GameKnot: club forum - More on rating vs study methodologies:

Play online chess!

More on rating vs study methodologies:

From	Message
deeper_insight 08-Oct-16, 12:03	More on rating vs study methodologies: I have copied and pasted this from my "TA info/tips of the month" thread.It simply my view on this issue based upon decades of research.You will always see variances in ones study approach method to the game,depending upon the source.I believe my view and my sources have much more precise validity.You,of course,have to make the final decisions on how you learn and in what format you study.Some players excel faster than others,some much slower.But my "guide"has been the most popular that I have observed in and out of the club scene: ***************************************************************************** Members in my club or readers of my club posts outside of my club....please be careful in what you read as chess training knowledge/advice that you may consider as the proper guideline to follow.Sure,you are free to follow any form of directed learning from others you think is their way to proceed and perhaps because it "seems"logical or that it was posted from another friend of yours on GK...or whatever,but again be careful!You could also be steering in the wrong direction,or be held back in the proper steps of graduated and layered learning techniques that may actually be a completely different variation of what was posted somewhere else on GK or some other source on the internet. Many of the steps in the chess learning process from estimated ratings of beginner to expert,I have already posted a long time ago here: gameknot.com It is massively important to note that those guidelines in the learning process are not simply "my opinion",my dads opinion,my uncles opinion,my grandmothers opinions or my best GM friend opinion at the Marshall Club!!!Training methods may differ from an individual because that was the "way"they learned from a parent(for example),but that can be confusing to others who may not know the step fact guidelines set up elsewhere.They may not agree with other sources of learning methods and techniques,especially if they read something in one club and it "differs"in my club. What is posted in that club link above,while not set in stone for every learner,had been gathered from major sources,many GM's,many senior masters,many books and USCF/FIDE learning sources over that last few decades....then condensed down to that guideline I posted for club members to view,interpret and follow. So,while I respect different opinions on what to learn at different rating levels,I do not always agree with it,for it does indeed go against what I have wrote with very precise and careful copying of the much larger chess professional opinions from mentors across the globe. In one other source on GK it was written Quote): Studying openings if you are < ~1800? Bad idea. As we state in the Wrecktangle System, opening study is wasted time on players who still do not know: 1) essential mating nets 2) basic or at least intermediate tactics and combinations 3) essential to intermediate endgame facts Why? Your valuable study time is much better spent on the above three areas AND especially 4) analyzing finished games, especially lost games. We contend (my Dad and I) that you can learn openings by playing correspondence chess PROPERLY (using the Game DB here at GK) to teach yourself openings and also by concentrating only on a defensive system such as 1...e6 (essentially leading to the French for 1.e4 or the Nimzo-Indian/Queen's Indian complex agains 1.d4) for black and 1.Nf3 (Barcza System) for white. The idea is to understand the ideas behind the opening rather than trying to memorize a blizzard of stray opening lines. In the black 1...e6 systems you see recurring ideas that come from the doubling of the white pawns along the c file. And these ideas lead to building an advantage in the endgame, if the game lasts that long. So why tire yourself out on openings? Learn then slowing by playing correspondence chess and use your valuable study time on studying the proper things to increase your chess prowess more quickly. Unquote Now in my club post with careful research and my own senior master opinion,I typed from my link above: 1200-1399: Study more openings, but do not stick with "rarely played variations". It is a huge mistake that a LOT of chess player make while studying openings, to study rarely played/unusual lines which most likely would never come up in real life tournaments. Studying standard opening lines would yield a lot more results! Spend maximum of 20% of your study time to study openings. Until 1800 level openings aren't very important. Concentrate more on middle game and tactics. So as you can see,there is a difference of opinion on where openings should be studied.One source states above that no opening study below 1800 should be attempted.My club source states that between 1200-1399,basically study some level of openings(major,not irregular)but perhaps only about 20%of your study should encompass these studies.My post goes on to say: 1400-1599: Endgame is the key on this level. Only imagine the advantage you get against your opponent if you know how to play endgame well and your opponent does not. The odds are that your opponent will loose the endgame almost immediately. Study basic endgame schemes: King + Pawn vs. King, King + 2 Pawns vs. King, King + Pawn vs. King + 2 Pawns and so on. Besides the endgame do tactics problems (puzzles). Play as much chess as possible especially in real life over the board tournaments with a long time control (that's where you learn the most). 1600-1799: If you got on this level it means you are already strong, very solid chess player which knows a lot about all stages of the game of chess. Keep working on your middle game, strategy and tactics. 1800-1999: Now it is a good time to systemize your opening repertoire. Ideally, you should know very well 2-3 openings for white and 2 for Black. The key to advancing to the expert level here is to analyze your own games. After the game, sit down with a chessboard, paper and pen and go over the game move by move writing down thoughts on your own and your opponent's moves. Only then you may check your game with an engine (Rybka, Fritz, etc). The number #1 mistake chess players make, they either do not analyze their games at all or analyze them by using chess program right away. This is a big mistake which slows down chess progress.The main idea of analysis is not to look at what computer thinks was a good move, but to look for that move yourself! Would it make sense to solve chess tactics puzzles by plugging them into a chess engine? Probably not.Also it is great idea to go over GM games and think them over. The best way to go over these high level games is to first go over all the moves without author's comments and only second time read the comments and annotations. This works great with the openings too. Remember that when you read your opening book tomorrow. 2000-2199: You are now an Expert. Keep working on chess and I'm sure you'll be able to make at least a Master.Concentrate on some more obscure subvariant lines and openings that move out of book a bit quicker like the Trompowski Attack.With your pure strength and knowledge at this juncture,the element of surprise is key in winning more.You will start to obtain more draws at your level if playing opponents around 2200-2300 which is actually a good thing because it proves you are playing close to perfect chess moves as opposed to when you were 2000 rated. So....... It is wise TO STUDY some basic major openings,even as a 1200-1399 player(20%)endgames and more...and then,of course and logically study MORE openings by % as you climb the ladder in rating.....BUT YOU ARE STILL BELOW 1800!!!!!To suddenly decide that there must be an opening study barrier below 1800 rating levels....is simply not completely valid. Then,once over 1800,the guideline illustrates,of course,even more selective opening study. So,its your choice to what you believe or follow!Having faith in a senior master and GM guideline painstakingly researched and followed by me to study a small % of openings prior to an 1800 rating,or some other post elsewhere that simply hinges on a firm"NO"study approach to anyone south of 1800 in rating to take a look at openings?Think carefully!!!! Also,I do not support others ideas about the "GK opening database" as in the above quoted statement from elewhere on GK.Sure its "ok"for early learners,but even those who are above 1500-1600 in rating,I strongly suggest much better and qualitative opening databases that can show much more detail,subvariant % comparisons and other directed learning facts imbedded within the opening database.Hiarcs opening databases and others are sources not even considered or used by other GK opinionated sources on GK.....so how on Earth can those same individuals that are stating that you should use the GK database if you are below 1800 in rating have any real intuitive validity in what they write?GK's database has many "limits".And it is better to start off with much "better"tools and invest$$ in those better study tools,before simply putting your shoulder on the GK database!Again the GK database is "ok"but even the top notch databases(and there are many outside of GK)...are not only better than GK's but NOT some complex tool that cannot be used by those rated under 1800.This would be a myth!!Sure,you may need a bit of guidance from time to time,if you are say,1200-1500 rated and do not understand every facet of that database.But truthfully,many sources on the internet(including youtube videos)will carefully explain "how to"use the best databases in the world. So,while I do not disagree on using the GK database,you will note that many other "opinions"of opening database learning,do not even openly consider other possibilities like I just mentioned!!!Perhaps this is one reason that the rating of those other writers on GK are nowhere near master.Sometimes the "tools"they use or the pattern of learning they conceive as a truism also have limits,thus they will be limiting themselves without even knowing it....and so will others who follow a learning system of others who contend a barrier of 1800 in respect to studying any openings at all. Summary? You SHOULD use opening study,even below 1800 in rating,starting at approx 1200-1399,but only touch on it.But on higher levels(but still below 1800),more openings should be studied COMBINED with endgame study and more....as you can find in my study link above. ***************************************************************** Let me add to the post directly above.... Sometimes you must use a bit of logic to determine who would be more correct in statement differences like...."do not study openings if you are below 1800 in rating" OR" study some openings if you are below 1800 in rating and include more opening study as you approach closer to 1800 in rating". How do you approach which statement has more validity? Answer:By doing your own internet research from MANY sources as well as asking yourself the key,important questions,like: What is the average rating of players across the USA? Do you know the answer?Well,that answer varies,but even in "variation"there is a truism that can determine the answer to what level one should begin to study openings! In general,the average rating with players that are not beginners,but play in some tourneys or clubs,have read chess books(but not necessarily in depth) according to USCF research are between 1400-1600.Adults average aprox 1500,but can drop down to 600-1000 for juniors.I did personal research over the decades and the breakdown in rating also varies by geographic location in the USA.Intercity adults and youths tend to have a bit higher rating than say, players isolated away from tournaments,chess clubs and do not get involved in organized chess play in groups.Those players may average about 1400,while the city adult may average approx 1500-1600 over time. www.chess.com So lets examine some facts through interpolation! Notice something? If the average rating of most players across the USA(not blitz)but corresp and OTB rating is approx 1400-1600.....then where does that place a 1799-1800 player???? The answer is simple! They are definitely ABOVE AVERAGE in chess rating strength!!!! So,using progressive logic and interpolation,ask yourself this question: If you or someone else was 1799 rated,would it have made any sense at all to NOT study chess openings and/or opening databases as the opinion of someone else on GK stipulated? Answer:No,it would not make any sense to ignore chess opening study,especially if 1799 is ABOVE average in chess rating across the USA!!!!If your above average,you certainly did not become "above average"by putting chess opening study aside and studying everything else but openings! Trust me a 1799 rating,Class B is only 1 point away from 1800,which is class A!Either class....B or A is very high!!To even tell others to avoid opening study at any level below 1800(like 1799)is,well,ridiculous.Sure,if you are below average,caution must be advised,but as I said,1200-1399 is some partial starting point to take perhaps 10-20% of your learning towards opening study seriously! See,stating that below 1800 is a no go for opening study is "way" too wide a statement!And average players at 1400-1600 should definitely be looking into openings to improve their play.Below 1200?Well,that is a different story! It does not take much internet scanning to see all the evidence of "average"in the USA.It does indeed vary between age,organizational chess memberships and even geographic locations,including other countries.But in the USA at least,all the evidence illustrates(including the USCF)that 1799 is ABOVE average in rating.That is a no-brainer! So does logic illustrate that an above average player at 1799 should never study openings and study everything else first...and then only AFTER they reach ABOVE or at 1800 then and only then study openings? Answer:No. Study openings in moderate or even great quantity at 1799!And more when you are above 1800,of course.Too many players think that 1200 is a beginner.Not necessarily!This is a base rating given to us all on GK when we first start out.Its only a staging ground.Now,after 25 games or more and you stay at 1200,but did not drop to say,600-700,you are really not a beginner by definition.Novices are below 1200 and 1200-1400 are "class D".Nothing wrong with a class "D"players picking up a bit of opening study!!!! Well,take my advice or take others advice to learn or not to learn openings at below 1800.My advice is to mold your experience and speed as you see fit.I have seen countless players between 1200-1799 learn openings.Some just taste test the openings,others,say,above 1400 take opening study much more seriously and with success!Its your choice.But never believe that you "must" study everything else first between 1200-1799 before you take any serious looks at openings or opening databases....GK's,Hiarcs or any other! TA

From

Message

deeper_insight
08-Oct-16, 12:03

More on rating vs study methodologies:

I have copied and pasted this from my "TA info/tips of the month" thread.It simply my view on this issue based upon decades of research.You will always see variances in ones study approach method to the game,depending upon the source.I believe my view and my sources have much more precise validity.You,of course,have to make the final decisions on how you learn and in what format you study.Some players excel faster than others,some much slower.But my "guide"has been the most popular that I have observed in and out of the club scene:
*******************************************************************************
Members in my club or readers of my club posts outside of my club....please be careful in what you read as chess training knowledge/advice that you may consider as the proper guideline to follow.Sure,you are free to follow any form of directed learning from others you think is their way to proceed and perhaps because it "seems"logical or that it was posted from another friend of yours on GK...or whatever,but again be careful!You could also be steering in the wrong direction,or be held back in the proper steps of graduated and layered learning techniques that may actually be a completely different variation of what was posted somewhere else on GK or some other source on the internet.

Many of the steps in the chess learning process from estimated ratings of beginner to expert,I have already posted a long time ago here:

gameknot.com

It is massively important to note that those guidelines in the learning process are not simply "my opinion",my dads opinion,my uncles opinion,my grandmothers opinions or my best GM friend opinion at the Marshall Club!!!Training methods may differ from an individual because that was the "way"they learned from a parent(for example),but that can be confusing to others who may not know the step fact guidelines set up elsewhere.They may not agree with other sources of learning methods and techniques,especially if they read something in one club and it "differs"in my club.

What is posted in that club link above,while not set in stone for every learner,had been gathered from major sources,many GM's,many senior masters,many books and USCF/FIDE learning sources over that last few decades....then condensed down to that guideline I posted for club members to view,interpret and follow.

So,while I respect different opinions on what to learn at different rating levels,I do not always agree with it,for it does indeed go against what I have wrote with very precise and careful copying of the much larger chess professional opinions from mentors across the globe.

In one other source on GK it was written Quote):

Studying openings if you are < ~1800? Bad idea.

As we state in the Wrecktangle System, opening study is wasted time on players who still do not know:
1) essential mating nets
2) basic or at least intermediate tactics and combinations
3) essential to intermediate endgame facts

Why? Your valuable study time is much better spent on the above three areas AND especially 4) analyzing finished games, especially lost games.

We contend (my Dad and I) that you can learn openings by playing correspondence chess PROPERLY (using the Game DB here at GK) to teach yourself openings and also by concentrating only on a defensive system such as 1...e6 (essentially leading to the French for 1.e4 or the Nimzo-Indian/Queen's Indian complex agains 1.d4) for black and 1.Nf3 (Barcza System) for white. The idea is to understand the ideas behind the opening rather than trying to memorize a blizzard of stray opening lines. In the black 1...e6 systems you see recurring ideas that come from the doubling of the white pawns along the c file. And these ideas lead to building an advantage in the endgame, if the game lasts that long.

So why tire yourself out on openings? Learn then slowing by playing correspondence chess and use your valuable study time on studying the proper things to increase your chess prowess more quickly.

***Unquote***

Now in my club post with careful research and my own senior master opinion,I typed from my link above:

1200-1399: Study more openings, but do not stick with "rarely played variations". It is a huge mistake that a LOT of chess player make while studying openings, to study rarely played/unusual lines which most likely would never come up in real life tournaments. Studying standard opening lines would yield a lot more results!
Spend maximum of 20% of your study time to study openings. Until 1800 level openings aren't very important. Concentrate more on middle game and tactics.

So as you can see,there is a difference of opinion on where openings should be studied.One source states above that no opening study below 1800 should be attempted.My club source states that between 1200-1399,basically study some level of openings(major,not irregular)but perhaps only about 20%of your study should encompass these studies.My post goes on to say:

1400-1599: Endgame is the key on this level. Only imagine the advantage you get against your opponent if you know how to play endgame well and your opponent does not. The odds are that your opponent will loose the endgame almost immediately. Study basic endgame schemes: King + Pawn vs. King, King + 2 Pawns vs. King, King + Pawn vs. King + 2 Pawns and so on. Besides the endgame do tactics problems (puzzles). Play as much chess as possible especially in real life over the board tournaments with a long time control (that's where you learn the most).

1600-1799: If you got on this level it means you are already strong, very solid chess player which knows a lot about all stages of the game of chess. Keep working on your middle game, strategy and tactics.

1800-1999: Now it is a good time to systemize your opening repertoire. Ideally, you should know very well 2-3 openings for white and 2 for Black. The key to advancing to the expert level here is to analyze your own games. After the game, sit down with a chessboard, paper and pen and go over the game move by move writing down thoughts on your own and your opponent's moves. Only then you may check your game with an engine (Rybka, Fritz, etc). The number #1 mistake chess players make, they either do not analyze their games at all or analyze them by using chess program right away. This is a big mistake which slows down chess progress.The main idea of analysis is not to look at what computer thinks was a good move, but to look for that move yourself! Would it make sense to solve chess tactics puzzles by plugging them into a chess engine? Probably not.Also it is great idea to go over GM games and think them over. The best way to go over these high level games is to first go over all the moves without author's comments and only second time read the comments and annotations. This works great with the openings too. Remember that when you read your opening book tomorrow.

2000-2199: You are now an Expert. Keep working on chess and I'm sure you'll be able to make at least a Master.Concentrate on some more obscure subvariant lines and openings that move out of book a bit quicker like the Trompowski Attack.With your pure strength and knowledge at this juncture,the element of surprise is key in winning more.You will start to obtain more draws at your level if playing opponents around 2200-2300 which is actually a good thing because it proves you are playing close to perfect chess moves as opposed to when you were 2000 rated.

So.......

It is wise TO STUDY some basic major openings,even as a 1200-1399 player(20%)endgames and more...and then,of course and logically study MORE openings by % as you climb the ladder in rating.....BUT YOU ARE STILL BELOW 1800!!!!!To suddenly decide that there must be an opening study barrier below 1800 rating levels....is simply not completely valid.

Then,once over 1800,the guideline illustrates,of course,even more selective opening study.

So,its your choice to what you believe or follow!Having faith in a senior master and GM guideline painstakingly researched and followed by me to study a small % of openings prior to an 1800 rating,or some other post elsewhere that simply hinges on a firm"NO"study approach to anyone south of 1800 in rating to take a look at openings?Think carefully!!!!

Also,I do not support others ideas about the "GK opening database" as in the above quoted statement from elewhere on GK.Sure its "ok"for early learners,but even those who are above 1500-1600 in rating,I strongly suggest much better and qualitative opening databases that can show much more detail,subvariant % comparisons and other directed learning facts imbedded within the opening database.Hiarcs opening databases and others are sources not even considered or used by other GK opinionated sources on GK.....so how on Earth can those same individuals that are stating that you should use the GK database if you are below 1800 in rating have any real intuitive validity in what they write?GK's database has many "limits".And it is better to start off with much "better"tools and invest$$ in those better study tools,before simply putting your shoulder on the GK database!Again the GK database is "ok"but even the top notch databases(and there are many outside of GK)...are not only better than GK's but NOT some complex tool that cannot be used by those rated under 1800.This would be a myth!!Sure,you may need a bit of guidance from time to time,if you are say,1200-1500 rated and do not understand every facet of that database.But truthfully,many sources on the internet(including youtube videos)will carefully explain "how to"use the best databases in the world.

So,while I do not disagree on using the GK database,you will note that many other "opinions"of opening database learning,do not even openly consider other possibilities like I just mentioned!!!Perhaps this is one reason that the rating of those other writers on GK are nowhere near master.Sometimes the "tools"they use or the pattern of learning they conceive as a truism also have limits,thus they will be limiting themselves without even knowing it....and so will others who follow a learning system of others who contend a barrier of 1800 in respect to studying any openings at all.

Summary?

You SHOULD use opening study,even below 1800 in rating,starting at approx 1200-1399,but only touch on it.But on higher levels(but still below 1800),more openings should be studied COMBINED with endgame study and more....as you can find in my study link above.

*******************************************************************

Let me add to the post directly above....
Sometimes you must use a bit of logic to determine who would be more correct in statement differences like...."do not study openings if you are below 1800 in rating" OR" study some openings if you are below 1800 in rating and include more opening study as you approach closer to 1800 in rating".

How do you approach which statement has more validity?

Answer:By doing your own internet research from MANY sources as well as asking yourself the key,important questions,like:

What is the average rating of players across the USA?
Do you know the answer?Well,that answer varies,but even in "variation"there is a truism that can determine the answer to what level one should begin to study openings!

In general,the average rating with players that are not beginners,but play in some tourneys or clubs,have read chess books(but not necessarily in depth) according to USCF research are between 1400-1600.Adults average aprox 1500,but can drop down to 600-1000 for juniors.I did personal research over the decades and the breakdown in rating also varies by geographic location in the USA.Intercity adults and youths tend to have a bit higher rating than say, players isolated away from tournaments,chess clubs and do not get involved in organized chess play in groups.Those players may average about 1400,while the city adult may average approx 1500-1600 over time.

www.chess.com

So lets examine some facts through interpolation!

Notice something?
If the average rating of most players across the USA(not blitz)but corresp and OTB rating is approx 1400-1600.....then where does that place a 1799-1800 player????

The answer is simple!
They are definitely ABOVE AVERAGE in chess rating strength!!!!

So,using progressive logic and interpolation,ask yourself this question:

If you or someone else was 1799 rated,would it have made any sense at all to NOT study chess openings and/or opening databases as the opinion of someone else on GK stipulated?

Answer:No,it would not make any sense to ignore chess opening study,especially if 1799 is ABOVE average in chess rating across the USA!!!!If your above average,you certainly did not become "above average"by putting chess opening study aside and studying everything else but openings!

Trust me a 1799 rating,Class B is only 1 point away from 1800,which is class A!Either class....B or A is very high!!To even tell others to avoid opening study at any level below 1800(like 1799)is,well,ridiculous.Sure,if you are below average,caution must be advised,but as I said,1200-1399 is some partial starting point to take perhaps 10-20% of your learning towards opening study seriously!

See,stating that below 1800 is a no go for opening study is "way" too wide a statement!And average players at 1400-1600 should definitely be looking into openings to improve their play.Below 1200?Well,that is a different story!

It does not take much internet scanning to see all the evidence of "average"in the USA.It does indeed vary between age,organizational chess memberships and even geographic locations,including other countries.But in the USA at least,all the evidence illustrates(including the USCF)that 1799 is ABOVE average in rating.That is a no-brainer!

So does logic illustrate that an above average player at 1799 should never study openings and study everything else first...and then only AFTER they reach ABOVE or at 1800 then and only then study openings?

Answer:No.

Study openings in moderate or even great quantity at 1799!And more when you are above 1800,of course.Too many players think that 1200 is a beginner.Not necessarily!This is a base rating given to us all on GK when we first start out.Its only a staging ground.Now,after 25 games or more and you stay at 1200,but did not drop to say,600-700,you are really not a beginner by definition.Novices are below 1200 and 1200-1400 are "class D".Nothing wrong with a class "D"players picking up a bit of opening study!!!!

Well,take my advice or take others advice to learn or not to learn openings at below 1800.My advice is to mold your experience and speed as you see fit.I have seen countless players between 1200-1799 learn openings.Some just taste test the openings,others,say,above 1400 take opening study much more seriously and with success!Its your choice.But never believe that you "must" study everything else first between 1200-1799 before you take any serious looks at openings or opening databases....GK's,Hiarcs or any other!

TA

« Back to club forum

GameKnot: play chess online, monthly chess tournaments, chess clubs, Internet chess league, chess teams, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.