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

How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

gautamnarula.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 156 posts

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#61

Post by izietto »

ximeng wrote: post #7
birken wrote: post #5

And for those that are interested in building their interest in chess in a way that is more entertainment than education, I highly recommend watching "live commentaries", IE chess players playing against other people online while commentating it live. My personal favorite is IM Greg Shahade (aka curtains), who has hundreds of these videos online [1]. There are also a bunch on youtube from other sources, but in my opi…

I like Mato Jelic's videos - short and regularly released with his own style.

I strongly recommend Mato: http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMxK1FKAbmj2N-faTWLwNig

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#62

Post by kristofferR »

pk2200 wrote: post #48
charlieflowers wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you mind naming some good chess engines for Mac, Windows and Linux? (I know this can be googled, but I value the recommendation from a credible source).

Stockfish (ranked #2 on the various computer rating lists) runs on Mac, Windows, Linux, Android. It's also free and open source! http://stockfishchess.org/ https://github.com/mcostalba/Stockfish

What's the best open source GUI for it?

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#63

Post by EdwigePelagia »

NathanthePie wrote: post #20
EdwigePelagia wrote: post #8

who is this guy and why should i take him seriously? he doesn't explain why his advice is worth a damn

Well, as you are someone who has found their way onto this forum, I must assume you: 1. Are competent at reading. 2. Have visited, and used, the internet before. Thus, the answer to your question, "Who is this guy" can be found on his WP site under the tab, 'About'. There, it states that he is: 1. Narula is a 19 year old sophomore at the University of Georgia studying Computer Science and Political Science and 2. Gau…

When someone asks an obvious question, the interpreter of the question has two paths to choose.

(a) Assume the author is very stupid and then tell him the very stupid and obvious answer.

(b) Interpret the question as rhetorical.

People who take (a) are the type of people who think they're smarter than everyone else, but who are actually, in fact, dumber. Usually they lack empathy, are undersocialized, and probably show on the autism spectrum.

People who take (b) are the type of people who correctly interpret the statement.

The correct interpretation of my rhetorical question is to read it as a commentary on authority. Is this 1800 rated 19 year old really the proper authority to learn how to play chess? Wouldn't a professional chess teacher with decades of experience and a higher rating than 1800 be the correct authority to instruct us on the best methods to learn chess? Yes. They would be. There are thousands of these teachers.

Instead of pushing blogspam by amateurs onto the frontpage, if HN really wants to know how to learn chess, HN should just link one of the dozens of much more reputable books on this topic.

As a chess player all I can do is roll my eyes when a 19 year old with an 1800 rating and very few (none?) years of chess teaching experience proclaims himself an expert and gets upvoted for it. It's just absurd.

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#64

Post by EdwigePelagia »

phaus wrote: post #43
EdwigePelagia wrote: post #8

who is this guy and why should i take him seriously? he doesn't explain why his advice is worth a damn

Since when did we start demanding background checks on people that publish free tutorials on the internet? But since you asked, he explains in this article that he was rated around 1800. He also clearly explains what that means. He then described a system he used to boost his rating by 600 points in 15 months. I'm impressed, but you aren't obligated to feel the same way. You also aren't obligated to take his advice.…

Does HN operate on a kindness and friendliness economy? If some blogspam hack writes in a very kind tone but peddles complete unauthoritative bullshit should we coddle him so as to not hurt his feelings? All he because he wrote with "kindness".

This isn't a nice lady smiling at you on the street and telling you about her knitting technique. This is fucking blogspam by a complete amateur who has self-proclaimed himself an expert on a topic that is already very well populated by ACTUAL authoritative experts.

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#65

Post by karpathy »

I'm part of this "renewed interested in chess", as I've played competitively when I was in high school but then stopped for several years until I came across this year's championship a few weeks ago.

I've tried several things to get back into chess but so far I've gotten the most "bang for the buck" on http://chesstempo.com/ , go to Training > Chess Tactics. It's fabulous, it feels very useful and it's even highly addictive. And for chess videos I warmly recommend ChessNetwork on YouTube. Lastly, I found a really nice app on iPad just called "Chess", which lets me squeeze in quick games in-between events and it's optionally computer assisted, which can help find interesting moves.

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#66

Post by hobbes »

cven714 wrote: post #30
jacobkg wrote: post #24

Any recommendations for a good place to play chess online?

chess.com is OK, ICC (chessclub.com) is where its at, but has a subscription fee.

It depends what you're after. (I have memberships on both)

Bear in mind that chess.com regularly has 10 times the number of players online at any one time, so it's much easier to find a game of your desired time controls and ability level.

Also, chess.com has much better material and functions to improve your rating for lower and intermediate rated players. For this reason alone I would recommend chess.com to lower ability players (although these features require a premium membership).

chessclub.com (ICC) has a greater number of GM's, etc. There are GM's and IM's on chess.com, but not as many as far as I can tell.

Finally, chess.com has outstanding "social" features, like teams and forums, etc, trolls notwithstanding.

So, I would without hesitation recommend chess.com for learners and intermediate players, and ICC for those who want to play against higher-rated players. I spend most of my time on chess.com and don't intend to extend my ICC membership.

UPDATE:

chessclub.com: 897 players currently online.

chess.com: 22,235 players currently online.

There was a time when chess.com didn't exist, and chessclub.com was the place to go. ICC's website now is a dog's breakfast and has been lacking in development for a long time. IMO, ICC had relied too much on the number of GM members at attract players. Chess.com, although more expensive, is a much more vibrant and educational place to be.

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#67

Post by adamconroy »

tmallen wrote: post #12

Read Nimzowitsch's "My System": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_System Everything you need is in that book. It's not too long, and very readable. It has a very common-sense approach. Look for the 21st century edition at used book stores or your chess club: http://www.amazon.com/My-System-21st-Century-Edition/dp/1880... chesstempo.com is good for practicing tactics between games.

Umm. 'My system' is worth reading but only so you have an understanding of what you are unlearning as you get stronger. In this day and age it is a long way from all you need to know, chess is much less dogmatic and more objective. The demands of the position trumps nimzowitsch's rules.

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#68

Post by adamconroy »

hobbes wrote: post #66
cven714 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

chess.com is OK, ICC (chessclub.com) is where its at, but has a subscription fee.

It depends what you're after. (I have memberships on both) Bear in mind that chess.com regularly has 10 times the number of players online at any one time, so it's much easier to find a game of your desired time controls and ability level. Also, chess.com has much better material and functions to improve your rating for lower and intermediate rated players. For this reason alone I would recommend chess.com to lower a…

ICC pissed me off when I let my subscription lapse for 9 months and wouldn't reactivate my account that I had for 15 years. I had ~ 15000 blitz games under my handle and dozens of contacts. All gone and they couldn't care less.

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#69

Post by Scarblac »

rmrfrmrf wrote: post #21

> "One big mistake is to rely heavily on computers for chess analysis. Computer analysis should be done only after you analyze the game on your own." This isn't correct information anymore, in my opinion. Chess engines have improved tenfold over the last four years (when the author says he stopped playing). The increase in the strength of chess engines has subsequently caused an increase in the "humanity" of chess en…

The point is that having the missed tactics pointed out to you by the computer doesn't do much to improve your chess. It won't help you find a tactic the next time an opportunity comes up. Whereas analyzing seriously and finding tactics yourself (albeit fewer than the computer will point out), _will_ improve your ability to find them over the board.

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#70

Post by Scarblac »

k_os wrote: post #58

Is there any evidence that becoming good at chess improves any mental aspects or is it just a hard game that you can brag about being able to play?

To become good at chess you need to become good at concentration. That helps in other areas. But there's no specific reason that chess is a good way to train it, it's just a way.
Post reply on HN