Has a solving pattern where they approach standard problems by using 10+ times less time than the average user per problem on many, many of their attempts (so around 4-8 seconds versus 1 minute average for all users on many problems), and they don't tend to fluctuate their time much based on problem difficulty, and have very low problem-to-problem solve time gaps (i.e. For example the highest volume "low rated" solver: It can be sometimes hard to interpret some of the very high volume solver's results, as they are often outliers in unusual ways. If you're not actively trying to extract something from your mistakes, you are probably engaging in the old "doing the same thing over and over, and expecting the result to be different" type of activity. If you look at the training diaries of some of the players in your FIDE rating range, I'd guess it takes some more deliberate practice than unreflectively banging out thousands upon thousands of unstructured problems to improve at that level.
I would guess that your case is an example of where a reasonable level of success can be had by being strong in areas other than tactics, although I suspect you might struggle against stronger players who are able to create tactically rich positions where your (relatively) superior positional skills might not be enough to save you from trouble. I'd guess from your stats here that your tactics ability is lagging about 300 points behind your actual FIDE level (perhaps more given that your positional/endgame skills are being offset by your relative lack of tactics skills - if your tactics skills jumped up to the level of the rest of your game, I'd guess your FIDE rating would also be higher). I find your description of how you win games interesting, as your FIDE rating, coupled with your tactics strength here suggests you must be very much stronger in non-tactical areas of the game to maintain a FIDE rating that high. Although I suspect this is true for all aspects of chess, and is the main reason there is a fairly large number of 2000ish FIDE rated players, but very much fewer 2300+, the diminishing returns applies across all aspects of the game, making progress to master level a fairly slow and painful process (especially for adults who haven't got well over 2000 before adulthood). I think there are definitely issues with diminishing returns once you are over around 2000 FIDE (maybe even 1900) in terms of how much effort is required to improve tactical skills. I hope my thoughts haven't offended anyone here and I hope we can discuss them a bit. Richard, amazing site, if I ever get serious about tactics improvement, I'll try and buy the premium membership (no promises tho - I'm just a poor student).
I'd estimate my rating rose 400 points from a good positional book (My System), several good videos on king and pawns and rook endgames and a good thinking method. Studying tactics beyond basic motifs (so my opponent can't use them against me) just gives me rapidly diminishing returns. Afterwards engine points out a winning 7-move combination that could've won an exchange (or a whole rook) but when I compare the effort/gain ratio re-reading My System gives me more bang for the buck. It's mostly gain space -> win a pawn -> exchange in a way that worsens opponents pawn structure or improves mine -> win another pawn since I overloaded his pieces -> trade down into a winning endgame -> promote and win. I can't remember the last time I won a game with a 1600+ player using a spectacular combination. You can see my rating here (around 1500), 1700 problems here give me a headache and yet I'm nearing 1900 FIDE. You'd expect these people to be at least IMs. I have read several preposterous (no offense meant, I just find them shocking) posts, such as "yeah, I'm 1800 on CT and 1300 FIDE", "I did x thousand problems this month" or the lists of people who did hundreds of thousands of problems, who still have mediocre rating. stronger) players quantify how much did tactics training exclusively improve your OTB strength? Dogmatic "Chess is 99% tactics" aside, could some of the more experienced (i.e.
I've discovered the forum just recently and I've been reading through a lot of posts here and some things piqued my curiosity.
0 kommentar(er)
