Chess improvement

Originally posted by nimzo5
wiki provides this

For players graded ECF 215 or below the ECF have issued the formula

ECF x 5 + 1250 = Elo[1]

I have to say i like the idea of being able to take my games to an IM for analysis. Unfortunately they are a little hard to come by near me. There's a couple of near master strength players at my local club but unfortunately they don't seem to have a lot of time for Mr. Average!
I normally end up doing as you said and just put my OTB games straight through Fritz with no effort to self annotate at all. Maybe that's where i'm going wrong.

I've also tried the solitaire method of studying master games but have found it of little benefit. It all just feels so disjointed. You end up having to take your own move back with no idea most of the time why it was bad. there then normally follows reams of possible variants that i would never have found in several hours of looking!
I've since resorted to only studying games in the openings i play. I simply play through them and read the notes trying to build up and Arsenal of attacking ideas.
Thanks for the heads up Nimzo. looks like a pretty intensive programme you have there.

Originally posted by Talisman
I'm just interested in what you guys do, if anything to try and improve your game. I've found the whole subject quite perplexing ever since i got serious about the game a few years back.
I've done reasonably well myself, on here at least, getting into the 1900 bracket from struggling in the 1600's but there's a few smelly games in the pile which is going t
I'm just interetsed in any ideas on the very vexed subject of chess improvement?

I get the feeling you spend a lot of time trying to find THE perfect move for every move you make.

But one thing I've found is that almost all games seem to be decided by a very small number of relatively "major blunders" by either yourself or your opponent (as well as any missed opportunities because you or your opponent failed to recognize a blunder when it happened). Often, it's just one move.

After each game you play, go back over the game and identify what were the main blunders you made that affected the game (including any blunders you made that your opponent failed to cash in on). Almost invariably, one or two moves will stand out. Then try to figure out why you made these mistakes. Obviously, as your rating gets higher, your "gaffes" are going to be less "major" - but there's still going to be one or two major mistakes that ultimately decide the game. Figure out what those were and focus on eliminating them.

Don't worry so much about analyzing all the more minor miscues - because those won't really matter until you've eliminated the bigger mistakes.


you could even use this approach with master's games (where it wasn't a draw) -- see if you can figure out what move ultimately decided the game and why. Figure out what sorts of "blunders" the masters tend to make.

ah ok. Well at 1320 I would put a lot less time into openings and spend most of my time doing tactics, playing games and then analyzing them afterwards.

Originally posted by Talisman
I have to say i like the idea of being able to take my games to an IM for analysis. Unfortunately they are a little hard to come by near me. There's a couple of near master strength players at my local club but unfortunately they don't seem to have a lot of time for Mr. Average!
I normally end up doing as you said and just put my OTB games straight through Fritz with no effort to self annotate at all. Maybe that's where i'm going wrong.

Well, you have to pay an IM to analyze your games, nobody will spend his time with you for free.
As for auto-annotating in Fritz, that's such an useless feature and such a waste of time. You should look at your games yourself, trying to see what went wrong in them. Tactical mistakes? OK, then you must work on your tactics. Lack of plans? Like you had an IQP and played too passively and got squeezed. Again, you know what to study. Fritz cannot tell you this.

agree pretty much. You can either offer one of the near masters some cash/pints or hunt down a master online to look at your games. Rybka is good for checking your ideas, but not so good on forming plans etc.