Your network blocks the Lichess assets!

lichess.org
Donate

Science of Chess - Candidate Moves, David Marr, and why it's so hard to be good.

I think one of the things rarely touched upon on by adult improvers is where they want to improve. Almost all material and analysis of learning / chess teaching cater to OTB classical time controls. By extension, people use these learning methods, looking for improvements in online rapid/blitz - without bothering to go through the intensity of playing several OTB classical TC games.

As such there's a disconnect.

Allow me to offer a rough analogy:

  1. Fruits = Chess knowledge
  2. Blender = Brain
  3. Blending Time = Playing long time control games
  4. Smoothie = Good moves

We cannot expect a smoothie if we skip on 3.

The standard improvement method is to get good at classical first, rapid and blitz would automatically follow since one has already made the smoothie.

Quick Fix Method
Considering that I have more or less skipped on 3, I tried an experiment which skips on 1 as well. What's the point of 1 if I'd just skip on 3?
So I just focused on habits and basic skills. Postponing knowledge-work for now. My rating jumps happened during the periods after I did the simple exercises which I have created. I don't produce smoothies, but it's good enough to get to 2100 rapid in Lichess. Further than that, we're bumping into those who did the standard method properly. 2300 is probably the ceiling for the QF method.

QF should work for anyone, and if you want to experiment on yourself, I'm sure you'll get to at least 2000 on Lichess.

I think one of the things rarely touched upon on by adult improvers is where they want to improve. Almost all material and analysis of learning / chess teaching cater to OTB classical time controls. By extension, people use these learning methods, looking for improvements in online rapid/blitz - without bothering to go through the intensity of playing several OTB classical TC games. As such there's a disconnect. Allow me to offer a rough analogy: 1. Fruits = Chess knowledge 2. Blender = Brain 3. Blending Time = Playing long time control games 4. Smoothie = Good moves We cannot expect a smoothie if we skip on 3. The standard improvement method is to get good at classical first, rapid and blitz would automatically follow since one has already made the smoothie. Quick Fix Method Considering that I have more or less skipped on 3, I tried an experiment which skips on 1 as well. What's the point of 1 if I'd just skip on 3? So I just focused on habits and basic skills. Postponing knowledge-work for now. My rating jumps happened during the periods after I did the simple exercises which I have created. I don't produce smoothies, but it's good enough to get to 2100 rapid in Lichess. Further than that, we're bumping into those who did the standard method properly. 2300 is probably the ceiling for the QF method. QF should work for anyone, and if you want to experiment on yourself, I'm sure you'll get to at least 2000 on Lichess.

@GnocchiPup said in #21:

I think one of the things rarely touched upon on by adult improvers is where they want to improve. Almost all material and analysis of learning / chess teaching cater to OTB classical time controls. By extension, people use these learning methods, looking for improvements in online rapid/blitz - without bothering to go through the intensity of playing several OTB classical TC games.

In physical sports they speak of "muscle memory". Of course, the term is a misnomer. It is nervous system memory. Probably, specifically, the memory is in the CNS of brain, brain stem and possibly even spinal cord, since it is motor skills. It's unlikely that that any of the "muscle memory" is in the peripheral nervous system as memory per se but some of these circuits may be upgraded or augmented in some way.

"Muscle memory is a form of procedural memory that involves consolidating a specific motor task into memory through repetition, which has been used synonymously with motor learning. When a movement is repeated over time, the brain creates a long-term muscle memory for that task, eventually allowing it to be performed with little to no conscious effort." - Wikipedia.

The key phrase in the above quote is "with no conscious effort". We are trying to create "chess memory" or chess procedural memory. Procedural memory is a type of implicit memory (unconscious, long-term memory) which aids the performance of particular types of tasks without conscious awareness of the learned elements and without conscious intentions of putting together, synthesising or processing the learned knowledge.

Aa an old adult improver, I am still abysmal at fast chess, despite doing some puzzle streaks and other puzzles. I have tried quite a few 10+5 time control games as Anonymous. I keep making the same infuriating mistakes over and over. It feels like I am not learning and/or not seeing the basic stuff that consciously I actually know. But if I laboriously play 60+30 games against the computer, Stockfish Level 5 currently, I can remember and consciously apply all my lessons (like Robert Ramirez and Danial Naroditsky's lessons (not speedruns) on Youtube, so that I don't make basic blunders any more in 60+30. These games feel like interesting journeys rather than blunder-riddled time scrambles.

At my age (70), I don't know if I will ever create enough chess procedural memory to play fast chess. Maybe it's too late for me. But classical time controls are fun for me so I will see how far I can push up the Stockfish levels. I can defeat Stockfish Level 5 pretty much every time now. Time to move to Level 6. I have immense trouble seeing ahead in the game though. Visualisation and calculation of combinations beyond a couple of moves is my glaring weakness. Again, at my age, I doubt if I can ever push that capability further now. I assume that my neural plasticity at 70 is sadly rather low. But I will keep trying.

"He not busy being born is busy dying." - Bob Dylan.

@GnocchiPup said in #21: > I think one of the things rarely touched upon on by adult improvers is where they want to improve. Almost all material and analysis of learning / chess teaching cater to OTB classical time controls. By extension, people use these learning methods, looking for improvements in online rapid/blitz - without bothering to go through the intensity of playing several OTB classical TC games. In physical sports they speak of "muscle memory". Of course, the term is a misnomer. It is nervous system memory. Probably, specifically, the memory is in the CNS of brain, brain stem and possibly even spinal cord, since it is motor skills. It's unlikely that that any of the "muscle memory" is in the peripheral nervous system as memory per se but some of these circuits may be upgraded or augmented in some way. "Muscle memory is a form of procedural memory that involves consolidating a specific motor task into memory through repetition, which has been used synonymously with motor learning. When a movement is repeated over time, the brain creates a long-term muscle memory for that task, eventually allowing it to be performed with little to no conscious effort." - Wikipedia. The key phrase in the above quote is "with no conscious effort". We are trying to create "chess memory" or chess procedural memory. Procedural memory is a type of implicit memory (unconscious, long-term memory) which aids the performance of particular types of tasks without conscious awareness of the learned elements and without conscious intentions of putting together, synthesising or processing the learned knowledge. Aa an old adult improver, I am still abysmal at fast chess, despite doing some puzzle streaks and other puzzles. I have tried quite a few 10+5 time control games as Anonymous. I keep making the same infuriating mistakes over and over. It feels like I am not learning and/or not seeing the basic stuff that consciously I actually know. But if I laboriously play 60+30 games against the computer, Stockfish Level 5 currently, I can remember and consciously apply all my lessons (like Robert Ramirez and Danial Naroditsky's lessons (not speedruns) on Youtube, so that I don't make basic blunders any more in 60+30. These games feel like interesting journeys rather than blunder-riddled time scrambles. At my age (70), I don't know if I will ever create enough chess procedural memory to play fast chess. Maybe it's too late for me. But classical time controls are fun for me so I will see how far I can push up the Stockfish levels. I can defeat Stockfish Level 5 pretty much every time now. Time to move to Level 6. I have immense trouble seeing ahead in the game though. Visualisation and calculation of combinations beyond a couple of moves is my glaring weakness. Again, at my age, I doubt if I can ever push that capability further now. I assume that my neural plasticity at 70 is sadly rather low. But I will keep trying. "He not busy being born is busy dying." - Bob Dylan.

@Ifmpty after looking at some of your classical time control games, it looks like you're past the level of making simple consequential blunders, i. e., you have the good habits.

And then looking at your last rapid game, it looks like it's not transferring over to the faster time controls. Your assessment of your situation seems spot on.

Same with you, classical time control games also feel like a journey, almost like there's a story in every game. In my opinion, this is the most enjoyable form of chess.

In any case, I'm quite curious if my exercises would work for your age range and if it would also transfer over to faster time controls.

@Ifmpty after looking at some of your classical time control games, it looks like you're past the level of making simple consequential blunders, i. e., you have the good habits. And then looking at your last rapid game, it looks like it's not transferring over to the faster time controls. Your assessment of your situation seems spot on. Same with you, classical time control games also feel like a journey, almost like there's a story in every game. In my opinion, this is the most enjoyable form of chess. In any case, I'm quite curious if my exercises would work for your age range and if it would also transfer over to faster time controls.

@GnocchiPup said in #23:

@Ifmpty after looking at some of your classical time control games, it looks like you're past the level of making simple consequential blunders, i. e., you have the good habits.

And then looking at your last rapid game, it looks like it's not transferring over to the faster time controls. Your assessment of your situation seems spot on.

Same with you, classical time control games also feel like a journey, almost like there's a story in every game. In my opinion, this is the most enjoyable form of chess.

In any case, I'm quite curious if my exercises would work for your age range and if it would also transfer over to faster time controls.

At the moment, I don't think I could take the endless thrashings I would receive at a very low level in fast chess. Anything faster than 10+5, I cannot bear thinking about. I can't even click that fast, let alone think. And the number of puzzles I would have to do would be in the 10,000s or greater just to get my reliable analysis to 3 moves in critical positions. Yes, my old brain is that slow at learning. I suspect where a young person would need 10 reps of a motif, I would need a 100 or maybe sometimes a 1,000. My life is no longer long enough for that!

@GnocchiPup said in #23: > @Ifmpty after looking at some of your classical time control games, it looks like you're past the level of making simple consequential blunders, i. e., you have the good habits. > > And then looking at your last rapid game, it looks like it's not transferring over to the faster time controls. Your assessment of your situation seems spot on. > > Same with you, classical time control games also feel like a journey, almost like there's a story in every game. In my opinion, this is the most enjoyable form of chess. > > In any case, I'm quite curious if my exercises would work for your age range and if it would also transfer over to faster time controls. At the moment, I don't think I could take the endless thrashings I would receive at a very low level in fast chess. Anything faster than 10+5, I cannot bear thinking about. I can't even click that fast, let alone think. And the number of puzzles I would have to do would be in the 10,000s or greater just to get my reliable analysis to 3 moves in critical positions. Yes, my old brain is that slow at learning. I suspect where a young person would need 10 reps of a motif, I would need a 100 or maybe sometimes a 1,000. My life is no longer long enough for that!

@Ifmpty No worries, chess has enough forms to be enjoyed by anyone just the way they like it.

Maximizing enjoyment... I should incorporate that in my way of thinking in regards to chess improvement.

@Ifmpty No worries, chess has enough forms to be enjoyed by anyone just the way they like it. Maximizing enjoyment... I should incorporate that in my way of thinking in regards to chess improvement.

@GnocchiPup said in #25:

@Ifmpty No worries, chess has enough forms to be enjoyed by anyone just the way they like it.

Maximizing enjoyment... I should incorporate that in my way of thinking in regards to chess improvement.

Yes, if I enjoy a moderate number of puzzles plus 90+30 games against Engine Level 5 and higher plus analysing those games plus watching Ramirez, Naroditsky and others teach (not speedruns so much) then that is the best way for me to learn for now. If learning and playing becomes an onerous hell I will just quit.

If I can make some kind of real jump in seeing good moves faster and blundering outright less then I might move to faster games and maybe even human vs. human. But if it doesn't stay fun, it's just not worth it. For the young and super talented professional it is different. Their rewards can be much higher so a higher level of hard work can be worth it.

@GnocchiPup said in #25: > @Ifmpty No worries, chess has enough forms to be enjoyed by anyone just the way they like it. > > Maximizing enjoyment... I should incorporate that in my way of thinking in regards to chess improvement. Yes, if I enjoy a moderate number of puzzles plus 90+30 games against Engine Level 5 and higher plus analysing those games plus watching Ramirez, Naroditsky and others teach (not speedruns so much) then that is the best way for me to learn for now. If learning and playing becomes an onerous hell I will just quit. If I can make some kind of real jump in seeing good moves faster and blundering outright less then I might move to faster games and maybe even human vs. human. But if it doesn't stay fun, it's just not worth it. For the young and super talented professional it is different. Their rewards can be much higher so a higher level of hard work can be worth it.

@GnocchiPup , @Ifmpty

Interesting discussion here! I'm in a similar boat, picking up chess rather late (~50 yrs), trying to focus on faster chess, and not making much progress. I've postponed actually playing faster chess until I can get my fast puzzles to a mediocre level.

Why did you mention "endless thrashings" though though Ifmpty? Assuming you can find competition around your level, you're going to win some games, and lose some games. It doesn't matter what absolute level you're playing at. It should be more about what time controls you enjoy.

Also, about the 10,000 puzzles, that may sound like a big number, but you're talking about simple "muscle memory" type puzzles. You could do 100 of those per day in less than 30 minutes a day. So 10,000 puzzles would just be a half-hour a day for a few months. Not at all bad if you actually enjoy simple puzzles.

@GnocchiPup , @Ifmpty Interesting discussion here! I'm in a similar boat, picking up chess rather late (~50 yrs), trying to focus on faster chess, and not making much progress. I've postponed actually playing faster chess until I can get my fast puzzles to a mediocre level. Why did you mention "endless thrashings" though though Ifmpty? Assuming you can find competition around your level, you're going to win some games, and lose some games. It doesn't matter what absolute level you're playing at. It should be more about what time controls you enjoy. Also, about the 10,000 puzzles, that may sound like a big number, but you're talking about simple "muscle memory" type puzzles. You could do 100 of those per day in less than 30 minutes a day. So 10,000 puzzles would just be a half-hour a day for a few months. Not at all bad if you actually enjoy simple puzzles.

Adult learners are playing a totally different ball game!
It's much harder for an adult to learn & improve at chess than it is a child or teenager for various neurological reasons, so there really should be a different learning pathway for berks like me who decide to take up chess aged 40!
*Screen/board size must also surely matter?
Playing chess on a phone must be better for keeping the entire board in your field of vision. I play on a TV so the board is massive, and thus it's harder to see all the board at once (and takes longer to drag the pieces)

Adult learners are playing a totally different ball game! It's much harder for an adult to learn & improve at chess than it is a child or teenager for various neurological reasons, so there really should be a different learning pathway for berks like me who decide to take up chess aged 40! *Screen/board size must also surely matter? Playing chess on a phone must be better for keeping the entire board in your field of vision. I play on a TV so the board is massive, and thus it's harder to see all the board at once (and takes longer to drag the pieces)

@Graque
Just in case you want to try out what I'm proposing, for science! Hehe

@Tuck_Fheory
Any particular reason you don't resize the board? I'm playing on a small laptop, and even that is too big for me. I resized so that a single hand mouse movement can reach a1 to h8.

@Graque Just in case you want to try out what I'm proposing, for science! Hehe @Tuck_Fheory Any particular reason you don't resize the board? I'm playing on a small laptop, and even that is too big for me. I resized so that a single hand mouse movement can reach a1 to h8.

@Graque said in #27:

@GnocchiPup , @Ifmpty

Interesting discussion here! I'm in a similar boat, picking up chess rather late (~50 yrs), trying to focus on faster chess, and not making much progress. I've postponed actually playing faster chess until I can get my fast puzzles to a mediocre level.

Why did you mention "endless thrashings" though though Ifmpty? Assuming you can find competition around your level, you're going to win some games, and lose some games. It doesn't matter what absolute level you're playing at. It should be more about what time controls you enjoy.

Also, about the 10,000 puzzles, that may sound like a big number, but you're talking about simple "muscle memory" type puzzles. You could do 100 of those per day in less than 30 minutes a day. So 10,000 puzzles would just be a half-hour a day for a few months. Not at all bad if you actually enjoy simple puzzles.

Re the endless thrashings: it just felt like that. I could only do 100 puzzles in 30 minutes if they were super easy 1 move puzzles and I wasn't double-checking. There seem to be two ends of the matter to work on. I have wondered if I should do both easy fast puzzles and difficult slow puzzles. I probably should. It probably relates to "Thinking, Fast and Slow" as per the Daniel Kahneman book of that title. I guess a chess player has to get both types of thinking working.

@Graque said in #27: > @GnocchiPup , @Ifmpty > > Interesting discussion here! I'm in a similar boat, picking up chess rather late (~50 yrs), trying to focus on faster chess, and not making much progress. I've postponed actually playing faster chess until I can get my fast puzzles to a mediocre level. > > Why did you mention "endless thrashings" though though Ifmpty? Assuming you can find competition around your level, you're going to win some games, and lose some games. It doesn't matter what absolute level you're playing at. It should be more about what time controls you enjoy. > > Also, about the 10,000 puzzles, that may sound like a big number, but you're talking about simple "muscle memory" type puzzles. You could do 100 of those per day in less than 30 minutes a day. So 10,000 puzzles would just be a half-hour a day for a few months. Not at all bad if you actually enjoy simple puzzles. Re the endless thrashings: it just felt like that. I could only do 100 puzzles in 30 minutes if they were super easy 1 move puzzles and I wasn't double-checking. There seem to be two ends of the matter to work on. I have wondered if I should do both easy fast puzzles and difficult slow puzzles. I probably should. It probably relates to "Thinking, Fast and Slow" as per the Daniel Kahneman book of that title. I guess a chess player has to get both types of thinking working.