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

71–80 of 156 posts

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#71

Post by phaus »

EdwigePelagia wrote: post #64
phaus wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 himsel…

Blog spam is for generating ad revenue or gaining attention for a product. This guy isn't selling anything, and there aren't any ads on his site(at least none that I see on my iPad).

If you don't like what he has to say, that's your perogative, but that doesn't make his article blog spam. The guy's been on HN for a year and a half and that's the first time he ever posted anything from his site. He likely just found out that a lot of HN members are interested in chess, and so he did what normal people have done with their hobbies for centuries, try to grow the community.

Instead of complaining, wouldn't it be more productive to take your own advice and post some of the resources that you found useful?

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#72

Post by xerophtye »

chendry wrote: post #47
xerophtye wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty cool idea. will check it in my free time. Btw Does it just give ONE next move? or a series of moves until a significant accomplishment? because sometimes a move is only epic because of the subsequent moves it allows you to make. A sacrifice on its own doesn't seem like a good move. Its only when you see what opening that gave you, that you truly appreciate it.

Thanks! It does indeed only give one move. I'm really just standing on the shoulders of the chess engines (GNUChess, Stockfish) and they simply tell me what the computer would do given a position. I'd like to get more insight into why the engine prefers one move to another, but my understanding isn't quite there yet.

Umm, i suppose u are using an API for this, well why not use a series of API calls? Is there someway to detect some sort of accomplishment? (like piece captured, or check?)

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#73

Post by xerophtye »

thewarrior wrote: post #52
xerophtye wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here, use this: http://norvig.com/21-days.html

Well I have read that article. I do understand that true mastery can take a lifetime. The posted article gives specific chess exercises which when practiced for 3 - 5 months can produce a marked improvement. I was asking whether there any such exercises for programming.

What about those "Learn code the hard way" tutorials? anyone tried em?

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#75

Post by thaumasiotes »

EdwigePelagia wrote: post #63
NathanthePie wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 sh…

> 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.

It's funny; people have been telling me my whole life that observing when other people ask obvious questions makes me a huge jerk, and I should patiently give them the obvious answers they ask for.

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#76

Post by bmjunk »

kristofferR wrote: post #62
pk2200 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Google "Scid vs Mac"

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#77

Post by a3_nm »

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

By the way, matches are currently ongoing to determine if Stockfish should be ranked #1 or not.

http://tcec.chessdom.com/live.php

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#78

Post by Scarblac »

netvarun wrote: post #16

If you are looking for a systematic learning program, I would like to suggest Artur Yusupov's training program (9 books that gradually increase in difficulty). http://www.qualitychess.co.uk/docs/14/artur_yusupovs_awardwi...

Truly great books, but not for beginners. If you're ambitious rated 1700 or so, these are the best.

Beginners should look at the workbooks from "Chess Steps". Cheap and very good too. After Step 5 you can switch to Yusupov.

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#79

Post by adamconroy »

EdwigePelagia wrote: post #63
NathanthePie wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 sh…

Your reply sounds a bit fishy. Your second sentence "he doesn't explain why his advice is worth a damn" is inconsistent with a rhetorical question.

I agree he doesn't have much cred by the way, and his method is nothing new or special. But I think his advice is generally sound for an uneducated player who wants to improve.

Re: How to Get Good at Chess, Fast

#80

Post by tmbsundar »

charlieflowers wrote: post #39
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…

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).

Houdini is the best now. v 1.5 is free

http://www.cruxis.com/chess/houdini.htm

Post reply on HN