The Grab Bag: Recent Comments at CTS
The skill had gone fast, but I am also very confident that this does not mean that I lost it. Slow calculation, standard as it were, is not the same as blitz, but at least from where I live, from where I stand, the one is connected to the other. Blitz feeds real chess, and real chess feeds blitz. Blitz is not food. It is fuel. You have to do a lot of it to get the raw experience, and the more you do it, the more you see. Comments below more than share my peripatetic thoughts.
Its Saturday, tomorrow promises to be the second nice day in three weeks. Some hate the weather here. I am among those who love it. The rain holds me in its gentle arms, bathing my sorrow, washing my heartache. But now that I am clearly defined as training for my first 30 mile run, but next year, and I need to put the miles in, and every two weeks need to do something big. And this is always best in the forest. That day is tomorrow. Those sort of runs can happen in horrid mud, but its good to be able to see where you are going, even if the mud is still there. OK, here goes:
Date From Message
2012, Nov 24 dktransform Play blitz all the time? Sure. But then the skills start to plateau. Most of all, fatigue sets in. 3 min chess day after day can be stressful, at least if you are doing it for real, that is to say, not 'for kicks', but full on, urgent, each and every game, for real, life or death, get a peak all time rating. Then you know--relative to yourself--repeat, to yourself--you are on form. Then you need to refresh and retrain. Train all the time? Sure. But then you run into lack of practical application, making comfort a value greater than struggle. But if you are not doing tons of training, it is not fruitful. Then you don't have muscle building but 'routine maintenance'.
Then you have to go and retest. The cycle repeats. Play lots of blitz, go back and run your games in chessBase, not for deep Fritz as it were, but to see where you have habitual bad opening habits and constructs. You determine to eradicate them, at least the way I do it, go into chessBase and if you have narrowed down your repertoire, you get to repeat. Getting to repeat, you get to see what you do that does not work. Better players punish you. You do deeper work, then do tactics, then blitz. Do it all, then play standard chess. See how good you are, and prepare for punishment. But you get to experience yourself, in relationship to others.
2012, Nov 24 dktransform OK. Nothing to brag of here. Just report on recent effort, as but one example of how one more CTS person goes about his or her efforts. First bad form. Hard to do 85% at 1600, 1500 level. So last day or two, retooling. Now that I can do 1f/138s= 139t @ 99.3% for 1100 elo level. Now I step up to 1300. Once I can do those around 97/98%, then I go back to 1500 level problems. Once I can do those at 91% and push up into the mid 1500's, then it is time to play blitz again. It takes time, but you get back in shape. First and foremost, by consistent success. 1100 is really not so completely easy. Easy? Yes. But perfectly? Not so easy. About 63% of those are 1300/1400 level. The issue is not difficulty. The issue is determination to correct thinking. Not most of the time. But each and every time.
2012, Nov 23 dktransform Hello CTS friends and associates, and Happy Thanksgiving to all of you who are in an America or American.... OK: 'How quickly it goes!' I've been busy at CT-Art 3.0 and just about finished the entire cycle. Great stuff. But it is also another world. I am ramping up here again, really, really starting to hunger for blitz, not for stimulation as such alone, but to start feeding my brain lots of chess to see how much I have absorbed in the last five or six weeks. I certainly know not to loose all this hard work, by total loss of confidence, by playing blitz, and having a rating sink like a stone as I resync my brain to faster board evaluation. As such, I am doing what I have always done, and found to work, and that is work hard, and steadily, and in size at CTS till I can do lots of problems accurately.
But also as always, starting back, you find that you cannot just will yourself into form. It was hard to do 70 or 80% at > = 1600 level with 1500 level problems, and I can assure you, since I cannot easily do 1100 level problems at 95%, it means my form is way off. CTS is a skill like anything else, and you just don't show up, and voila! It takes time. I will get it back, but until I can get back to a 91% run rate, and steadily and consistently, there will be no blitz for me. Its running laps, hill work, the gym, sit ups. Then when the work outs are good, and consistently, then the fight or the track or cross country match. That time is not now! Warmly, dk
2012, Nov 19 dktransform Good. Even better: 'Learning How to Learn: Bateson'sDolphins. One of the best stories about learning how to learn comes from anthropologist Gregory Bateson In his book, "Steps to the Ecology of Mind". In these collected stories, Bateson describes how he saw dolphins working it out for themselves in a dolphinarium. On the first day of a new routine, the dolphins were taught a new trick. If they performed it correctly, they were rewarded with a fish. The next day, when they performed the trick, no fish were given. Fish were only given when a new trick was mastered. This continued for two weeks. Then on the fourteenth day, the dolphins performed four new tricks they hadn't been shown before but had learnt by themselves. The dolphins had learnt that learning, not tricks, is what gets rewarded. It's precisely this skill that we all need to learn for our own personal effectiveness at work.'
2012, Nov 16 chessisajedrez 'If you were to visit a chess tournament and watch a grandmaster in action, you would be able to observe a surprising range of emotions. Sometimes, in apparently simple positions, the grandmaster might lapse into lengthy periods of concentration, where ten minutes or more might be spent on a move. At other times the moves will come very quickly, even in complicated positions. You might even be shocked if the grandmaster suddenly wins the game with a lengthy and brilliant mating sacrifice – after thinking for just a few seconds. Clearly the analytical process is not always directly related to how complicated the position is on the surface. The reason for this is pattern recognition.
If the grandmaster can recall similar positions encountered in the past, the same themes and concepts might be applicable to the game in hand. This makes it much easier and quicker to analyze a position. It especially applies to the most basic attacking formations around the enemy king. Once a known motif is spotted, the moves of the potential combination are analyzed to check that it does indeed work in the particular position on the board. It is clear then that chess analysis is a mixture of calculation of individual moves and pattern recognition'. – Murray Chandler, How to Beat Your Dad at Chess [dk: Quoted here. Great book. He is part of the Emms, Nunn, Burgess nexus at Gambit Publications, UK]
2012, Nov 16 e4e5f4 Do you want to get better results on this site? Read and use "Thinking fast and slow" from Daniel Kahneman.
2012, Nov 15 chessisajedrez @dktransform - "Soilent Green is Coca Cola!"
2012, Nov 15 dktransform Soylent Green is a 1973 American science fiction film directed by Richard Fleischer and starring Charlton Heston and, in his final film, Edward G. Robinson. The film overlays the police procedural and science fiction genres as it depicts the investigation into the murder of a wealthy businessman in a dystopian future suffering from pollution, overpopulation, depleted resources, poverty, dying oceans, and a hot climate due to the greenhouse effect. Much of the population survives on processed food rations, including "soylent green". The film, which is loosely based upon the 1966 science fiction novel Make Room! Make Room!, by Harry Harrison, won the Nebula Award for Best Dramatic Presentation and the Saturn Award for Best Science Fiction Film in 1973.
2012, Nov 15 dktransform Friends and loved ones at CTS, lets not rot our bodies and brains while we try to build our mental acuity here. Worth the while. Love to all of you, David Korn PS, now at problem 1,063 at CT-Art 3.0. This stuff is the sh_t! I will finish it this time, in about 65 days this time, then 47, then 23, then 11, then plan to make the move to 1800 blitz, up one notch, then from nascent 1700 USCF to 1800+ (OK, not quite, but I refused like 97 draws in my recent games, lost when thinking i was even, even when i thought i was winning, all of them! try this: https://secure3.convio.net/aahf/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=1284
2012, Nov 13 dktransform nice to see you. i am here twice a day, always enjoy the notes. currently, after four attempts at the seven circles, each time getting stuck at problems six hundred, seven hundred, eight hundred, biting through with deep, very deep commitment. drafted a xls schedule. discipline was not and is not the issue. these are hard problems, some mind bending. 'click, click' and too fast, might as well not call it standard tactics, but my old hobgobblen of 'guessing'. this time i am biting hard. on problem 1,049, and on my way to 1209. i do this at waking, before work, now, and before bed. i was going to stop at level six, problem 1,039, my aim of weeks, and repeat that circle first in 40 days again recently, then 28, 14, and seven.
i do not do it the same as michael de Mazla, but similar. i decided two days ago not to go back, subverting my irrevocable plan to finish at 31 dec 2012, but now the whole thing, then repeat ALL of it. no blitz, no chessBase, just john emms ultimate chess puzzle book in bed. this is it. it is now time. leaving portland, going back to washington state, to work on sustainability, a 28th amendment to the american constitution, into law. so first finish CT-Art 3.0, prefatory to lots of USCF games back in WA state (not much here, and not ready, and way overpriced here, tournaments anyway), and nascent to that, will play lots of blitz, and before that, lots of CTS. I will be back, and believe me, my RD will not >100. i am awake.
2012, Nov 04 dktransform i have been eating pretty much having a full mean every hour for the last six hours, now constantly. when i did a guided climb of Glacier Peak in 2000, i had a large pizza two days before leaving for dinner, a large pizza for lunch the next day, and a large pizza for dinner. only 12,000 feet vertical in 1.5 days, carrying sixty pounds. the body needs deep fuel reserves, but water matters FAR more. i just got back from the trailhead,here in a far different place, driving 38 miles total, just to drop 0.8 gallons of water at the 9.7 mile mark off a access road along the way, to be ready to drink up, tank up, and have water for the trip back. in the forest, divine! then i am starving for two days after, cannot stop eating :-).
2012, Nov 04 dktransform larry kaufman smart motherF'r! http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Kaufman+Test
2012, Nov 04 dktransform http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Bratko-Kopec+Test i do not program chess engines, just from wide anecdotal chess reading...
2012, Nov 04 dktransform yes. some of the old guard have a cc of a pgn of the complete CTS problems, when there were 23k of them, the last seven years. to the operators credit, they added an additional 14k problems, but let it be reminded that on one has ever or does complain about the scope of prior. it is just that much better to have more. ways to improve the site and user experience? why yes, of course, but duly appreciated all the same. a matter of what is present, not what is absent.
please write me at firstname.lastname@example.org, and I can send. the illustrious ginger baker, who i believe still lives in france (an american, and to my surprise, a man not a woman... by the name only would have thought not). i am preparing to run 22 miles to tomorrow, so if don't send it then will the next day. massive eating is real work :-). second, you can get pgn's of the two reinfeld books as well as, what is it called, the Brako or Bradko problems for testing engines here, which should be plenty. good luck:
2012, Oct 29 dktransform does anyone here, please, have any direct experience with the many variations of Renko's various tactics courses, CD's. to me, it is hard to tell. CTS, CT-Art 3.0, Reinfeld, Polgar's Chess Middlegames--4,158 Positions, TASC or Steppenmethod, at some point, become no more or no less, you do the work, there are no magic tricks. at the same time, if you aim too high, i kind of ruins better work for latter. you do not so much calculate or delve into the problems as memorize them, as my Zen Master Dae Soen Sa Nim called 'Number One Bad!'.
you do CT Art 3.0 too slowly, you just start to suffocate. do it too fast, its click, click, this is not memorization, but time calculating, with direct feedback. that said, its like the man said, 'so many girls, so little time'. so here. begs the question, what does Renko have that others do not? i duly note, the guy on paper seems like the real deal, a person of respectable intentions, effort, imprimatur. blessings, david korn portland oregon
2012, Oct 29 dktransform hello friends. i continue to work hard, very, very hard at CT-Art 3.0, this time, doing the real, full on, full-bore seven circles. not as de la Mazla described it, but in my own way, but more like what he did, than not. i plan to write about it, and already did, in a small way, and have drafted parts II, III, IV, V. just to let you folks know, i continue to read comments, always nice to see new blood. i wish that i could respond to the many astute, worthwhile, smart comments. briefly, thanks to you, Chessisajedrez, always nice to see your most worthwhile, astute comments. always.
i plan to be back here, but not right now. to me, CTS is chicken and egg--if i train for standard, i don't need it. if i am playing a lot of blitz, then it is the gold standard for training. chessTempo, of course. a great place. nothing bad to say about it, lots that is good. and yes, its free, despite what some say. that guy Richard is one smart motherF. that it is visually attractive, to my eyes, counts for a lot. smart is the word for him, his work, that place. i maintain, you don't go to CTS to learn tactics, but to practice them, duly on the clock. see you all latter, warmly, dk 2012
2012, Oct 20 dktransform last blog post is a draft, discovery writing. i make no appologies. been busy also doing seven circles at CT-Art, currently doing about 25 per days around problem 600, a real tough road. more latter, see ya, dk: http://dk-transformation.blogspot.com/ . http://dk-transformation.blogspot.com/2012/10/sustainability-draft-work-in-progress.html . i have given up fear in the current economy, and i dont care.
2012, Oct 20 dktransform sorry. speaking of accurate, not my typing. i just got off work, am dead brain tired. but you get the idea. you can view things in different ways. obama and romney alike, think that increasing GDP for the USA 4% annually for the next six years is accomplishing economic gain. economic gain, instead, would be taking first two percent, then four, then six percent of all GDP for the next three years, devoted to sustainable energy, sustainable life, while DECREASING GDP 2% a year for the next three years. for example, get every highschool kid, to work three times a week, ninety minutes at a time, going around with a glad bag and work gloves, and clean up roads and rivers.
but no, child labor laws and strict things about safety, toxicity, barrier protection prevents it. we pay unemployment, and the concrete exists, the men exists, the skills exist, the needs exist, but no, there is no money to retool america or rebuild roads, but rich civil servants and police have rich pension, congressional pages have smart phones. yea. so no, 74% at 200k is not progress, it is waking sleep.
2012, Oct 20 dktransform there are others who have done more, and or better than me. but let it be duly noted, going 70k at 91% is equal to the effort of 200k at 74%. it takes a LOT longer to do the problems, more tension, more going back, more time. at 74% you fly through the work. just try 1,000 each way, time it, and compare. see how you feel. even the difference between 90% and 95% is light years. one in twenty five wrong is not 62.5% harder, than one in gen wrong. it is exponentially harder.
if you are doing 98.5%, as i did for almost two years along the way here, that means if you get one wrong in fifty, you have to do the next hundred in a row to get back to parity. if you are doing one in twenty, and get one wrong in ten, you then have to do the next one wrong in forty to get back to parity. this takes great effort. same analogy. 74% at 200k can alternately be said to be gigantic evidence of someone in a hurry insuring the same mistakes keep getting repeated, not a badge of honor. chess is learning, chess is thinking, not gambling.