Note to Generalkaia : Slowing Down at CTS to increase % success, sacrificing rating
i am 100% certain of this comment:::
greetings.
if you have only done 1661 problems at chess.emrald.net at 59.1%, then you might want to slow down. now, your rating evidences superior understanding at chess, so let me trod gently, pls.
angryhaggis' photos @ Flickr, Gamma
SLOW Banner at the Matterhorn
i was 1420 or so at 1500 problems, at 76% or so. i made a resolute decision to play for quality there. i pushed it to 81% at 10,000. it took a long, long time. now im 14250 at 83.341%, and soon ill again be 83.450 so expressed as 83.5%. i play for percentages only there.
last night my RD at closure or log off was 16.0. i well understand low RD = high commitment.
if you do 8339 problems, at 85%, you will be there. maybe forget the 59% and if the rating need fall, let it fall. IMHO.
decide, do you want to be like Tempo, or SpaceCowboy, or Trallala, or Wormwood in % success, or do 88,000 problems fast, and learn what. if Cylk--and i dont mean at all to disrespect such a great effort, but it must be asked--has done 88,672 at only 63%, and ONLY 1532 ELO, then it begs the question, what did he or she learn? to what effect? to miss 3/8ths of all problems???? does one brag for so many attempts, or maybe it is a loss to do so much and repeat the same mistakes and not learn?
tempo on the other hand has learned CTS well, and i intend to follow close by.
dktransform at chess.emrald and here transformation, here...
thanks, david
greetings.
if you have only done 1661 problems at chess.emrald.net at 59.1%, then you might want to slow down. now, your rating evidences superior understanding at chess, so let me trod gently, pls.
angryhaggis' photos @ Flickr, Gamma
SLOW Banner at the Matterhorn
i was 1420 or so at 1500 problems, at 76% or so. i made a resolute decision to play for quality there. i pushed it to 81% at 10,000. it took a long, long time. now im 14250 at 83.341%, and soon ill again be 83.450 so expressed as 83.5%. i play for percentages only there.
last night my RD at closure or log off was 16.0. i well understand low RD = high commitment.
if you do 8339 problems, at 85%, you will be there. maybe forget the 59% and if the rating need fall, let it fall. IMHO.
decide, do you want to be like Tempo, or SpaceCowboy, or Trallala, or Wormwood in % success, or do 88,000 problems fast, and learn what. if Cylk--and i dont mean at all to disrespect such a great effort, but it must be asked--has done 88,672 at only 63%, and ONLY 1532 ELO, then it begs the question, what did he or she learn? to what effect? to miss 3/8ths of all problems???? does one brag for so many attempts, or maybe it is a loss to do so much and repeat the same mistakes and not learn?
tempo on the other hand has learned CTS well, and i intend to follow close by.
dktransform at chess.emrald and here transformation, here...
thanks, david
posted by transformation at 12:27 AM
3 Comments:
thanks for the comment. indeed, slowing down is my number one priority. it is hard for me to even think of playing in a way that would hurt my rating, but, like you, I think that slowing down would help me in the long run. i appreciate the thought you put into the comment.
rating at chess.emrald.net, while it shouldnt matter at all, does matter a little, lets face it.
and im sure tempo when he said your rating and his couldn't compare, didn't mean any harm or to offend--but he is correct.
when you do 5 or 10,000 problems, and are 78, 79, 0r 80%, whatever, then you will know your true CTS rating.
as i said once at the comments section there, boosting ones rating isn't hard there. but how stable or real? get a high RD and start firing away!
but to sit there, when you cannot see it, you might loose 0.9 or 0.8 if you take a bit, or 1.1 if you get it correct but take 50 seconds, but you will loose LESS on your CTS elo than if you just winged it cause the clock was running down and couldnt find the answer.
its a whole different approach.
if you go into the tacticians, and go to tempo, or me, or trallala, or spaceCowboy, and then look at recent actions, you will see virtually EVERYBODY with rare exceptions (bad days) hitting problem after problem.
when you hit a seemedly impossibly problem, then go into a deep think, then you will be playing real chess when you find it. and so happy. real chess is not a mouse race.
generalkaia, today on chess.emrald.net just now, i checked your "lattest actions", which goes with trophies and nightmares.
if you are failing two or three in a row, or 3 out of 5, then maybe try hanging on a problem that seems unclear.
when you CALCULATE IT, rather than play what Dan Heisenman (Philly Tutor of ICC and author of the wonderful column Novice Nook at ChessCafe.com) calls "hope chess".
you will know the difference. you will sit, and look, calculate variations, and instead of hoping you got it, you will know it, hit the mouse, know the oppositions response and your response, and simple await a ping for confirmation.
also, i set my screen so i pause after EVERY SUCCESS and failure. even if only for five seconds, to look at it or go back and see how i did it right, or of course review wrong.
i agree with tempo that there is a real factor of raw memorization for SOME of the problems. at 54,000 versus my 14,201, he can utilize that. but for me, there are many new problems left, so i must SEE rather than remember.
getting in the zone where, at a glance, we evaluate king safety, checks to the opponents king, open files, loose pieces, pins/forks/skewers/clearanceSacrifices, etc. in five or ten seconds we all need to comprehend all that.
BUT when the solution is unclear, to sit and dig it out rather than wing it--if you will. this is the way. an failed problem is a hole in our perception.
just try it. hope these are not inappropriate comments. i dont know it all. but this i know.
Post a Comment
<< Home