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

On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years

jacobbrazeal.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 342 posts

Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years

#61

Post by globular-toast »

llarsson wrote: post #4

Cool that the author does this, and has found a method that works for them! However, to be able to spend 2 hours a day on this seems like an indescribable luxury to me. And the quote about netting about 1.5 ELO per day sounds like a linear growth is assumed, which I can assure will not be the case past the initial massive improvements one gets from "not knowing the rules" to "actually starting to get it". I love solv…

> However, to be able to spend 2 hours a day on this seems like an indescribable luxury to me.

Is this how far we've regressed? I'm sure most humans through history have had more free time than you.

Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years

#62

Post by globular-toast »

hvdfhbj wrote: post #32
tutfbhuf wrote: post #5

Congratulations that's a great achievement. I think that almost everyone should be able to achieve a solid 2000 elo rating, with enough dedication over the years. Doing tactics puzzles is one of the most important factors for fast improvements. > Some day, I want to become a titled player. A candidate master needs an ELO of 2200 2000 and 2200 are completely different skill levels. I have some friends who play chess f…

> I think that almost everyone should be able to achieve a solid 2000 elo rating, with enough dedication over the years I think you are massively underestimating the natural range of human intelligence. I don't think the average IQ 100 individual could ever reach an ELO of 2000 regardless of how much they practice, and half the population has IQs of less than 100.

Once again HN readers revealing how sheltered they are in their little bubbles.

If you pay attention to it you'll see how far removed from reality a lot of the readers here are. It's quite worrying really.

Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years

#63

Post by matsemann »

Fumtumi wrote: post #39

I thought about learning chess and what it actually involes when i watched the new netflix show. i came to the relisation that it actually involes becoming good in a very very big search space by having a lot of experience and being fast in calculating and remembering chess moves. Especially when i see how many people read up on grand masters, i came up with the theory: The normal person is running behind or trying t…

> The normal person is running behind or trying to 'just' learn the fast pre found and pre tested moves from a handfull of people who actually played/thought those moves through.

Quite the opposite, amateur players play a few moves from a standard opening, and then deviate hugely from the book variations and go into uncharted territory really fast.

And while pro's certainly spend an insane amount of time memorizing openings, chess is far more than rote memorization which you kinda seem to apply.

Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years

#64

Post by mrslave »

prune2000 wrote: post #10

You should use lichess.org instead. You would have unlimited tactics per day which come from real games played on the website, endless number of studies made by other players on opening theories, free analysis of your games, and all these statistics about your progress and more! Like "do I win more often or not when Queens are traded?". Good luck!

A quick second endorsement for this absolute gem of a website: lichess.org. I've gone from a player who can't beat the computer on level 1 (estimated ELO 800 LOL) to winning 50% of matches on level 3 (est. ELO 1400). Still pretty poor, but so is my study effort. And I'm OK with it.

My colleague from another time zone struggled to recommend a book for my level and kinda laughed (albeit politely). But now we can play a quick game in our work breaks online. Thank You Lichess! canned applause

Edit: DO THE PUZZLES!!! (sorry, tired)

Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years

#65

Post by jen729w »

globular-toast wrote: post #61
llarsson wrote: post #4

Cool that the author does this, and has found a method that works for them! However, to be able to spend 2 hours a day on this seems like an indescribable luxury to me. And the quote about netting about 1.5 ELO per day sounds like a linear growth is assumed, which I can assure will not be the case past the initial massive improvements one gets from "not knowing the rules" to "actually starting to get it". I love solv…

> However, to be able to spend 2 hours a day on this seems like an indescribable luxury to me. Is this how far we've regressed? I'm sure most humans through history have had more free time than you.

While agreeing with your general principle, I think you're being unfair.

Two hours a day, every day, is a lot of time. I barely watch television and still, if you asked me to find two more hours every day I'd tell you that you were crazy.

I already have hobbies. I relax. I spend time with my partner. I sleep, I cook, I work, I walk.

I do not find myself with two hours that I don't know what to do with, and I'd challenge you to find someone that does.

Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years

#66

Post by ZephyrBlu »

MperorM wrote: post #59
ZephyrBlu wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Eventually I decided that I no longer wished to prioritize the game over other things This is what I unfortunately found as well. I reached Legend in Hearthstone (The top rank, no clue what percentile it was) a while back and top 3-5% in StarCraft II a couple of years ago. In both games I stopped playing shortly after reaching that level because the time investment just didn't seem worth it to me. I love games, but…

I think there's something to be argued that reaching a high level in any competitive game or sport has merit. I've learned more valuable lessons from competing in Starcraft than I can count. Without knowing the exact opportunity cost, I think trading my highschool grades for the competitive experience was worth it. The biggest mistake I think I made was not cutting games out completely after having learned those less…

I definitely agree and also feel like I've learned valuable lessons from SC2. It sucks to give a game up though :/.

Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years

#67

Post by globular-toast »

paulpauper wrote: post #54
hvdfhbj wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that almost everyone should be able to achieve a solid 2000 elo rating, with enough dedication over the years I think you are massively underestimating the natural range of human intelligence. I don't think the average IQ 100 individual could ever reach an ELO of 2000 regardless of how much they practice, and half the population has IQs of less than 100.

Garry Kasparov is smart but we're not talking Feynman levels of intelligence The correlation between chess ability and IQ is positive but not that high. not as high as it is with physics and math abiltiy.

That's because physics and maths ability is included in the IQ test. If you included lots of chess or chess-like problems than Kasparov would magically rank a lot higher.

Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years

#68

Post by RJIb8RBYxzAMX9u »

beeforpork wrote: post #38

A long while back, I dedicated my time to Tetris (on Gameboy). I surely spent less time on that than would have been necessary for chess, but it is amazing to see what progress is possible. I could play level 9[heart] without an end (in infinite play mode) or up to high 3 (6 rows of waste on bottom). When moving a brick to the left or right edge, the gameboy would make a long beep instead of individual blips. No idea…

If you don't already know, then you might be interested in the Classic Tetris World Championship, which is currently running on Twitch (with VODs on YouTube). The YouTube channel aGameScout[0] also has a lot of interesting information on the history and recent developments of the tournament.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/c/aGameScout/videos

Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years

#69

Post by cupofcoffee »

llarsson wrote: post #4

Cool that the author does this, and has found a method that works for them! However, to be able to spend 2 hours a day on this seems like an indescribable luxury to me. And the quote about netting about 1.5 ELO per day sounds like a linear growth is assumed, which I can assure will not be the case past the initial massive improvements one gets from "not knowing the rules" to "actually starting to get it". I love solv…

Can you please tell us more about your day to day life and why 2 hours of free-time is considered a luxury?

Re: On Learning Chess as an Adult – From 650 to 1750 in Two Years

#70

Post by cupofcoffee »

globular-toast wrote: post #61
llarsson wrote: post #4

Cool that the author does this, and has found a method that works for them! However, to be able to spend 2 hours a day on this seems like an indescribable luxury to me. And the quote about netting about 1.5 ELO per day sounds like a linear growth is assumed, which I can assure will not be the case past the initial massive improvements one gets from "not knowing the rules" to "actually starting to get it". I love solv…

> However, to be able to spend 2 hours a day on this seems like an indescribable luxury to me. Is this how far we've regressed? I'm sure most humans through history have had more free time than you.

Reminds me of Nietzche: "Whoever does not have two-thirds of his day for himself, is a slave, whatever he may be: a statesman, a businessman, an official, or a scholar.”.
Post reply on HN