Originally posted by RahimK I can't see a 2000+ player doing tactics that way and those tactics actually helping him.
Surely "tactics" are tactics. Pins, forks, skewers, etc are the same no matter whether you are rated 1200 or 2400. The difference is the 2400 player sees further, calculates more accurately and (generally) makes a better assessment of the final position.
Sometime even he gets it wrong only not as often as the 1200 player gets it wrong. The only difference beween the 1200 and 2400 in this regard is the depth and complexity of the combination.
Originally posted by Gammastyle www.beginnersgame.com
Yes anyone can publish a chess book.
Oh, yes. That one is my favourite 😉. I stumbled upon this link from another chess related website. I am a beginner in terms of openings, endgames and strategy but reading a few pages from that book made me laugh.
Originally posted by Dragon Fire Surely "tactics" are tactics. Pins, forks, skewers, etc are the same no matter whether you are rated 1200 or 2400. The difference is the 2400 player sees further, calculates more accurately and (generally) makes a better assessment of the final position.
Sometime even he gets it wrong only not as often as the 1200 player gets it wrong. The only difference beween the 1200 and 2400 in this regard is the depth and complexity of the combination.
Doing tactics would help them.
I'm talking about a 2000+ player doing tactics La Maza ___ way.
Have you heard of his book Rapid Chess Improvement and his article 400 points in 400 days?
Originally posted by Sicilian Smaug Hey Powershaker, where'd you go? Busy reading Lev Albert books?
Ahhh! Well, I've been working a lot. A crap load of my games timed out, so my 1600 RHP rating is now in the mid-1400s. I'm still in the forums on and off, but I don't want to start a game if I can't finish it, you know? So, I'm laying off of correspondence chess for awhile.
Can a 2000 player learn anything from a 1600 player. I think the answer is a resounding yes. If the 1600 player was good at writing and putting his ideas across and he has available to him a multitude of databases, chess engines and other research material he may very well be able to write a book that puts across ideas well above his OTB capabilities.
Put it this way, would a 1600 player given 2 hours per move beat a 2000 player given 5 minutes for the game. No??? Would you change your mind if that 1600 player were able to use databases and engines but the 2000 was not?
Still think no? OK would GM Neil MacDonald given 2 hours per move and allowed to use engines and databases beat GM Veselin Topalov given 5 minutes for the game and not allowed to use those tools. If you answer this question yes, why? GM Neil MacDonalds rating is 2374 and GM Veselin Topalov is rated 2804, a difference of 430 rating points. Could Topalov learn something from a book written by MacDonald (there are many)? If the answer is yes then that 2000 player could learn from the 1600 player.
Originally posted by Dragon Fire Can a 2000 player learn anything from a 1600 player. I think the answer is a resounding yes. If the 1600 player was good at writing and putting his ideas across and he has available to him a multitude of databases, chess engines and other research material he may very well be able to write a book that puts across ideas well above his OTB capabilities.
...[text shortened]... then that 2000 player could learn from the 1600 player.
If you still think he could not, why?
Or, could I beat Dragon if I had 2 hours to finish the game and he had 5 minutes? YES!! 🙂 😛
Originally posted by cmsMaster Or, could I beat Dragon if I had 2 hours to finish the game and he had 5 minutes? YES!! 🙂 😛
Absolutely, of course you could, although our rating difference is only 320 points and my OTB rating for Rapidplay is significantly higher than normal play!
Just proves the point. Given time and tools there is plenty you could teach me!
Originally posted by Dragon Fire Absolutely, of course you could, although our rating difference is only 320 points and my OTB rating for Rapidplay is significantly higher than normal play!
Just proves the point. Given time and tools there is plenty you could teach me!
No way, I don't prefer rapid play and blitz 🙁, especially since I've been playing so much blitz lately. However I'll play a g/90 with you any day 🙂. (My slow otb is significantly than my RHP is currently as well 😉, although my blitz is much lower).
Originally posted by Shinidoki you have $10 and you MUST SPEND IT ON CHESS....
(also assume you are a 1300 player)
a number of options present themselves. all of them costing $10
1) a Hour lesson with Kasparov (2800 player)
2) 1 single 2 two hour lesson with an IM (2400)
3) 2 lessons (each 2hrs long) with a Master
4) 4 lessons (each 3hrs long) with a 1700 player (400 pts above you)
**all players are equally good at teaching**
I would take the 1 hour w/ kasparov, get his autograph on various items (chessboard, picture, etc) and sell those items on ebay. I would then spend the money that I make to take regular lessons from the IM.
Originally posted by Dragon Fire Can a 2000 player learn anything from a 1600 player. I think the answer is a resounding yes. If the 1600 player was good at writing and putting his ideas across and he has available to him a multitude of databases, chess engines and other research material he may very well be able to write a book that puts across ideas well above his OTB capabilities.
...[text shortened]... then that 2000 player could learn from the 1600 player.
If you still think he could not, why?
Yes you can learn things from lower rated players but why risk your money on such a book when there could be other better ones?
Why not buy a book written by a master on that subject instead of a 1600 even if it is a bit more money?
Originally posted by RahimK Yes you can learn things from lower rated players but why risk your money on such a book when there could be other better ones?
Why not buy a book written by a master on that subject instead of a 1600 even if it is a bit more money?
Ah yes! but we are not debating the quality of the book here.
I have books written by World Champions that lose me and others written by lesser players that are very clear and easy to follow.
It is the layout of the book and the presentation of the data that makes all the difference. In both books there is haevy emphasis on past GM games.
I have no books (yet) since the advent of chess engines but imagine they would have increased quality significantly even when the book is written by a lower rated player.
Here's the question: If a 1600 player can explain something of value to a 2000 player, why is he still at 1600? I don't think you'll find too many players 1600 in the opening and 2000 in the middle game or end game. There is some difference, of course, but I think the visualization, calculation, and strategic skills of a 2000 would carry over to all parts of their game to some degree. Many great players, i'll agree, are unable to impart their knowledge to lesser mortals, because of a lack of communication skills. However, a lack of "how to" skills would make a 1600 player unable to show anybody 2000 much of value, no matter how good at explaining he is. I have opening cd's by Kasparov and Andrew Martin. I much prefer Martin as a teacher because of his enthusiasm and explaining ability. But those two are well above my rating anyway. If Martin were, say, 1600 I don't think I'd get much out of the cd, if, indeed i were to buy it in the first place. At least that's my story, and I'm sticking to it.
You didn't read my earlier post or at least did not understand it.
The point I am making is that the 1600 player is only that good OTB but when given hours per move, access to a database and chess engines and having excellent communication abilities he can write a book that will convey ideas far greater than his rating implies.
He will get it right because he has the time and ability to do the research.
You may not realise this but there are many chess books out there where the GM whose name appears on the cover has done little more than contribute his name to a book written by a lesser mortal. This concept is not of course the sole perogative of chess book writers as many books are written by ghost writers.
Can Anybody Write a Chess Book?
05 Aug '06 17:48
Back to Top