. c4 so far, but I wouldn’t be surprised if I struggle with the resulting middlegames (something I’ve always done with the Trompowsky - it can’t be much worse). And of course, I still do tactics and review all my other openings while doing this training.
I sometimes do number 5, the freak-out. In the last round of a recent tournament, for instance, I misplayed the opening in a particularly galling way. The next day, I bought a half-dozen opening courses on chessable and started slamming quickstarters like a freshman on $1 beer night. I came to my senses a few days later and decided to actually learn my current repertoire instead of changing everything. Now, I'm a few dollars poorer but marginally wiser.
Yes guilty…starting out chasing the vast array of items to choose from to study, including most being above current level actually and not playing enough set me back I think. The last year and a half have shifted that and seeing the benefits. Have heard too many strong players mention that playing and analyzing their games then adding in some tactic work is what worked for them. It’s finally sinking in thankfully
For me, I think not actually getting to the root cause of my limit was the problem. I was studying, learning stuff, playing, getting measurably better in various ways, trying to understand my blunders….it took two consecutive painful losses and happening to read several articles by Nate and others to come to my senses and realise I was actually just killing myself with time trouble. Early days but since the light bulb went on I’m 7 from 9 and a new peak rating on lichess classical. I’d normally have thrown away an additional two of those 9 games.
I think the not playing is the one I struggle with. I suspect I am like other adult improvers. It’s easy to fit 15 minutes of Chessable openings or 30 minutes of tactics into our busy day. Here I think the meta narrative around long games and playing OTB (I know you push rapid but you are the minority there) hurts at least the adult improvers cohort. Spending a full Saturday or Sunday (or both) is a huge investment to make regularly. If something comes up at home while I am doing tactics, working on opening files, reading an annotated book, etc I can put it down and pick it back up in 5 minutes in a way I wouldn’t find acceptable in an online game.
If the choice is between not playing or playing shorter games, I think playing shorter games wins!
It really is very unusual to sit across a table from someone for multiple hours while wanting the exact opposite of what they want. Most people don’t ever do anything like that.
Huh. Until now, I'd never noticed that a chess tournament and a presidential debate are basically the same thing.
"...while wanting the exact opposite of what they want."
LOL I have never heard it stated like that. I love it.
Psh, I totally agree especially with the first 2. I am not as intimidated playing otb as I am online for some reason though but playing has become intimidating once I started wanting to get better when hitting plateaus. I love studying chess, there's no consequences when studying. It reminds me of how someone can feel good about themselves by thinking about doing the right thing without actually doing the right thing.
Guilty! After 3 decades plus away from chess I came back to it and have done all the things you are not supposed to do, including the ones you mentioned. It has taken me(and still working on it) almost a year to get to where those four things you mention are a priority for my improvement. And that’s really because of a new friend who is also an adult improver helping me. I will also add, I play online but I don’t like it. I much rather play OTB. But if you’re not in an area where there’s a decent chess club, those games are hard to find.
My notes on this article:
Keys to improvement https://substack.com/home/post/p-181459190?source=queue
1. Play chess
2. Analyze games with curiosity
3. Study material at my level that addresses the gaps found in game analysis
4. Focus on one improvement area at a time.
5. Stick with a plan long enough for it to work. Chess improvement, like most things in life, is a marathon, not a sprint.
6. If I don't love 1 and 2, maybe chess is not the hobby for me. Evaluate periodically if I still love finding the answers to puzzles, playing, and putting on my detective hat in game analysis.
Note to #4. Currently, I have 2: time management and tactics. I think it will stay that way with time management always being a focus. I will change out the others as needed. I suspect it will stay this way for quite a while because I am at the beginner stage.
This all rings very true to me, especially liked the piece about both extremes of game review being counterproductive.
On the point about doing too much at once, I’ve been conflicted recently. I’ve always thought along the same lines, that focusing solely on the highest-ROI thing would be the way to go. I still think it’s probably largely correct, but it does seem to contrast with the finding that interleaving is more effective than chunking, in the science of learning literature. Curious if you were aware of those findings, or if you’ve already considered this?
My largest gains did come from focusing on one thing instead of doing a bunch of things, so at least anecdotally, the interleaving thing is somehow not applicable to chess study, but it’s not clear to me why.
I am definitely victim to points 3 and 4.
I took a course on positional chess on chessable that wasn’t meant for my rating range. It’s probably the best course I’ve ever done on chessable, but since taking it, I always lose on time. I overthink so many positions where the first obvious move would actually be the best.
While doing this chessable course, I decided to change my opening repertoire and switch from the Trompowsky to 2. c4. Changes to the opening repertoire might also be a good reason for a plateau. I’ve only played a handful of games with 2. c4 so far, but I wouldn’t be surprised if I struggle with the resulting middlegames (something I’ve always done with the Trompowsky - it can’t be much worse). And of course, I still do tactics and review all my other openings while doing this training.
At least I play games and analyze them (a bit).
Usually takes a while to get proficient with a new opening. Faster games can help with this.
I sometimes do number 5, the freak-out. In the last round of a recent tournament, for instance, I misplayed the opening in a particularly galling way. The next day, I bought a half-dozen opening courses on chessable and started slamming quickstarters like a freshman on $1 beer night. I came to my senses a few days later and decided to actually learn my current repertoire instead of changing everything. Now, I'm a few dollars poorer but marginally wiser.
Very common story!
Yes guilty…starting out chasing the vast array of items to choose from to study, including most being above current level actually and not playing enough set me back I think. The last year and a half have shifted that and seeing the benefits. Have heard too many strong players mention that playing and analyzing their games then adding in some tactic work is what worked for them. It’s finally sinking in thankfully
I’ve been guilty of most of these at various points. I still struggle with number four.
For me, I think not actually getting to the root cause of my limit was the problem. I was studying, learning stuff, playing, getting measurably better in various ways, trying to understand my blunders….it took two consecutive painful losses and happening to read several articles by Nate and others to come to my senses and realise I was actually just killing myself with time trouble. Early days but since the light bulb went on I’m 7 from 9 and a new peak rating on lichess classical. I’d normally have thrown away an additional two of those 9 games.