I agree. I used to do IT work at a company where playing chess was popular among the techs and I decided to improve my skill. The ways to improve: * Study

I agree. I used to do IT work at a company where playing chess was popular among the techs and I decided to improve my skill. The ways to improve: * Study tactics and strategy books * Study grandmaster games * Do two-to-mate or tactical chess problems * Review your own games and look for mistakes * Study openings (once you're more advanced) Some of these things are straightforward, some not. If I study openings and know e5 is a good response to e4, I know my study did that. I am following an opening I memorized from a book. If I spend months carefully studying the games of Kasparov, Fischer, Karpov etc., and my playing begins improving - how do I prove studying the greats carefully has improved my game? It might be "self-serving nonsense", as I can't draw a line between a move I do to some game I studied, like I can for an opening I memorized from a book. All I know is my general problem solving skills have somehow increased. I now see patterns I did not see before, and the correct path forward where before it was muddled, although I can't fully explain why. The only test is a sample comparison of those who do it versus a sample of those who don't.