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

How to learn chess as an adult (2021)

alexcrompton.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 320 posts

Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)

#271

Post by commanderkeen08 »

hvs wrote: post #217
mptest wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can anyone recommend a similar app/site for learning go? That one feels so hard to learn, but it is so fun. the games really feel like a conversation

As low-DDK player, what has helped me most is 1) Playing lots of games ( https://online-go.com and https://gokgs.com are good for this). I usually have a few correspondence games going and then try to play a normal speed game daily. Don't worry about winning and losing, just play. Begin to internalize how standard tactics reappear regularly on the board. 2) Do tsumego (life and death) a lot. But don't just try things…

> But don't just try things and see what happens

But what if I don’t know how to do anything else? I’ve learned the basic rules but struggle really hard even figuring out what’s a legal move.

Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)

#273

Post by yodsanklai »

johngossman wrote: post #206
yodsanklai wrote: post #201

What does it even mean to learn chess? I suppose any adult can learn the rule in a few hours and start to have fun from there. Then is there a specific rating after which you can claim that you have learned chess? or will you get more fun once you reach a given level? it seems to be a very elusive target.

What does it mean to learn piano? A foreign language? Programming? Tennis? As you get better, you make fewer mistakes and it is (usually) less of a struggle to perform well. You’re right in the sense that you’re never (as a human) going to master it like you can tic-tac-toe or rubik’s cube. But that sort of mastery isn’t fun either.

I guess a proficient piano player wouldn't say "I'm learning piano", even though they're still trying to improve.

In the case of chess, you can learn the game very quickly. So I'm wondering at what stage a chess player consider they can play, and that they're now trying to improve rather than just learn.

Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)

#274

Post by mrangle »

kzrdude wrote: post #81

I don't like losing, I want to always win. That's why I don't play. I've been thinking recently that I should play anyway so that I could grow out of this condition. Any tips for that?

Find whomever regularly can beat you, be thankful, and play them as often as possible until they can't.

Players are very lucky if they can irl find people that can beat them. The goal should always be to play someone who is better when possible, because it's the only way to improve via gameplay.

Most people don't play chess. Many fewer will ever play beyond the casual game with someone over a holdiay. Meaning that anyone who is remotely serious about improving will likely very quickly find themselves without anyone better to play.

I'm not a "good" chess player. But about half of the adults that I know, who play, won't play me for the same reason that you don't play. So I mostly teach children to play. Some of them can play now. They likely won't beat me for a long time to come. I don't improve over these games. The games are sometimes marginally fun for me. One kid won't learn for the same reason that you won't play. Those who do play are lucky to be able to improve their game against my play.

Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)

#275

Post by layman51 »

WJW wrote: post #108
DeathArrow wrote: post #17

Is 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.

Don't play against bots then. There's plenty of people online to play against at any moment of the day. Maybe I read the wrong forums but this particular hangup ("machines can do it better so what is even the point?") seems to be quite unique to chess as a hobby. I've never seen someone on an athletics tournament complaining that the sport is no longer fun because a cannon could throw the spear much farther than even…

I appreciate your comment because I have thought a lot about chess cheaters who make all of their moves at the recommendation of a chess engine. When playing against them, you really don’t have a chance to win unless you’re playing on a fast time control. Online, and sometimes even in-person, it may not be obvious that someone is cheating which makes you feel all the more powerless. As an improving player though, it’s not a good thing to fixate on. But I can totally understand why some people would want to move on to some other game like maybe bowling, tennis, etc.

I find chess engines and any model that can play games themselves very fascinating though. I wonder why chess engines do not really play in a human-like way. That’s why I don’t even like to play against beginner bots because they will tend to make weird and obvious mistakes.

Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)

#276

Post by narag »

VonGallifrey wrote: post #140
narag wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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, Is rating on chess.com similar to rating in lichess? The article mentions 1%, but you start with 1500 in lichess??? If you lose often, you quickly go down. But if you keep an even record, you stay in 1500. I don't understand how people learn from slamming blitz/bullet games. As in the article, speed t…

> If you lose often, you quickly go down. But if you keep an even record, you stay in 1500. Is that actually true? You start at a 1500 in lichess, but that is a provisional rating and the outcome of your first few games are going to cause BIG swings in your rating. After your rating is no longer a provisional rating then that is going to slow down. Losing a few games at the start might take a lot more wins to "even o…

After your rating is no longer a provisional raing and the outcome of your first few games are going to cause BIG swings in your rating.

The rating algorithm is suppossed to be predictive. It's only natural that the first data points cause big swings, but the amplitude will narrow after a few games.

Then, providing you win the same number of games that you lose, you stabilize. Will you keep around 1500? I think so, because the algorithm selects oponents with similar rating and with my own mediocre ratings over 1500, lichess tells me that I'm better than 60% of blitz players and 65% of bullet players.

There's a caveat though. Ratings in Lichess are not "lineal". There are annoying discontinuities. I get stuck at some level but, if I manage to go up 50 points, I get easier (but better rated) oponents and raise another 100 points. Conversely, if I get down a certain level, I can expect to sink even more.

Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)

#277

Post by narag »

smatija wrote: post #115
narag wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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, Is rating on chess.com similar to rating in lichess? The article mentions 1%, but you start with 1500 in lichess??? If you lose often, you quickly go down. But if you keep an even record, you stay in 1500. I don't understand how people learn from slamming blitz/bullet games. As in the article, speed t…

Rating on chesscom is wildly different than on lichess in lower rating ranges. 300 cc should be similiar to around 800 lichess. Around 2000-2200 ratings even out on both sites and on higher ratings lichess ratings tend to be lower than on cc. For improving longer time controls are better. The old adage, that if you want to play blitz better you should play rapid and that if you want to improve rapid you should play c…

300 cc should be similiar to around 800 lichess.

800 is very low in Lichess. If you can think just two moves ahead without losing pieces, you get 1000 easily.

For improving longer time controls are better.

Yes and no. There are different aspects to the game. Every variety is good for something.

After playing a lot of bullet, I win easily in blitz just because the time advantage. But the reverse is also true. After playing more slower games, my fast games get better.

And there are some parts of the game that you just need to sit down with a book and a couple of boards.

Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)

#278

Post by faeriechangling »

LargeTomato wrote: post #49
ta8903 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the only bold statement in the article. >But I'm a smart guy (hi white male privilege) It's amusing to see someone go mask off and call non-whites low IQ like that.

I don't think that's what they meant.

I’m not so charitable. It’s nearly impossible for one to walk around self-conceptualizing as a privileged white male without the inherent identitarianism and rank ordering of identity groups corrupting you into bigotry.

His association with “smart” with “white male privilege” is a mask slip. Yet all saviours believe in some way, they are more powerful and capable than those they are saving. Even if all they’re better at is a board game.

Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)

#279

Post by faeriechangling »

xboxnolifes wrote: post #65
qingdao99 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What did they mean? Can't figure it out.

Educated. Access to good schools.

Which amounts to concluding that whites are collectively more intelligent than other racial groups with extra steps. Funny to hear from a group slowly having its wealth and population collapse. Maybe they’re not actually smart and are just entranced by conspicuous displays of intelligence like school and chess.

You can’t have privilege unless you are in some way more powerful and able than other groups in the first place. I think one day people are going to wake up one day and realize that white people are just like everybody else. That they’re unremarkable - not some privileged elite.

Re: How to learn chess as an adult (2021)

#280

Post by bongodongobob »

SadWebDeveloper wrote: post #268
bongodongobob wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was that your FIDE Elo or are you just guessing? It sounds like you just need to practice. You're going to need to provide much more evidence if you think the two biggest chess platforms in existence are impossible and cheating you. Yes there are some bots, yes some people cheat, but what you're implying is just plainly false.

Thats what my chess teacher used to put me in their local chess club tournaments, in order to get a FIDE Elo, i would have need to go (on that time 1995~1999) to official tournaments and that was expensive for a rural area... M not saying m on the level of masters but definitely not a newbie... either way i don't need proof just go to chesscom, open a new free account and start grinding... you are gonna see fast the…

Sorry man, that just means you aren't as good as you think you are. I have free accounts on both and don't have any issues winning matches. You're probably nowhere near where you were if you haven't played in 25 years...

I'm anywhere between 1000 and 1800 depending on time constraints and I have friends pushing 2000. All free accounts. Don't know what to tell ya.

Post reply on HN