3 ms·

This was interesting to me. I played chess seriously for about 4 years and gained about 400 Elo points. Apparently that's rather above the expectations for an "

This was interesting to me. I played chess seriously for about 4 years and gained about 400 Elo points. Apparently that's rather above the expectations for an "ordinary" person! I spent around 1000 hours practicing chess during that time, 3/4ths of which was spent on tactics training (writeup here: https://blog.waleedkhan.name/hours-invested-vs-percentile-rank/ https://blog.waleedkhan.name/hours-invested-vs-percentile-ra...). I'm guessing that's a significant differentiating factor, and that the majority of players only spent time playing games. Of course, you can't tell from the Lichess data in the post how much time was spent practicing via not playing. And I would argue that 250 hours per year, like I accomplished, is not actually that much.

bsder 5y ago
Tactics training is by far the most effective thing you can do to improve your game short of Master level (assuming you have the basics down). Chess before Master level is all about "avoiding blunders" and "capitalizing on blunders". It's a function of the fact that a single mistake can at any point completely destroy your game.
- mpol 5y ago
  I agree and I don't agree :) It is not all about tactics, that is a mistake that I see repeated often. A difference between 1300 FIDE level and 1800 FIDE level is partly tactics and avoiding blunders, sure. But there is also more positional play, which is a very good addition in your toolbox, if it is even a tool. There is thinking in fields, which can be about controlling one field that is deciding the game, or about controlling the white fields for example, or the seventh row. There is also intuition, which is much more than pattern recognition, but more letting the unconscious part of the brain work for you (inspired by the moon or by god :) ). (edit) Oh, and I forgot about tempo, which is especially important in the opening or during an attack. Gambits are loved for a reason, you give a pawn for a tempo and win the game :) Also, I feel very much that improvement in chess is often sought in improving someones strong points, because they are the most fun to work on. There are also the weak points that you can work on, which are less comfortable and more confronting, but can be a bottleneck. In psychological sense this works as well.

bsder 5y ago

Tactics training is by far the most effective thing you can do to improve your game short of Master level (assuming you have the basics down). Chess before Master level is all about "avoiding blunders" and "capitalizing on blunders". It's a function of the fact that a single mistake can at any point completely destroy your game.

mpol 5y ago
I agree and I don't agree :) It is not all about tactics, that is a mistake that I see repeated often. A difference between 1300 FIDE level and 1800 FIDE level is partly tactics and avoiding blunders, sure. But there is also more positional play, which is a very good addition in your toolbox, if it is even a tool. There is thinking in fields, which can be about controlling one field that is deciding the game, or about controlling the white fields for example, or the seventh row. There is also intuition, which is much more than pattern recognition, but more letting the unconscious part of the brain work for you (inspired by the moon or by god :) ). (edit) Oh, and I forgot about tempo, which is especially important in the opening or during an attack. Gambits are loved for a reason, you give a pawn for a tempo and win the game :) Also, I feel very much that improvement in chess is often sought in improving someones strong points, because they are the most fun to work on. There are also the weak points that you can work on, which are less comfortable and more confronting, but can be a bottleneck. In psychological sense this works as well.