Your network blocks the Lichess assets!

lichess.org
Donate

Learning from Jacob Aagaard

@Inter-temporal said in #8:

there is one tiny recommendation i would have...
i think it's helpful to begin the list with the opponent's checks (on our K) and the opponent's captures; and then insert our checks and our captures.

Maybe it's because I do too many easy puzzles (as per nvasquez's recommendations!), but I thought it would be better to start with our own moves. If you have a forced mate, it doesn't matter what checks the opponent has. Also, the implicit assumption is that it's the player's turn, so the player's moves are more immediate than the opponent's moves.

@Inter-temporal said in #8: > there is one tiny recommendation i would have... > i think it's helpful to begin the list with the opponent's checks (on our K) and the opponent's captures; and then insert our checks and our captures. Maybe it's because I do too many easy puzzles (as per nvasquez's recommendations!), but I thought it would be better to start with our own moves. If you have a forced mate, it doesn't matter what checks the opponent has. Also, the implicit assumption is that it's the player's turn, so the player's moves are more immediate than the opponent's moves.

@Graque
that's logical. i understand. there's likely no right way.

the reason i like to begin the opponent's moves is because i still fail to spend enough time on the opponent's moves generally. so i try to counter that problem by beginning my analysis with their moves.

@Graque that's logical. i understand. there's likely no right way. the reason i like to begin the opponent's moves is because i still fail to spend enough time on the opponent's moves generally. so i try to counter that problem by beginning my analysis with their moves.

Another tip someone once told me -- pay extra attention when the pieces are "touching" each other. A cute way to say within capture distance. Sparks are ready to fly! When such a thing happens with pawns, esp. for prolonged periods of time, people often refer to it as a "tension", but of course it's not limited to just those pieces.

Anyway, just be extra vigilant when pieces are "touching"!

Another tip someone once told me -- pay extra attention when the pieces are "touching" each other. A cute way to say within capture distance. Sparks are ready to fly! When such a thing happens with pawns, esp. for prolonged periods of time, people often refer to it as a "tension", but of course it's not limited to just those pieces. Anyway, just be extra vigilant when pieces are "touching"!

I've done FM Dalton Perrine's Survive and Thrive course on Chessable. There's only a small amount of defensive courses out there. My primary issues are: #1) Moving too fast (as in not checking all my opponents responses) ; and #2) Missing my opponent's threats.

If I were to create a training program it would be to train 3 skills - Wide not deep (see all the moves for all the pieces); Blunder check (what are all my opponent's forcing moves); and 3 moves (looking 3 moves into the future to see which line is best).

What I do is play what "feels" right.

I've done FM Dalton Perrine's Survive and Thrive course on Chessable. There's only a small amount of defensive courses out there. My primary issues are: #1) Moving too fast (as in not checking all my opponents responses) ; and #2) Missing my opponent's threats. If I were to create a training program it would be to train 3 skills - Wide not deep (see all the moves for all the pieces); Blunder check (what are all my opponent's forcing moves); and 3 moves (looking 3 moves into the future to see which line is best). What I do is play what "feels" right.

@nvasquez said in #14:

If I were to create a training program it would be to train 3 skills - Wide not deep (see all the moves for all the pieces); Blunder check (what are all my opponent's forcing moves); and 3 moves (looking 3 moves into the future to see which line is best).

The wide + 3 moves sounds like Can Kabadayi's Chessable course:

https://www.chessable.com/fundamental-chess-calculation-skills/course/123333/

I haven't tried it, but I really liked another of Can's courses and hear he is a good author. About defensive courses, I keep drilling Susan Polgar's:

https://www.chessable.com/learn-chess-the-right-way-book-3-mastering-defensive-technique/course/12774/

For some reason I can never seem to keep all the patterns in my head long-term though.

@nvasquez said in #14: > If I were to create a training program it would be to train 3 skills - Wide not deep (see all the moves for all the pieces); Blunder check (what are all my opponent's forcing moves); and 3 moves (looking 3 moves into the future to see which line is best). The wide + 3 moves sounds like Can Kabadayi's Chessable course: https://www.chessable.com/fundamental-chess-calculation-skills/course/123333/ I haven't tried it, but I really liked another of Can's courses and hear he is a good author. About defensive courses, I keep drilling Susan Polgar's: https://www.chessable.com/learn-chess-the-right-way-book-3-mastering-defensive-technique/course/12774/ For some reason I can never seem to keep all the patterns in my head long-term though.

hey i really liked this post .
i wanted to ask about this diff candidates moves method in this should we like literally see for all moves for many pieces ? or like what i am a bit confused as didnt used this method even till now so pls tell me .

hey i really liked this post . i wanted to ask about this diff candidates moves method in this should we like literally see for all moves for many pieces ? or like what i am a bit confused as didnt used this method even till now so pls tell me .

Mr Aagaard supports Israel's genocide.

Mr Aagaard supports Israel's genocide.

@Graque said in #15:

For some reason I can never seem to keep all the patterns in my head long-term though.

I am attempting to keep some patterns in my head long-term. It is very difficult as in my case I am 70 years old. I have been doing the Common Chess Positions course by @Benedictine on Chessable. It is a very good course but possibly a little too advanced for me. Nevertheless, doing the checkmates and the knight moves so far has been a revelation to me with so many aspects to tactics revealed that I had no idea about.

In terms of keeping patterns in the brain, or attempting to, I have been using Overstudy to a very significant extent as well as the default spaced repetitions. It is still hard to retain the pattern memories.

The metrics behind what is happening paint a clear picture. I am doing overall about 2 to 3 times the volume of spaced repetitions (extras as Overstudy) than the Chessable default settings alone deliver. Despite this, some of the early stuff I learnt a few months ago (the early "isolated" or archetypical mates) is already decaying in memory as follows. Well-learned batches of 10 which had taken me about 70 seconds for solving 10 puzzles after much practice were later taking me up to 3 minutes (180 seconds) to solve. This was and is because my frequency of Overstudy on those was reduced over time to leave time for learning new puzzle patterns.

New learning is becoming more difficult. The puzzles are more difficult too of course. But it is also difficult to burn the candle at both ends as it were. I mean to say it is difficult to keep old patterns fresh with low repetitions while learning more and more new ones with high repetitions. The puzzle solving and practice load increases and increases. I relearn even the earliest puzzles every week, still, as I seem to require that or else my memories of the patterns decay too much. The next stage after needing 3 minutes to solve 10 (after previously being able to do 10 in 70 seconds) seems to be dropping from 10/10 to 9/10: that sort of thing.

I guess having an old man's memory is my enemy here. (Ya think?) In terms of my playing ability, 8 months of doing Lichess random puzzles, and of playing, failed to improve me much. I have only being doing spaced repetition puzzles on Chessable for a few months now. It is still too soon to say if these can help me. My rating fell badly when I tried to play faster time limits. It now seems impossible to improve it again while back at Rapid 15+10. So all my work at mostly Lichess random puzzles and now at targeted puzzles has achieved nothing, at least so far. But the targeted puzzles work is still too recently started and much more is needed.

However, it raises the issue that old brains, or at least this old brain, probably simply cannot improve at chess. Old dogs cannot learn new tricks. Old chess improvers... don't.

Some types of study, training and playing do work, obviously, because a lot of young players, meaning kids, teenagers and young adults, do get better at chess. Sometimes a lot better. Beyond that, well I have severe doubts now for older chess learners. Loss of neuroplasticity, declining memory and low energy are the main issues.

My attempted improvement experiment is not finished yet. The experiment is interesting even if my chess is not. And by heavens, my chess is terrible... still. But that could be solved if I simply quit chess. I may yet do so sooner or later, but not until this old age learning experiment has been pushed to the limit. The day I become 100% certain it is hopeless, the experiment is over. Right now it looks to be at about 80% probability of being hopeless. That is I give myself about 1 chance in 5 of yet turning this around... a little. Even reaching 1600 at Rapid would be a small victory and probably about as far as I could go.

@Graque said in #15: > For some reason I can never seem to keep all the patterns in my head long-term though. I am attempting to keep some patterns in my head long-term. It is very difficult as in my case I am 70 years old. I have been doing the Common Chess Positions course by @Benedictine on Chessable. It is a very good course but possibly a little too advanced for me. Nevertheless, doing the checkmates and the knight moves so far has been a revelation to me with so many aspects to tactics revealed that I had no idea about. In terms of keeping patterns in the brain, or attempting to, I have been using Overstudy to a very significant extent as well as the default spaced repetitions. It is still hard to retain the pattern memories. The metrics behind what is happening paint a clear picture. I am doing overall about 2 to 3 times the volume of spaced repetitions (extras as Overstudy) than the Chessable default settings alone deliver. Despite this, some of the early stuff I learnt a few months ago (the early "isolated" or archetypical mates) is already decaying in memory as follows. Well-learned batches of 10 which had taken me about 70 seconds for solving 10 puzzles after much practice were later taking me up to 3 minutes (180 seconds) to solve. This was and is because my frequency of Overstudy on those was reduced over time to leave time for learning new puzzle patterns. New learning is becoming more difficult. The puzzles are more difficult too of course. But it is also difficult to burn the candle at both ends as it were. I mean to say it is difficult to keep old patterns fresh with low repetitions while learning more and more new ones with high repetitions. The puzzle solving and practice load increases and increases. I relearn even the earliest puzzles every week, still, as I seem to require that or else my memories of the patterns decay too much. The next stage after needing 3 minutes to solve 10 (after previously being able to do 10 in 70 seconds) seems to be dropping from 10/10 to 9/10: that sort of thing. I guess having an old man's memory is my enemy here. (Ya think?) In terms of my playing ability, 8 months of doing Lichess random puzzles, and of playing, failed to improve me much. I have only being doing spaced repetition puzzles on Chessable for a few months now. It is still too soon to say if these can help me. My rating fell badly when I tried to play faster time limits. It now seems impossible to improve it again while back at Rapid 15+10. So all my work at mostly Lichess random puzzles and now at targeted puzzles has achieved nothing, at least so far. But the targeted puzzles work is still too recently started and much more is needed. However, it raises the issue that old brains, or at least this old brain, probably simply cannot improve at chess. Old dogs cannot learn new tricks. Old chess improvers... don't. Some types of study, training and playing do work, obviously, because a lot of young players, meaning kids, teenagers and young adults, do get better at chess. Sometimes a lot better. Beyond that, well I have severe doubts now for older chess learners. Loss of neuroplasticity, declining memory and low energy are the main issues. My attempted improvement experiment is not finished yet. The experiment is interesting even if my chess is not. And by heavens, my chess is terrible... still. But that could be solved if I simply quit chess. I may yet do so sooner or later, but not until this old age learning experiment has been pushed to the limit. The day I become 100% certain it is hopeless, the experiment is over. Right now it looks to be at about 80% probability of being hopeless. That is I give myself about 1 chance in 5 of yet turning this around... a little. Even reaching 1600 at Rapid would be a small victory and probably about as far as I could go.

@Wodjul said in #18:

The day I become 100% certain it is hopeless, the experiment is over. Right now it looks to be at about 80% probability of being hopeless. That is I give myself about 1 chance in 5 of yet turning this around... a little. Even reaching 1600 at Rapid would be a small victory and probably about as far as I could go.

I'm in a similar situation (except my goal was to average 25 in puzzle storm). I think I may have reached my natural max, but it's hard to say. How can you ever be 100% certain you can't improve? As time goes on, it seems the probability that you will only get worse goes up, but there is always some chance you will hit an epiphany and suddenly get better. But it does seem that chess is mostly about age and talent, and practice can only nudge the needle within those bands.

@Wodjul said in #18:

The metrics behind what is happening paint a clear picture. I am doing overall about 2 to 3 times the volume of spaced repetitions (extras as Overstudy) than the Chessable default settings alone deliver. Despite this, some of the early stuff I learnt a few months ago (the early "isolated" or archetypical mates) is already decaying in memory as follows. Well-learned batches of 10 which had taken me about 70 seconds for solving 10 puzzles after much practice were later taking me up to 3 minutes (180 seconds) to solve. This was and is because my frequency of Overstudy on those was reduced over time to leave time for learning new puzzle patterns.

Yeah I also found Benedictine's chess patterns too hard---I just couldn't retain the whole thing in memory. It seems the more you review, the more patterns you can retain, but the amount you practice per day puts a cap on the total you can learn. For instance, suppose it takes you one minute to review each pattern, and you can easily remember that pattern for a week. If you practice an hour a day, you'll review 60 patterns per day, and can keep a total of 60 * 7 = 420 patterns in memory.

@Wodjul said in #18: > The day I become 100% certain it is hopeless, the experiment is over. Right now it looks to be at about 80% probability of being hopeless. That is I give myself about 1 chance in 5 of yet turning this around... a little. Even reaching 1600 at Rapid would be a small victory and probably about as far as I could go. I'm in a similar situation (except my goal was to average 25 in puzzle storm). I think I may have reached my natural max, but it's hard to say. How can you ever be 100% certain you can't improve? As time goes on, it seems the probability that you will only get worse goes up, but there is always some chance you will hit an epiphany and suddenly get better. But it does seem that chess is mostly about age and talent, and practice can only nudge the needle within those bands. @Wodjul said in #18: > The metrics behind what is happening paint a clear picture. I am doing overall about 2 to 3 times the volume of spaced repetitions (extras as Overstudy) than the Chessable default settings alone deliver. Despite this, some of the early stuff I learnt a few months ago (the early "isolated" or archetypical mates) is already decaying in memory as follows. Well-learned batches of 10 which had taken me about 70 seconds for solving 10 puzzles after much practice were later taking me up to 3 minutes (180 seconds) to solve. This was and is because my frequency of Overstudy on those was reduced over time to leave time for learning new puzzle patterns. Yeah I also found Benedictine's chess patterns too hard---I just couldn't retain the whole thing in memory. It seems the more you review, the more patterns you can retain, but the amount you practice per day puts a cap on the total you can learn. For instance, suppose it takes you one minute to review each pattern, and you can easily remember that pattern for a week. If you practice an hour a day, you'll review 60 patterns per day, and can keep a total of 60 * 7 = 420 patterns in memory.

@Wodjul said in #18:

Even reaching 1600 at Rapid would be a small victory and probably about as far as I could go.

BTW I think even maintaining 1500ish rapid at age 70+ is quite an achievement. It means you're doing as well as the average player, almost all of whom are much younger than you.

@Wodjul said in #18: > Even reaching 1600 at Rapid would be a small victory and probably about as far as I could go. BTW I think even maintaining 1500ish rapid at age 70+ is quite an achievement. It means you're doing as well as the average player, almost all of whom are much younger than you.