|
|
| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
cmtoo 15-Dec-19, 19:46 |
 Chess Study, and TrainingIn mathematics, there is a clearly delineated sequence of topics that should be covered, and every student is expected to learn these topics before moving to their next year of study. Naturally, as the years go by, there is more flexibility, and specializing requires us to diverge into seemingly separate fields. Having said that, at least the first thousand hours of mathematical training are almost universally accepted as both necessary and sequential in nature. The landscape of chess training paints a completely different picture. Lesson topics are often disconnected one from the other, and there is often an emphasis on personalization. It is not uncommon for a coach to say that his or her lessons are tailored toward the individual needs of each student. That has always puzzled me. Would you ever tell a middle-school child that, given his personality and personal preferences, he should learn trigonometry before learning fractions? Devising a chess curriculum that is both effective and universal is a very complex task, with many interesting questions and challenges I hope to explore over the years. At the same time that I am exploring this topic, so is the St. Louis Chess Club. The club works to provide chess training and instruction in St. Louis area schools. While structuring chess is a difficult task, they are also working on a curriculum that chess instructors, and even teachers, can follow to bring the educational benefits of chess to the masses.” From St. Louis Public Radio web site - Mauricio Flores is a chess grandmaster based in Minnesota, where he finished his Ph.D. in applied mathematics. He is the author of the book “Chess Structures, a Grandmaster Guide." news.stlpublicradio.org |
||
|
cmtoo 10-Mar-20, 21:51 |
Play the French |
||
|
cmtoo 11-Mar-20, 00:32 |
Openings Even at grandmaster level, most games are decided not by opening knowledge, but by tactical mistakes in the middlegame, and this is even more true at club level. Providing you are playing a reputable opening, there is no reason to think that your opponent will be able to win the game by preparation alone, even if he has a good idea of what you will play. He is unlikely to secure more than a small advantage. Be discerning about the variations that you record, and your responses. Do not worry about learning too much by heart. Don’t look at your opening repertoire while you are playing the game. Try and play it from memory. When you finish the game, analyse the opening, and the game. When opponents play opening variations that are not in your opening lines, and when you come to the end of what you can remember, or forget your opening lines, you can deal with it by playing “real” chess and from your general understanding and experience of the opening. As Tal said at the age of 20, “The World Champions I Knew” – Genna Sosonko P. 184, “If you constantly take your partner off the well-trodden paths and into the wilds of complicated intuitive calculation, and then sacrifice something (especially good in time trouble!), then… In that situation it isn’t only the faint-hearted who waiver.” So, my advice is to avoid spending a great deal of time on openings. Just learn enough to get by, and spend more of your chess time improving your tactical ability. This will win you more games than extensive study of opening lines - Some of the above is from Steve Giddins “101 Chess Questions Answered”. Beginners Look for the attacking main line, as White 1.e4 - Ruy Lopez, as Black 1.e4 – Sicilian, as Black 1.d4 - Nimzo-Indian. I think there comes a point where you know whether you’re an attacker or a positional player. When you get to that point, you can decide whether to switch to positional openings. |
||
|
|
||
|
cmtoo 26-May-20, 11:20 |
|
