Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Learning Chess at 40

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 104 posts

Re: Learning Chess at 40

#51

Post by jlg23 »

rilut wrote: post #49
pcmaffey wrote: post #41

I highly recommend speed chess (5 mins), as it allows for many more repetitions. You'll learn faster what works / doesn't. Intersperse every once in a while with a slow game to rethink your fundamentals and strategy. Also, speed chess is much more forgiving. 1 mistake is not the end of the game, as time is the great equalizer. Whereas in slow chess, going down a pawn unintentionally is often a loss.

Where can I play speed chess against computer (offline/online) or people online?

A great, free site: http://lichess.org/

Re: Learning Chess at 40

#52

Post by kohanz »

keiferski wrote: post #11

Probably the most interesting example of someone pursuing chess later in life is that of Marcel Duchamp, the famous Cubist artist. He grew up playing chess for fun, but at age 36 he basically stopped making art and started pursuing chess full-time. "I am still a victim of chess. It has all the beauty of art—and much more. It cannot be commercialized. Chess is much purer than art in its social position." "The chess pi…

As someone who played a lot of competitive chess at a very high level in my youth (and poured hours and hours of my life into it), I can attest that it is a game that seems to attract eccentric minds. Whether they are eccentric before chess or whether chess introduces eccentricity, I don't know, but I met so many interesting people through chess, the likes of which I would never meet in my other usual social circles.

I can also agree that, at a high level, it can be an all-consuming game. It can be difficult to turn off. There are a lot of activities and pursuits that you can physically put away, but for a great chess player, the positions are always in your thoughts.

Re: Learning Chess at 40

#53

Post by jlg23 »

I think the author's real problem is less his age but his tendency to stick to rules which are just meant as "rules of thumb". He says that this is how he is thinking but still primarily blames his age.

Following rules and schematics in chess is great/necessary for end games (which he says he wins) because there you really just work through the algorithms and it also allows for quickly played openings (assuming you memorized the few standards that are played 99% of the games).

But in mid-game you actually need creativity and concepts like forks become much more important and I'd trade a "knight on the rim" for a choice between two forks the next move any time. His daughter seems to be playing with creativity while he is so stuck in schematic play that his daughter can even predict his moves (“I knew you were going to do that.”).

What I think is really curious is his remark: "She played [...] as if I were just some lower-level chess engine making haplessly random moves. Indeed, when I made my moves, her eyes would often drift elsewhere—as if what I was doing was almost inconsequential to the larger game."

She is right to do so, nobody cares about what one did 3 moves ago. The board is in a state that does not care about its history, it only cares about future possibilities :) When I play chess and look at the board when it is my opponent's turn, I don't care for my opponent but just take the time for a deeper analysis.

Re: Learning Chess at 40

#54

Post by viperscape »

I enjoy playing chess since maybe middle school, but it wasn't until about 20 years later that I tried to program my own chess game, including logic and rules. It was extremely difficult for me at certain points, especially figuring out check mate. I really didn't think it was going to be so hard at first.

Re: Learning Chess at 40

#55

Post by bobjordan »

Science be damned. I reject any reasoning built on limit based thinking. I'm 40 now and if I wanted to be world class chess player by 50, I would be. We are all constrained by the limits we accept. Limits can be accepted at any age. There are plenty of limits I have accepted by 40. The problem becomes when we believe those limits are not optional. Any limit I accept is optional.

Re: Learning Chess at 40

#56

Post by ktRolster »

chongli wrote: post #39
ktRolster wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Viktor Korchnoi gave his expert opinion that most chess grandmasters hit their peak around age 40, maybe a little after. He also tried to analyze what gave various people the drive to work hard enough to become a grandmaster. Also, Anand would arguably be world champion right now if he had the stamina. His knowledge of the game is probably the deepest of anyone, but he runs out of energy as th game progresses.

That's a fascinating insight about Anand. I wonder if he'd improve by hiring a personal trainer to increase his physical fitness?

I would really like to see that too. My hypothesis is that he would.

Currently I'm experimenting with my grandma, trying to get her to exercise to improve her cognition!

Re: Learning Chess at 40

#57

Post by kansface »

lordnacho wrote: post #12
danielvf wrote: post #2

I'm learning the game of Go at near fourty. But I'm not having any of the problems he describes. A great thing about learning and playing online is that you can find an opponent at your same skill level within minutes. Unlike learning in a local club, where every person you will ever play beats you every time, I win slightly more than half my games. I also get this nice increasing graph of my skill level. This is a l…

I wish physical sports were like this. Anything online is blessed with this mechanic where you can keep it challenging for everyone other than the people at the top or bottom (based on my experience in CoD where I'm pretty sure I'm bottom). With sports like soccer it's quite noticeable that some people are way better than everyone else, or way worse. And there's no way to improve since you can't just rearrange thousa…

If your up for it, try climbing. Competition is almost entirely with yourself and its typically quite easy to climb with a friend across multiple grades of difficulty. It also heavily involves problem solving, strategic thinking, and risk management that is not found in most other sports.

Re: Learning Chess at 40

#58

Post by JamesBarney »

braythwayt wrote: post #38
spdegabrielle wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I started playing soccer at 40 - the best way to learn is to play with and against people who are much better than you. BUT is is a dangerous game - you can get hurt playing against 20year olds!

For a modest value of “much.” My experience is that you need to play against people who will challenge you, but within an appropriate level of attainment. I am a keeper, so I will speak of keeper skills. One important skill to learn early is to get off the line and cut off the angles. If you stay on the line when you are just learning, the net is too big and you have no chance to make saves. Thus, you never learn to…

This is very common with foos ball. There are local maximums where a player can get stuck. If you're playing opponents as good or a little better it pays to practice your foosball skills like passing and high accuracy shots. However if you're playing opponents far stronger then the best strategy is lower percentage Hail Mary's so it trains less important skills.

Re: Learning Chess at 40

#59

Post by jonbaer »

"She was lacking that larger, strategically metacognitive sense, that Bayesian ability to use probability to change one’s beliefs." - that says it all and puts the age difference into real perspective, there is alot to theory, games, AI which can't be understood until you have a child.
Post reply on HN