|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 13, 2022 20:14:17 GMT
be fresh, rested; the difference is huge; never do too much Always, one of the things you find out with time. Did you try Mate studies? Not per se, just as they come around in problem solving.
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 14, 2022 16:24:12 GMT
You were right, it's rather easy to keep going up. I think problems are overrated. The one below has a "Task Elo" of 2250, whatever that is, and I saw it instantly. Even solved correctly all the lines at the first try in just 3 minutes (had to close the laptop to open the door). Have you come across this particular one? If you haven't, don't look to thee right, SPOILERS there.
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 14, 2022 20:36:32 GMT
I am with my mother, so I'll have a look at the problem tomorrow, on my pc.
But yes, after some time solving combinations is mostly a matter of discipline: one detects the motives (it becomes relatively easy after some time) and then carefully calculate the solution. The whole point is to see the patterns - calculating can be learned. I think it doesn't matter how difficult the problems are once you have learnt the technique, but how many you solve, to become aware of the motives, patterns.
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 14, 2022 20:45:02 GMT
Don't worry about the spoilers i can't see what's written on my little phone. I barely see the board. I think I found the idea, but did not solve the problem yet. Solving it in three mn was great!
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 14, 2022 21:00:08 GMT
Finally! The solution is Dd5, of course but I had difficulties to see Rh8 at the end of the line with Kb7, Kc6.
I often pain to switch to other kinds of solutions searching for mate in all lines, although there's, like here, only material in one of them. Poor technique.
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 16, 2022 13:44:06 GMT
I installed Peshka with CT-Art (I also found some other courses, btw, at my usual shop. It also occurred to me that I could send you some more materials, if you want.) and started solving problems. Doing this kind of exercises taught me several techniques in calculation, and the motives/patterns are much easier to see after some time. But still, I miss the easy, most obvious moves. In my last exercise, I spent 2mn calculating a complicated continuation when I had a mate in 1! I missed twice mates in 1 yesterday (I gave mate in 2 once, and took the Q the other time. What's even worse is that this second exercise, I had already solved it before!). BTW, I prefer the old interface. Peska is a mess, even when I customize it. I somehow got use to it, but I don't like it still. Will do some endings this afternoon. I am home, alone, nobody to bother me. Then, play a game against Maia. I don't know how much I have improved, even if I have improved at all. I feel I still lack the discipline, focus required to play well. I see most of the threats in a game, but, just like in the exercises, somehow miss something quite obvious. I don't feel that I calculate better -- I am more careful, miss less answers, but I feel somehow without landmarks at times, and, at other times, I am just unable to evaluate, even see the resulting position.
Where I have improved? Openings -- I know some openings much better. That's for sure. Some middlegames.
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 16, 2022 14:41:50 GMT
The only way to know for sure if one has improved, and by how much, is by playing tournaments. That's why I don't trust these "problem solving" ratings.
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 16, 2022 15:49:34 GMT
The only way to know for sure if one has improved, and by how much, is by playing tournaments. That's why I don't trust these "problem solving" ratings. I agree. Problems serve to improve your game, not to get an Elo rating. And like I wrote, the Elo in Convekta software is a fake one. It is also uneven: way easier to improve in some programs than in others.
Playing against Maia has also his drawbacks -- Maia is simply positionally too good, and tactically too bad. It's... uneven. Whatever the authors intended, it does not feel completely human. I played a game against Maia 1500 since my last post, and it blundered a mate in one in a relatively simple position, after playing a very good, complicated middlegame. I went last Friday to the cafehouse where the members of the club play, played a few off-hand games, and I simply destroyed them positionally. Against Maia 1900, I simply can't touch her strategically. I wait for a blunder (from her or from me, unfortunately, but hopefully, I blunder less and less), and then, I have to fight like a devil to win a won position. It simply is not human, and I feel stressed whatever plan I choose. OK, it's good for learning, and since Maia calculates from 0-4 moves deep, her moves are really easy to understand at times, but it's completely different from real OTB play (the stress excepted).
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 17, 2022 8:16:45 GMT
Did you give WeakDelfi a try? Remember, not the free version of the Delfi engine available here, but the one in Aquarium, which plays around 1900. The other one is fixed at 1000 or GM level. Not very convenient.
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 17, 2022 9:18:59 GMT
Did you give WeakDelfi a try? Remember, not the free version of the Delfi engine available here, but the one in Aquarium, which plays around 1900. The other one is fixed at 1000 or GM level. Not very convenient. Not yet, but I will. There are also DOS programs that I could try, and under LucasChess, there are several weak engines one could play with.
I read an article on ChessOK that with a combination of work/analysis and tournaments, a jump from 2200 to 2400 was possible in two years. I had a look at the timetable: four hours a day, four days a week of analysis/learning + tournaments. Of course, this work is with a coach and adequate software.
I don't have a coach, and there are no tournaments around. The lack of coach was obvious when I chose my repertoire. I lost several months before making the adequate choices, finding lines that I understand, can remember, and like to play.
For the rest, I can only rely on books about chess training I read: Miguel de la Maza's "Rapid chess improvement", where he emphasizes the need to training tactics to achieve the rank of good amateur; there is also a book from Jonathan Hawkins, where he wrote about his own experience of improving his understanding of endings to achieve a master level. I have the required software to do this.
But, obviously, I have to play. Three, four games a week, and some rapid and blitz too. I'll try with everything I have -- Maia, weak engines, engines with levels. We'll see what's the most realistic and works the best.
The last question is: how will I know I have improved? Until some point, I will know. But I need to play, obviously.
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 17, 2022 11:58:36 GMT
WealDelfi can be configured below 1900, from inside Aquarium, but I never tried, so I have no idea how well it accommodates lower levels.
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 17, 2022 12:16:31 GMT
WealDelfi can be configured below 1900, from inside Aquarium, but I never tried, so I have no idea how well it accommodates lower levels. Come on, Ozzy. The fact that I prefer easily beating AI players ranked 1600 than facing AI players ranked 1900 is just laziness from my part, a reticence to fight hard. I can't delay playing (and losing) any more. 1900 is fine. 2200 should be fine too if I want to really progress. I think I am tactically ok -- as much as I can be -- to face weaker engines. I already tried last year, when I started this work, but I simply blundered too much so it was not fun at all.
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 17, 2022 20:34:09 GMT
Tactically OK, I should be too, given the ratings I get, and yet, that only means something under certain conditions: being rested, willing to concentrate, under optimal physical conditions. Things you can control at home, and just stop solving problems as soon as you notice one or more of those conditions waning. You can't do that when playing a tournament. Case in point, I played today a 7 round rapid tournament, 3 on the morning 4 on the afternoon. I was OK this morning, and scored 2/3 losing only to a GM. This afternoon I started with another win, but only scored half a point for the remaining 3 games. I was tired, dehydrated (forgot to carry water) and suffocated (it's not very hot today, but it was a basement with little forced ventilation and humidity was very high.
|
|
|
Post by matejst on Jul 18, 2022 1:08:11 GMT
Tactically OK, I should be too, given the ratings I get, and yet, that only means something under certain conditions: being rested, willing to concentrate, under optimal physical conditions. Things you can control at home, and just stop solving problems as soon as you notice one or more of those conditions waning. You can't do that when playing a tournament. Case in point, I played today a 7 round rapid tournament, 3 on the morning 4 on the afternoon. I was OK this morning, and scored 2/3 losing only to a GM. This afternoon I started with another win, but only scored half a point for the remaining 3 games. I was tired, dehydrated (forgot to carry water) and suffocated (it's not very hot today, but it was a basement with little forced ventilation and humidity was very high. Anyway, good result! The important is that you know what was wrong and that you can change it. Then, seven round in a day is a bit too much, it's almost seven hours of play, especially tiring is the nerve wrecking zeitnot at the end of the games (even with Fischer clock).
I also think about improving my physical condition overall, to do some cardio and lose even more weight (since I stop being the secretary of the redaction of the faculty journal I lost 23 kg; I gained a lot of weight in the seven years I did this awful job. I look good now, almost no belly, but a few kg less would do no harm.)
OTOH, I plan to play more. I tried today an engine with UCI_limit_strength and it looked good. I was massacred in several blitz games at 1800 Elo, but I checked the "autoskill" option and I was able to play a good rapid game. I will try it tomorrow at a normal time control. A combination of playing and cardio-exercises should definitely help, especially in a crucial part you mentioned above: "willing to concentrate". I still have to put lot of efforts to remain focused through a whole game. It is important to develop this habit.
|
|
|
Post by Ozymandias on Jul 19, 2022 11:35:09 GMT
This one was 2150, but I couldn't find the first move. Even when the program showed me the motif, I failed 4 times. In the end, the move was played and only then did I see how to apply the lesson. Can you find the oddly looking move?
|
|