How to learn chess as an adult (2021)
51–60 of 320 posts
Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)
#52Is there a well known strategy game where AI doesn't have better chances to win than a human? Is there possibly, math wise, that such games exist? I kind of dislike not having a chance when playing against bots.
Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
True randomness doesn't drive better results for humans, due to some intrinsic humane qualities, but rather eliminates the advantage of large volume data access and processing of AI. Basically true randomness levels the playing field. Backgammon is a perfect example.
You want a game where searching large amounts of data, computing moves and calculating probabilities fast doesn't help. Maybe some randomness will help, but might not be enough. My ideea is that bots can't win in the real world economy, no fund driven solely by algorithms can win more than funds driven by humans. So if we can find a game modeled like the economy, where nothing is random but many things are uncertain,…
But yes, I think you're right that you'd need a game where crunching a lot of numbers really fast doesn't give you an advantage. For instance, if the state space of the game is so big that number crunching is useless, and other approaches like AI style pattern matching (used IIRC by Alpha-Go?) don't work either.
Though ultimately, what is the uniquely human trait that would allow a human to beat an AI? Can you make a game that depends on that? Is there even such a thing?
Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)
#54and here I was happy to get up to 1000 in Chess.com after 2 years (only to then just hover around forever). Knowledge is power etc etc but at one point nothing replaces studying. I've found that anything under 15 minute clocks just feels like brain poison to me, though. Your brain goes completely into pattern matching mode and lose out on the actual interesting tactical analysis you can do when you're taking a bit mo…
I'd rather have a stable rating over time, at a level I can maintain comfortably, than have to expend ever increasing levels of energy to maintain a higher level; and probably end up having less fun. (maybe it's more like treading water. You can get more of your body out of the water, but each inch requires exponentially more effort to maintain)
That said, I started doing a lot of puzzles a while ago, as well as doing the basic mating pattern practice on Lichess. My rating jumped up a few hundred rating points. Turns out that I was missing a bunch of the basics.
Now I hover around average on the server for Blitz (~1500), and slightly above for Rapid (~1700) and that's awesome.
Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)
#55https://apps.apple.com/us/app/learn-chess-with-dr-wolf/id135...
It's got a beautiful UI, and it's a conversational chess tutor that goes over the basics, tactics, advanced strategy and with whom you can play and will point out mistakes and blunders for later review. Perhaps it is too basic for anybody that has a few hundred games of chess under their belt but if you know nothing about the game, it is a great way to get into it. As the author say, low level chess is about learning patterns and short-term strategy (what should I do the opening, how to checkmate with a rook, etc.) and this app teaches exactly that, in a gradual way.
Not affiliated, just a happy and now paying user.
Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)
#56"Only about 10% of players ever gain more than 100 points, and only about 1% of players gain more than 200 rating points given years." This seems like a wild claim. On chess.com I've gone from 500 to ~1050 in a handful of months without any real study, just some light YouTube watching. 500->800 felt like all it took was learning a few openings and not blundering pieces. 800-1050 felt like it came mostly from getting…
If you follow the link to the data analysis [1] you’ll see that the argument is based on higher rated players. Low rated players have much higher variance in their rating and can improve by quite a lot, just by learning to stop blundering. That’s basically the situation you’re in. Getting to 2000 rating is going to be quite a mountain to climb for you, unless you’re very young. [1] https://github.com/jcw024/lichess_d…
Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)
#57and here I was happy to get up to 1000 in Chess.com after 2 years (only to then just hover around forever). Knowledge is power etc etc but at one point nothing replaces studying. I've found that anything under 15 minute clocks just feels like brain poison to me, though. Your brain goes completely into pattern matching mode and lose out on the actual interesting tactical analysis you can do when you're taking a bit mo…
Have you tried mixing up games with daily moves with rapid and blitz? Mixing “do it right” with “do it fast” training is more effective than doing only one of both.
I think that blitz reinforces my bad habits of approximate pattern matching and ultimately makes me play worse in my other games. If I want to "do it fast" I can just open my dailies and play them fast! But this is a me problem, I routinely play board games etc too quickly, and lose because of it. I do not need help with "do it fast".
Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)
#58Is there a well known strategy game where AI doesn't have better chances to win than a human? Is there possibly, math wise, that such games exist? I kind of dislike not having a chance when playing against bots.
We are taught from a young age that winning is the objective of playing a game, but what if it wasn’t?
What if it was to learn some hidden truth, or to explore your own tendencies to over-react, to become too rash, to become overly-defensive or to be disappointed when things didn’t always go your way? What if you took each game as a learning opportunity?
If you take a different perspective, bots and AI can help you a great deal - they aren’t going to feel smug about beating you, or remind you of it over a family dinner, or brag about it on social media. They can help you improve your gameplay and yourself.
I’m reminded of this when I think of recent AI advances in Go. The moves and strategies that emerged have left that community in awe, because they were open to learning from what AI produced, not just obsessed with trying to win.
Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)
#59> Like most people, late last year I watched the Queen's Gambit. That's a... bold statement.
When humans communicate, we don't use Backus-Naur form. We generally accept that people will be able to derive the meaning from context. Does the author literally believe that over 50% of the planet watched it? The claim is preposterous - and obviously so. But it is a convenient shorthand for referring to the impact on the cultural zeitgeist made by that show.
Anyway, QG was astonishingly popular. See https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/drama/the-queens-gambit-most-p... and https://adage.com/article/media/golden-globe-winner-queens-g...
Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)
#60To put simply, I believe Chess is good as something of a brain exercise for when you're younger or if you are a parent and want to develop your child's logical thinking and that's it, no more and no less.
So what happens if you take Chess further?
People don't know when to stop and I've seen with my eyes this happen because there was this kid at Chess tournaments who was a much better player than I am, however the kid just lived Chess, there was nothing else to the kid, he was socially very unintelligent & awkward, didn't really do much anything else since his parents shoved him to Chess when he was 6 and made it a daily routine thing for him to focus on Chess and his school studies. Gradually, Chess took over his entire identity and he's now a titled player and from people who see him on an everyday basis, they all still don't say much about this now-adult other than that he's still just focused on Chess. The general sentiment of everyone who knows this kid is just pity because it's just a very one-dimensional life. He achieved success but it sacrificed a lot of his childhood, and for what?
Chess players, even titled ones don't really make a lot of money from tournaments and if you want to be good at it and play at tournaments, you have to dedicate basically all your time to it and have good discipline to keep at it, day after day. There's the coach hustle but that also requires you to be at least above average and also I haven't met a coach who's not just living Chess so it's about the same, you still get sucked into this lifestyle.
Chess at a higher level is pretty draw-ish and ultimately a memorization contest. Most strong players will not slip up if given a slight advantage and they will be able to convert this slight advantage into at least a draw. Strong players already have a good grasp on tactical motifs and can spot opportunities easily but that's where Chess theory comes into play. There's many openings and every opening has variations, which have optimal moves and then of course inaccurate moves and blunders. Just Sicilian theory is enough for someone to spend years of their life memorizing moves and building a repertoire.
Ultimately, Chess doesn't get more fun the stronger you get and that's counter-intuitive because people want to get better. I played Chess for a few years both casually and professionally, I won some tropheys and have some medals to show for it. I beat titled players (2300+ rated) but I quit all of it to focus on software engineering because Chess got boring. For me, Chess got to a point where further improvement depended on memorizing opening theory, middlegame theory and endgame theory. Just memorize and nothing more. I refused to do that so I often drawn/lost games in situations where I played less than ideal moves and my opponent knew the theory to punish my very slight inaccuracy. What I liked in Chess was the calculation, so something like Fischer Chess (Chess960) was fun but did you know people actually made theory even for that? So games got more and more boring, in casual games I would purposefully play bad moves to throw my opponent off their theory and to get into unknown territory in terms of tactics. I'd do that just to try to make the game fun again, but obviously I was burned out and there was no coming back from it.
In my country I am friends with a lot of Chess people. I saw a lot of things, like titled players throwing games for .. $10-$20. They spent about 20-30 years of their life to get good at Chess and now they have to throw games for money. Do I want to be that guy? How does it feel to study and play something for 30-40 years then just have to throw games for $20? Probably awful.
Also, general health-wise, most Chess players I know are sedentary, playing Chess isn't really healthy as you are sat in a chair for hours on end. It's very competitive, which can lead to stress and stress just leads to burnout often.
To end this post, I want to say that I luckily didn't keep on this path. In my opinion, life needs variety and so I have done much more and I am happier than the years I spent on Chess. Studied hard, got a job as a software engineer, went on many vacations, enjoyed food & drinks everywhere, had friends/love come and go, played many games, read books and watched movies and I just lived a more fulfilling life than my past Chess lifestyle because it's frankly, a stark contrast between the two.
TLDR: Trying to logically explain my distaste for Chess in modern times.