Sweet Perfection (well, shucks, almost...)
(chessDog after his lattest salvo at CTS)
I was finishing an (almost) golden session at CTS, and my rating was firm and 97 successfull tries in a row, when i finally hit a problem that I could NOT calculate correctly... I stared at it, but to no avail...
Today:
15f/145s = 160 tries at 90.6%
(14f/ 45 success = 59 early today; 1f/100s = 101 @ 99.01% to finish)
1523 elo: #482 of 1441 tacticians is the 33.45 percentile
RD = 15.8 #2 tonight, #1 last night
percentage success 85.0 #161 (3273f/18,477s = 21750 tries @ 84.9517%)
21,750 tries is #31 just past the mighty and most esteemed Morkovin (21.6k tries at 89.1%, 1615 elo!), and in a day or two I will be #30 to coincide with a true rather than 'posted' 85.0%.
My goal was 20,00 by 15Sept06 which I missed by about three days..
My goal was 85.0% at 22,000 and I was almost missing it, getting off track for the last two days chasing an almost 1540 elo twice, and falling to 79/82% over extened periods, so sank in percentage success absolute terms for first time in weeks, and it felt bad. The hell with the rating, it can wait!
Due to hard core catch up tonight back to 'plan', I need 27f/223s = 250 @ 89.2% to get there at 22,000 exactly. Once I get there, it is back to CT-Art 3.0 which I have been on hiatus from short term, then will pound on 1540 hard, and confident not too far away in days or tries past 22k.
So tonight, I said to myself, 'thats it, I am not going to make any errors'. Well, I almost had the golden series.
posted by transformation at 1:32 AM
5 Comments:
DK, thanks for the advice! I think you're right, milestones can only help me.
I never heard of psycho-cybernetics or Maxwell Maltz, but many people seem to recommend him. I'll check out his book the next time that I stop by my bookstore.
Elista has been... something else. While they're still negotiating, I have hope.
[what follows is from likeForest:]
"You asked whether aiming for high accuracy at the expense of rating is a good approach.
dktransform and I would say yes!
I aim for 95% accuracy in every session, as I need to be able to do that in a real game. Your rating will drop at first, but soon it will stabilize, and then begin to go up again--no worries there. I was at 1221 not long ago.
9/30/2006 11:30 PM"
[transformation said...]
"we can finess all this, but a plan is a plan.
first, chernev most illustrative games of chess ever played is much more foundational. of course, i have both books and many others and are each alike most excellent, but MIGCEP has more vegetables than the pure meat UCMBB.
again, maltz is very good, but napolian hill, think and grow rich is MUCH better. and please everyone, its not a book about money, but riches is to strive for your fondest dream, with all your heart, and not so trivial a thing as money or money only!
it is axiomatic as spinozas ethics is or wittgensteins tractacticus philosophicus (rutledge), so well edited by bertrand russell.
lastly, question to likeF: which is better: ten games three hours, or five games six hours, or four games 8 hours, or three games ten hours, or thirty only one hour?
i say let your ego chew them SLOWLY, AND TAKE three months, and learn ten times more. stare at the position like a zombee. no moving peaces, no clicking pgns, but staring silently and deeply inquire.
the other unfinished games will grow inside you.
ive done this. i spent seven months of chernevs first seven games, off and on, one capabl game two months, and annotated them myself. but you will learn the position!
slow review of gm games is to quick viewed ones, what higher percentage success is to slap dash CTS low % users.
IMHO
as my branch manager a Piper Jaffray Investments said to me when i said that broker xyz was making 150 calls a day: Jim M, who latter became a very successfull district manager [only to get a rare case of male breast cancer (obesity) latter on], replied:
"he THOUGHT that he made 150 calls!!"
what did i do? i decided to make thirty calls a day. smart calls! planner targeted calls or what we called elephant hunting. you only take one shot with a big gun.
tonight, finally:
a mighty long haul!!!!
85.0004% (85.0%)
#159 rank
3290f/18,644s = 21,934
#30 rank
RD 16.7
#2 of 1434 active users.
-----------------------------------
how many CTS users 20,000 tries and up are => than 85.0% and rated over 1420? six, illustrated by tries:
morkovkin 1615, 21.2k @ 89.1%
dktransform 1491, 21.9 @ 85.0%
alvis 1543, 24.9k @ 87.5%
kawala 1534, 27.1k @ 84.2%
spacecowboy 1424, 27.7k @ 88.9%
trallala 1583, 34.3k @ 93.1%
is this the only grouping of outstanding efforts? no. just my idea of what i idealize in other CTS users and have been striving for. others who are close:
slowmouse 1403, 10.8 @ 93.5%
bahus 1537, 11.1k @ 89.0%
loomis 1668, 14.1k @ 77.9%
edgy 1684, 15.2k @ 79.6%
chessdog 1305, 27.0k @ 95.8%
mousetrapper 1423, 31.5 @ 82.2%
slowmouse is below 1424 but % is ++
bahus is rated+ with %++
loomis is rated ++
edgy is rated ++
chessdog is rated lower but % is ++
mousetrapper is below 85.0% but has ++ tries
Congratulations, another step on the road to chess mastery! Only 66 from 22,000--and no snide remarks from ******** this time.
Have you played any games recently to see how your recent tactical gains have improved your overall game? If I recall correctly, you were 1625-1650 a couple months ago.
[what follows is my note to loomis post on Fri29sept06:
http://thebackrank.blogspot.com
/2006/09/friday-update_29.html]
dear loomis, these are most impressive results. and congratulations on your 1670. this is very notable.
BTW, i am using CT-Art 3.0 and while i am taking one of the many short term breaks from it i am want to utilize, plan to get back soon as soon as i am 22,000 @ 85.0% as planned all summer now.
samurai has done the same as me, or rather me the same as he, and that is go back and forth between these two. the synergy of both is far greater than one alone, as you know better than i, surely given you objectively demonstrated superior knowledge of or skill at chess.
i have made my best progress at CTS reducing perhaps excessive tries, and spreading 20% of my effort to CTA, according to the law of deminishing returns.
----------------------
i hope that you do not mind a tiny bit of parallel content here:
"Pareto Principle
A principle, named after economist Vilfredo Pareto, that specifies an unequal relationship between inputs and outputs. The principle states that, for many phenomena, 20% of invested input is responsible for 80% of the results obtained. Put another way, 80% of consequences stem from 20% of the causes. Also referred to as the "Pareto rule" or the "80/20 rule".
Notes:
This principle serves as a general reminder that the relationship between inputs and outputs is not balanced. For instance, the efforts of 20% of a corporation's staff could drive 80% of the firm's profits. In terms of personal time management, 80% of your work-related output could come from only 20% of your time at work.
The Pareto Principle can be applied in a wide range of areas such as manufacturing, management and human resources. In Pareto's case, he used the rule to explain how 80% of property in Italy was owned by 20% of the country's population."
http://financial-dictionary.
thefreedictionary.com/Paretos+Law
Post a Comment
<< Home