Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 02 Nov '07 18:05
    Many players like myself want to use RHP games as training for OTB play. But there are different approaches to this…

    a) play RHP games in a total correspondence manner, and assume that many benefits are still transferable to OTB play

    b) consider what to move as if it were an OTB game. Then check this move via books, databases, moving the pieces around, etc. Change your initial choice if you wish prior to moving.

    c) consider what to move as if it were an OTB game. Don’t do any checks which aren’t allowed in OTB games. Play the move. Further checking is only done once the game is finished.

    So far most of my RHP games have been completed using (a). But I want to put more emphasis on my OTB ability, so I considered (b) as it seemed the most practical. However, I’m wondering if (c) has the benefit that it forces the player to live with the consequences of his OTB type analysis? i.e. (b) can still allow laziness, etc. because the player knows there will be some checking prior to submitting the move.

    Also, (a) and (b) allow opening theory to be followed more often (good for learning theory). But alternatively, (c) practices the skill of being able to find one’s own way in the opening.

    I’m considering (c), though I guess (a) and (b) are most popular in that order. Thoughts?

    (By-the-way, OTB games are indeed best training for OTB play, but sometimes life style, etc. doesn’t always allow such training)
  2. 02 Nov '07 18:53
    Originally posted by Varenka
    Many players like myself want to use RHP games as training for OTB play. But there are different approaches to this…

    a) play RHP games in a total correspondence manner, and assume that many benefits are still transferable to OTB play

    b) consider what to move as if it were an OTB game. Then check this move via books, databases, moving the pieces aroun ...[text shortened]... d best training for OTB play, but sometimes life style, etc. doesn’t always allow such training)
    If there were 3d boards available for RHP it would do much better with OTB players. The 2d tends to screw up board vision some when returning to OTB.
  3. 02 Nov '07 19:07
    Varenca:

    Since you are a stong player, have you noticed any difference in your
    OTB play and rating since joining RHC?
  4. Standard member wormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    02 Nov '07 19:26 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Varenka
    Many players like myself want to use RHP games as training for OTB play. But there are different approaches to this…

    a) play RHP games in a total correspondence manner, and assume that many benefits are still transferable to OTB play

    b) consider what to move as if it were an OTB game. Then check this move via books, databases, moving the pieces aroun ...[text shortened]... d best training for OTB play, but sometimes life style, etc. doesn’t always allow such training)
    I would guess c) might have the advantage of developing more confidence in your own judgment, which probably translates into better 'live performance'. I'm moving into that direction myself, to harness the added pressure into better motivation, thus achieving stronger learning effect. I'm not strict about it though...
  5. 02 Nov '07 20:45
    Originally posted by hamltnblue
    If there were 3d boards available for RHP it would do much better with OTB players. The 2d tends to screw up board vision some when returning to OTB.
    Unless I'm feeling lazy, I try to set up the position on a board. I'm one of those who can't analyse as well on a 2d board.
  6. 02 Nov '07 20:56
    Originally posted by davidgrayson
    have you noticed any difference in your
    OTB play and rating since joining RHC?
    My OTB rating has dropped quite a bit in the last two years, but that's for reasons not related to RHP.

    What I do know is that my OTB calculation isn't very good right now. Moving pieces around for my RHP games obviously won't help. So far, the main thing RHP has helped me with is learning openings and improving my positional understanding. Maybe I can change my approach in order to exercise my calculation skills more too.
  7. 03 Nov '07 17:52
    hi. welcome.
  8. 03 Nov '07 18:01
    I feel that C would be the wrong choice. The same could be done with your OTB games. Check after you finish...
  9. 03 Nov '07 22:09
    Originally posted by deeploser
    I feel that C would be the wrong choice. The same could be done with your OTB games. Check after you finish...
    One aspect of my initial post is that my life style at the moment doesn't allow for many OTB games, hence trying to make the most of my RHP games too.
  10. 03 Nov '07 23:03
    Originally posted by Varenka
    One aspect of my initial post is that my life style at the moment doesn't allow for many OTB games, hence trying to make the most of my RHP games too.
    No matter how much I try, the fact that each position is often analysed several days after it was last looked at, it is difficult to recreate the conditions and immediacy of an OTB game at RHP. I also find it difficult to invest the same level of emotion in an RHP game.

    From that point of view I think all forms of chess that are not an OTB game constitute "cross training" rather than training. I think the only way to use the "muscles" used in an OTB game is to analyse the diagram or real board, exactly as you would OTB without moving the pieces. This requires a certain strength of mind, because there is the underlying fear that you will lose games to "weaker" players who do.

    All too often I find myself making RHP moves with an opening book balanced on my knee, or moving pieces on a peg set or the analyse board, when the fear of making a mistake becomes overwhelming. Equally I can find myself hanging a piece for no good reason after almost no thought at all, in a way that almost never happens to me OTB. This is what I mean about my lack emotional investment in RHP games.

    In the end we do what suits us best, and make progress or not in line with the level of effort invested. At least RHP keeps us thinking about the game at some level, when otherwise we may not.
  11. 03 Nov '07 23:49 / 1 edit
    I printed off a game I'm having difficulty with at the moment so as to study the position on a train journey. As I studied the position I became sharply aware of how the analyze board precludes the use of the "muscle" to calculate a position in my head and how beneficial it was just staring at the paper and working it out. It also occurred to me that staring at a chess position on a train is slightly odd behavior and that I should perhaps wear an ill fitting corduroy jacket with elbow patches and sandals with white socks to complete the effect.

    Several times now I've made plans to stop using the analyze board but I inevitably slide back to using it within a few days. I think an option to switch it off on my profile settings might help so I would be forced to make several awkward clicks to turn it back on...perhaps with a polite warning message:

    "You have chosen to activate the analyze board. Many players consider that overuse of the analyze board inhibits your development as an OTB player. Are you sure you wish to enable this feature? Click yes and select the time you wish it to be available for - or click no to return to your game."

    My ideal scenario is to have the game set up on a board beside the computer and do the calculations in my head. Then, as a very last check, run the line on the analyze board...along the line of Varenkas option (b). Having just read Josh Waitkins book on the art of learning he has quite a lot to say about the power of deep concentration, sometimes working for hours at a time before some truth about a position is revealed to him. Sadly my efforts on the train have so far just revealed deeper truth about how crap my position is and left me wondering what I was thinking about on the preceding moves.
  12. 04 Nov '07 01:31
    Originally posted by Sepia Tint
    it is difficult to recreate the conditions and immediacy of an OTB game at RHP
    Yes, I agree. I guess the question is whether it's worth trying to emmulate it as closely as possible.

    I think one of the reasons that puts people of a (c) type approach is that ultimately they will not play their RHP games as well in comparison to (a) or (b). e.g. my visualisation skills will never be better than me just moving the pieces and seeing the positions firsthand. And accessing databases/books is helpful too. So I guess (c) only suits those who care only about their OTB rating and not RHP rating. This may not be so easy to maintain if the RHP losses start increasing.
  13. 04 Nov '07 20:58
    Originally posted by Varenka
    Many players like myself want to use RHP games as training for OTB play. But there are different approaches to this…

    a) play RHP games in a total correspondence manner, and assume that many benefits are still transferable to OTB play

    b) consider what to move as if it were an OTB game. Then check this move via books, databases, moving the pieces aroun ...[text shortened]... d best training for OTB play, but sometimes life style, etc. doesn’t always allow such training)
    I tend to lean towards c, although sometimes when playing an unrated game against a friend in which we are trying a new opening I might use a database.