lichess.org
Donate

how do u actually get better at chess ?

DECOY-CHOPPER

@kindaspongey said ^

... you need to keep to time limits in which the chess position is more relevant than the thinking time, and, ideally, much more relevant. I actually believe that only Grandmasters (2500+) should play five minute blitz, ... 1500 players should have at least 25 minutes thinking time for a game -- or a rough equivalent if they are using an incremental time limits. ..." - GM Nigel Davies (2010)

i agree @kindaspongey , but i was playing with my friend for fun and i wasnt serious . I usually play rapid game of chess.com .
https://www.chess.com/member/decoy-chopper -> my profile . i know i have lost 4 games in a row there but i will improve.

@kindaspongey said [^](/forum/redirect/post/7gZaLx3z) > ... you need to keep to time limits in which the chess position is more relevant than the thinking time, and, ideally, much more relevant. I actually believe that only Grandmasters (2500+) should play five minute blitz, ... 1500 players should have at least 25 minutes thinking time for a game -- or a rough equivalent if they are using an incremental time limits. ..." - GM Nigel Davies (2010) i agree @kindaspongey , but i was playing with my friend for fun and i wasnt serious . I usually play rapid game of chess.com . https://www.chess.com/member/decoy-chopper -> my profile . i know i have lost 4 games in a row there but i will improve.
tpr

"book burning"

  • Hold a book burning of Silman books.

"a sub 1700 rapid player"

  • will stay sub 1700 rapid with Silman and may get above 2000 with Kotov.

"HTRYC: #12, TLGM: #1,189"

  • There are more sub 1700 players that will stay sub 1700 than those who will get above 2000.
"book burning" * Hold a book burning of Silman books. "a sub 1700 rapid player" * will stay sub 1700 rapid with Silman and may get above 2000 with Kotov. "HTRYC: #12, TLGM: #1,189" * There are more sub 1700 players that will stay sub 1700 than those who will get above 2000.
kindaspongeyedited

"Jeremy Silman's HOW TO REASSESS YOUR CHESS is an example of a good book which explains many important ideas in clear terms." - GM John Nunn (2006) (referring to the third edition)
"Here are some excellent endgame books:
Chess Endings: Essential Knowledge (1993) by Yuri Averbakh ...
Silman's Complete Endgame Course: From Beginning to Master (2007) by Jeremy Silman ...
Understanding Chess Endgames (2009) by John Nunn ...
Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual, 4th edition (2014) by Mark Dvoretsky ...
Practical Chess Endings, 2nd revised edition (2018) by Paul Keres ...
At this point in your training, you probably only need to study one or two of these books to get everything you need. ..." - Learn to Play Chess Like a Boss (2019) by GM Patrick Wolff
"... There are several problems which can arise as a result of Kotov's method. ..." - GM John Nunn (1998)

"Jeremy Silman's HOW TO REASSESS YOUR CHESS is an example of a good book which explains many important ideas in clear terms." - GM John Nunn (2006) (referring to the third edition) "Here are some excellent endgame books: Chess Endings: Essential Knowledge (1993) by Yuri Averbakh ... Silman's Complete Endgame Course: From Beginning to Master (2007) by Jeremy Silman ... Understanding Chess Endgames (2009) by John Nunn ... Dvoretsky's Endgame Manual, 4th edition (2014) by Mark Dvoretsky ... Practical Chess Endings, 2nd revised edition (2018) by Paul Keres ... At this point in your training, you probably only need to study one or two of these books to get everything you need. ..." - Learn to Play Chess Like a Boss (2019) by GM Patrick Wolff "... There are several problems which can arise as a result of Kotov's method. ..." - GM John Nunn (1998)
Toscani

From your games measure resilience and efficiency. See how long you survival the pressure in a game, by using purely objective facts from the PGN, like how many moves are you able to do before losing.

If you play an engine a loss after 4 moves for a week and the following week you are losing in 20, you have improved. So you have become better at chess, yet the rating has not changed.

What you are doing differently to make the game last is what makes you better than the one that does not make the game last.
Slow down and smell the roses.

From your games measure resilience and efficiency. See how long you survival the pressure in a game, by using purely objective facts from the PGN, like how many moves are you able to do before losing. If you play an engine a loss after 4 moves for a week and the following week you are losing in 20, you have improved. So you have become better at chess, yet the rating has not changed. What you are doing differently to make the game last is what makes you better than the one that does not make the game last. Slow down and smell the roses.
RemRus

I started learning to count several moves ahead. If I could count three moves, I would achieve 2000 rapid. But it’s difficult when you don’t train much. I couldn't.

I started learning to count several moves ahead. If I could count three moves, I would achieve 2000 rapid. But it’s difficult when you don’t train much. I couldn't.
imanoob424

I'm not that good, but i think My 60 Memorable Games by bobby fischer is supposed to be great for building intuition, but its meant for intermediates and advanced players.

I'm not that good, but i think My 60 Memorable Games by bobby fischer is supposed to be great for building intuition, but its meant for intermediates and advanced players.
ChessPriyome

@tpr said ^

"book burning"

  • Hold a book burning of Silman books.

You really hate that guy, don't you?

i find it funny.

Anyways, spongey got me thinking about this:

In his book Secrets of Practical Chess (1998), Grandmaster John Nunn highlighted several practical and structural problems with the calculation method described by Alexander Kotov in Think Like a Grandmaster.

The core issues outlined by Nunn and modern chess theorists include:

  1. Extreme Inefficiency

Kotov’s rigid mechanism dictates that you generate a comprehensive list of candidate moves and then analyze each branch strictly sequentially, exactly once. Nunn argued that this mechanical routine can cause massive time management failures. For example, if you spend 20 minutes intensely calculating candidate move A, only to look at candidate move B next and notice within two minutes a dead-obvious tactical refutation that completely collapses the position, you have completely wasted 20 minutes of your clock solely because you picked the wrong move order to calculate.

  1. Disregard for "Sensemaking" and Feedback Loops

Humans do not calculate like a computer's static game-theory decision tree. Nunn pointed out that true human calculation relies heavily on the method of comparison and a continuous feedback loop. When you calculate branch A, you frequently discover tactical motifs, defensive ideas, or defensive geometries that you did not realize existed when you first generated your candidate list. An effective player must be allowed to immediately take that newly discovered information and apply it back to re-evaluate branch B, rather than rigidly moving on down a checklist.

  1. Over-Reliance on Perfect Memory and Human Processing Limits

Kotov's method assumes that a human player can hold an enormous, sprawling tree of concrete variations in their head without mixing up the branches, losing track of lines, or suffering from mental fatigue. By attempting to comprehensively calculate every single candidate branch, a player often experiences mental exhaustion, leading to "Kotov Syndrome"—where they run out of time, panic, and make a hasty blunder on a completely uncalculated move.

  1. Overlooking Intuition and "Satisficing"

Nunn championed more flexible techniques, such as applying short scans, safety-net checks, and relying on positional evaluation to cut down unnecessary calculation (following principles like DAUT: Don't Analyze Unnecessary Tactics). Modern grandmasters rarely calculate a mechanical tree from scratch; instead, they use positional intuition and pattern recognition to limit their focus to the 1 or 2 most critical variations, aiming for a "satisficing" move (one that is highly adequate) rather than burning the entire clock looking for a computer-perfect mathematical truth.

Pro Kotov players are mostly from the Botvinnik school of Chess. Kasparov, Dvoretsky, Yusupov, Bauer + others.
There is an "Anti-Kotov" school as well that includes Caruana, GM John Nunn, and The Modern Engine Era (e.g., GM Magnus Carlsen, GM Hikaru Nakamura). Carlsen relies heavily on instant structural evaluation to completely bypass the "tree" and zero in on the single most critical breakthrough, nearly to the point of perfection.

GM Igor Smirnov has updated the Kotov method by supplying the so-called "missing Link". Kotov never offered a way to find candidate moves. Grandmaster Igor Smirnov has authored books and comprehensive digital training courses through the Remote Chess Academy (https://chess-teacher.com/), focusing on chess psychology, calculation systems, and structured thinking.

Exposure to this content should be mentioned as opposed to an incomplete, 50+ year book that has been DoDo-birded into extinction, which has never been an easy read.

I might check Smirnov's work out - he has some low money online courses, etc.

Anyways, my inexpert thoughts with some AI assistance.

@tpr said [^](/forum/redirect/post/WOoZWGlt) > "book burning" > * Hold a book burning of Silman books. You really hate that guy, don't you? i find it funny. Anyways, spongey got me thinking about this: In his book Secrets of Practical Chess (1998), Grandmaster John Nunn highlighted several practical and structural problems with the calculation method described by Alexander Kotov in Think Like a Grandmaster. The core issues outlined by Nunn and modern chess theorists include: 1. Extreme Inefficiency Kotov’s rigid mechanism dictates that you generate a comprehensive list of candidate moves and then analyze each branch strictly sequentially, exactly once. **Nunn argued that this mechanical routine can cause massive time management failures.** For example, if you spend 20 minutes intensely calculating candidate move A, only to look at candidate move B next and notice within two minutes a dead-obvious tactical refutation that completely collapses the position, you have completely wasted 20 minutes of your clock solely because you picked the wrong move order to calculate. 2. Disregard for "Sensemaking" and Feedback Loops **Humans do not calculate like a computer's static game-theory decision tree.** Nunn pointed out that true human calculation relies heavily on the method of comparison and a continuous feedback loop. When you calculate branch A, you frequently discover tactical motifs, defensive ideas, or defensive geometries that you did not realize existed when you first generated your candidate list. An effective player must be allowed to immediately take that newly discovered information and apply it back to re-evaluate branch B, rather than rigidly moving on down a checklist. 3. Over-Reliance on Perfect Memory and Human Processing Limits Kotov's method assumes that a human player can hold an enormous, sprawling tree of concrete variations in their head without mixing up the branches, losing track of lines, or suffering from mental fatigue. By attempting to comprehensively calculate every single candidate branch, a player often experiences mental exhaustion, leading to "Kotov Syndrome"—where they run out of time, panic, and make a hasty blunder on a completely uncalculated move. 4. Overlooking Intuition and "Satisficing" Nunn championed more flexible techniques, such as applying short scans, safety-net checks, and relying on positional evaluation to cut down unnecessary calculation (following principles like DAUT: Don't Analyze Unnecessary Tactics). Modern grandmasters rarely calculate a mechanical tree from scratch; instead, they use **positional intuition and pattern recognition** to limit their focus to the 1 or 2 most critical variations, aiming for a "satisficing" move (one that is highly adequate) rather than burning the entire clock looking for a computer-perfect mathematical truth. Pro Kotov players are mostly from the Botvinnik school of Chess. Kasparov, Dvoretsky, Yusupov, Bauer + others. There is an "Anti-Kotov" school as well that includes Caruana, GM John Nunn, and The Modern Engine Era (e.g., GM Magnus Carlsen, GM Hikaru Nakamura). Carlsen relies heavily on instant structural evaluation to completely bypass the "tree" and zero in on the single most critical breakthrough, nearly to the point of perfection. **GM Igor Smirnov has updated the Kotov method** by supplying the so-called "missing Link". Kotov never offered a way to find candidate moves. Grandmaster Igor Smirnov has authored books and comprehensive digital training courses through the Remote Chess Academy (https://chess-teacher.com/), focusing on chess psychology, calculation systems, and structured thinking. Exposure to this content should be mentioned as opposed to an incomplete, 50+ year book that has been DoDo-birded into extinction, which has never been an easy read. I might check Smirnov's work out - he has some low money online courses, etc. Anyways, my inexpert thoughts with some AI assistance.