Rapid Chess Improvement

Have you'll heard of the book 'Rapid Chess Improvement', by Michael de la Maza? Here's a summary of that book -
http://satishtalim.blogspot.com/2005/05/rapid-chess-improvement-my-summary.html

Also, those interested can start on the programme and blog about their own progress. There's a strong likelihood of you being then included in the Knights Errant. It's fun. Give it a try.

Ofcourse you will have to spend a lot of time practicing. Don't say that I did warn you - it's a lot of hard work too!

Originally posted by IndianGuru
Have you'll heard of the book 'Rapid Chess Improvement', by Michael de la Maza? Here's a summary of that book -
http://satishtalim.blogspot.com/2005/05/rapid-chess-improvement-my-summary.html

Also, those interested can start on the programme and blog about their own progress. There's a strong likelihood of you being then included in the Knights E ...[text shortened]... o spend a lot of time practicing. Don't say that I did warn you - it's a lot of hard work too!

We already had 2 posts on this topic so far which i can remember.
I'm close to completing round 5.

How about using the Chess Tactics Server at http://chess.emrald.net/index.php. You could do the same thing de la Maza's advocating, except CTS gives you much more relevant material. I've noticed an inordinate number of queen sacs in CT ARTS, something i've experienced maybe once or twice in my many years of playing. Most of the CT ARTS exercises lead to mate, whereas in real games a tactic could win a piece or a pawn or simply get you in a better position. For that reason i think CTS is better. The site keeps track of your progress, numbers of tries, etc. My only problem with CTS is the brief time it gives you to solve the tactic in order to get any rating points. It seems to reward those who have fast hands/mouses (mice?). Anyway, the de la Maza fans would be interested in the above site. And it's free, you only have to register. It's based in Germany. Also, it doesn't have a drag and drop feature on the board, which i prefer.

Originally posted by buddy2
How about using the Chess Tactics Server at http://chess.emrald.net/index.php. You could do the same thing de la Maza's advocating, except CTS gives you much more relevant material. I've noticed an inordinate number of queen sacs in CT ARTS, something i've experienced maybe once or twice in my many years of playing. Most of the CT ARTS exercises lead to ...[text shortened]... based in Germany. Also, it doesn't have a drag and drop feature on the board, which i prefer.

Originally posted by buddy2
How about using the Chess Tactics Server at http://chess.emrald.net/index.php. You could do the same thing de la Maza's advocating, except CTS gives you much more relevant material. I've noticed an inordinate number of queen sacs in CT ARTS, something i've experienced maybe once or twice in my many years of playing. Most of the CT ARTS exercises lead to ...[text shortened]... based in Germany. Also, it doesn't have a drag and drop feature on the board, which i prefer.

Originally posted by buddy2
How about using the Chess Tactics Server at http://chess.emrald.net/index.php. You could do the same thing de la Maza's advocating, except CTS gives you much more relevant material. I've noticed an inordinate number of queen sacs in CT ARTS, something i've experienced maybe once or twice in my many years of playing. Most of the CT ARTS exercises lead to ...[text shortened]... based in Germany. Also, it doesn't have a drag and drop feature on the board, which i prefer.

yea, I'm surprised more people don't use the site Chess Tactics Server. It's ideal for those who want to improve their tactics (well, almost). I have issues with CT ARTS, which i state above. Mainly that their examples are, many times, so unusual they are useless for the everyday player. You need "typical" examples of situations that come up frequently. The more frequently the better, so that the patterns become instantly recognizable because they come up so often. I'm surprised no one has come up with a way of measuring the frequency of tactical patterns to see which ones are most useful. We all know the typical themes: overworked piece, deflection, back rank mate, etc., but we don't know which patterns comes up the most. There are programs that quantify opening success, but not combinational frequency. At least none that i know of.

I'm working through 'The Ultimate Chess Puzzle Book' by Jon Emms at the moment which has a good mix of 1001 problems. I'm not working through it at any where near the rate that de la Maza advocates though.

the John Emms book, I believe, helps more in over the board games, tournament and such CT ARTs and Chess Tactics Server is more for blitz, casual games. The puzzles in the Emms book require a deeper analysis, hence lots more time. In the Chess Tacts Server, for example, you have three seconds to spot the combination or non-combination! After that you're rating drops. That's my big contention with CTS, the time element. They have their statistical justification, I think they're nuts. I just take as long as i want and to hell with the rating. The point in all of them is to burn pattern recognition into the brain, so it becomes second nature.