I was reading the article, "400 Points in 400 days" by Michael de la Maza. (The article can be found http://www.chesscafe.com/text/skittles148.pdf#search=%22400%20points%20in%20400%20days%22 for part 1 and http://www.chesscafe.com/text/skittles150.pdf#search=%22400%20points%20in%20400%20days%22 for part 2)
Anyway, the author claims that this helped him, and if you look at his rating, it has gone up quite dramatically. His system is to just study tactics and completely ignore everything else. Over the summer I had lots of free time so I generally did 50 chess tactics puzzles per day, play a game against ChessMaster everyday, and study a book (different days had different topics i.e, monday and Saturday Endgames, Tuesday Tactics, Wednesday and sunday Strategy, etc.). During the 2 months that I did that, my rating went up 100 points. My system seems to be effective, but I haven't tested it enough (I have no time now except the weekends to my rating has now stagnated) to see if it is good.
Has any one used the De La Maza system, and does it work?
I think that La Maza overstates his case. It is true that the ability to recognize tactical opportunites is crucial for success in chess, but knowing about openings and endgames is important too. It's nice to win a pawn with a clever three-move comibnation, but if you don't know how to win King and Pawn versus King endgames, then the pawn might not do you any good.
Originally posted by BedlamThanks. If I ever get to 2200 (which I doubt)... I'll follow the advice.
No idea to be honest (Although I know it does say get and do CT Art, which comes highly recommended by me) but theres also the GM Irina Mikhailova 2 year from 2200 to IM plan.....
http://www.convekta.com/softscho/l1/lesson_3.html
Studying anything in chess brings rewards. Everyone's looking for a magic spell. Play lots of chess with good people, read, do tons of tactics. de la Maza has some good ideas in his book, commonsense really, but valuable. i also have ctarts, but got frustrated with the hundreds of queen sacs leading to mate. In my whole life i've only had one queen sac, and that was done against me! Much more common are tactics that win a piece or a pawn or give you a good position. Try http://chess.emrald.net/ Commonly called Chess Tactics Server. Comes out of Germany. Throws common tactical situations at you as fast as you can solve them. And speed does count! It gives you a rating, compared to others on the site. You can become a member free and forget paying for ctarts, which is getting a little long in the tooth.
Michael de la Maza's system will make you better at tactics, but at a price. If you follow his program religiously, you will probably get burned out on chess, it's just too much for most people. I've read a few times here that even de la Maza no longer plays chess! There's still alot to be gained by regular practice with tactics, just not quite so zealous as his sytem advocates. I was doing 50-100 puzzles a day for a while and my play got much sharper, but I was rapidly losing interest. That's too heavy a price for me to pay, I play this game for fun. I believe you can sharpen your tactical eye without going at it so crazy, maybe 10-20 puzzles a day. Chess Tactics Server is a nice free site that offers this, as mentioned above by buddy2.
Originally posted by chesskid001Solving chess puzzles helps I guess. But I think learning from basic is still the best way to go. Opening principle, middle game, endgame etc. Why should you trade down pieces etc. Small details here and there, eg Knights are no good at the edge of the board, bishops of opposite colours are drawish in nature, king & rook pawn on 7th rank is draw etc. You'd surprised how all the small details can help you in actual games.
I was reading the article, "400 Points in 400 days" by Michael de la Maza. (The article can be found http://www.chesscafe.com/text/skittles148.pdf#search=%22400%20points%20in%20400%20days%22 for part 1 and http://www.chesscafe.com/text/skittles150.pdf#search=%22400%20points%20in%20400%20days%22 for part 2)
Anyway, the author claims that this helped hi ...[text shortened]... agnated) to see if it is good.
Has any one used the De La Maza system, and does it work?
Then you need to have more serious games also. My nephew is quite a bright boy. He plays well for his age. But he has the habit of wanting to take back moves. Over time, it became a weakness. In his school competition recently, he lost to players I know to be weaker than him, and he lost because of that lousy habit!
Originally posted by Falco LombardiHopefully Silman's review is not biased, because in the article at least de la maza bashes silman.
"Rapid Chess Improvement" is like one big infomercial. Jeremy Silman's review can be found here. http://www.jeremysilman.com/book_reviews_js/js_rapid_chess_improv.htm
EDIT: Oops, someone already posted it.
Its infomercial but I tend to agree with a lot of what he says. Some of it is well dodgy though.
He has a point on club players overly focusing on deep theory while making basic tactical mistakes. I know Nimzovitch's "My System" didn't help me keep missing basic K & Q forks! ;-)
On the other hand, I learned a lot from Irving Chernev - Chess Move by Move. This book alone helped me move from 1200 to 1400.
The point "#2: GM instruction is sub-optimal at the class level" - is an interesting one but this depends on the GM surely? I once got the advice: "improve by studying GM games". Often this left me even more confused (especially if there was little or no analysis).
IMHO, choose books with at least some verbal analysis (eg Kasparov's recent series on the World Champions, Fischer' Best 60 games). The best games you certaily must study are your own, if possible with a better player.
I like the idea of a drill - the analogy with other sports (like taking a penalty kick in soccer, or a free throw in basketball) is a valid one and something I force myself to use in OTB games. The "No Blitz" rule is bull in my opinion. Blitz is *the* way of learning tactics.
Tactics are important (and basic) but they are subordinate to strategy. I don't think players would benefit a lot from this course though. Moving pieces in circles around the board is for 5 year olds. (No offence to 5 year olds intended).
Originally posted by thargYes I did find the "Chess Vision" somewhat pointless.
Its infomercial but I tend to agree with a lot of what he says. Some of it is well dodgy though.
He has a point on club players overly focusing on deep theory while making basic tactical mistakes. I know Nimzovitch's "My System" didn't help me keep missing basic K & Q forks! ;-)
On the other hand, I learned a lot from Irving Chernev - Chess Move by Move. ...[text shortened]... circles around the board is for 5 year olds. (No offence to 5 year olds intended).