Practically every chess player would like to win more games. But even with a keen desire, it is easy to plateau and somewhat difficult to find good information about how to improve. Having taught chess for several years, and having also improved my own game dramatically over the last couple of years, I can offer a number of principles and suggestions.
Of course, every player is different and the main thing is to find precisely what is preventing you from achieving greater success. In general, however, there are roughly six activities which are recommended over and over again in a variety of chess manuals and which have a profound impact on one’s playing strength. In addition to that, there are a couple of attitudes which one must bring to study to get the maximum results. Here they are the six activities:
The Six Fundamental Activities of Chess Improvement
- Analysis of one’s own games
- Studying the endgame
- Solving tactical puzzles
- Studying your openings and typical positions which arise in them
- Studying games and theories of the classical masters (Steinitz, Capablanca, Alekhine, etc.)
- Practice – especially against stronger opponents (tournament games, blitz, training games)
I’ll explore each of these in detail later in the article, but for now let me reiterate that the suggestions listed above constitute the most oft-repeated advice you’ll find when you scour chess books which discuss the topic of improvement.
Next are the principle attitudes which I have found are very helpful to bring about improvement. These are more scattered throughout the literature and also come from my own experience and that of my students.
Two Attitudes of Chess Improvement
- Keen desire and devotion
- Willingness to actively train instead of passively studying
Each of these eight factors is extremely important for improving your game. In this article I’ll concentrate on how to practice, and the two key attitudes of chess improvement. I’m working on detailed articles to discuss the other five factors: analysis of one’s own games, endgame study, solving tactical puzzles, opening study, studying the classics.
Practice, practice, practice
Even Stenitz is on record as having admonished developing players to avoid playing weaker opponents. Instead, he and countless others since then have recommended that you play against stronger opposition as often as you possibly can. I think that this aspect of chess development is one of the most overlooked.
In my opinion there is a lot of anecdotal evidence to suggest that this may be one of the biggest factors in determining how far you will go as a player. One of the “secrets” to Russian chess success, is simply that there are plenty of strong players around to play (in proportion to one’s results, of course). Currently, there is a high concentration of successful young players in California. There are five grandmasters, fifteen international masters, twenty-one FIDE masters, and a total 109 players over 2200 in California. An ambitious player (young or otherwise) has plenty of persons to compete against!
In general, try to aim at players 200-300 points higher than me. You’ll lose a large number of such contests – but you’ll also have a lot of fresh games to look at. If you’re anything like my students (or myself) you’ll quickly realize that these players who currently strike fear in your heart are actually doing just a couple things better than you. Gradually you’ll find yourself making a few draws here and there. Then you’ll score your first win against one such player. Look out world, because almost immediately thereafter it is not unusual to have a huge leap in results. Once you learn to score 50% against players rated 200 points higher than you – guess what happens? You gain 200 rating points.
If you are (for example) 1800 and live in an area where it is difficult to get a shot a 2000-rated players, your best shot is to gain the needed skills is to travel to a national tournament and play in a section above. It is not by chance that many young players doing this. Players who aren’t afraid to play in a section where they will undoubtedly receive a number of hard knocks are players who will eventually reach and then surpass that level.
Try to spend as little time as possible playing players rated less than you. This can be fun from time to time, and is obviously unavoidable in most tournaments – but try not to do it too often. If you combine playing stronger opponents with analysis of your own games, you already have a very solid program which can propel you very far.
Keen desire and devotion
Not everyone has an intense enough desire to improve their game very far. This is perfectly alright. Life is full of alternative goals and competing interests. It is worth assessing why you wish to improve at this royal game and what price you’re willing to pay to attain it. To really improve you must be willing to spend time outside of your comfort zone, to play against difficult competition (which may mean travelling, spending time and money along the way), and to devote a decent amount of time to study.
Of course one also shouldn’t over-estimate what is required as this can quickly become an excuse for non-action. Roughly ten hours a week of study is enough to improve your game, and fifteen is very good. But tournaments are pricey and exhausting, and you need to be willing to take some hard knocks and discomfort. Obviously, you need some time, and probably some minimum amount of physical resources which you can allocate to your task.
The good news is that if you really wish to improve, you can definitely do it. The best kind of motivation is a hunger and love for chess – an appreciation for the beauty of our royal game, a thrill for the battle, a sense of identity in chess.
Actively training versus passively studying
There is one specific trap which I’d really like to mention before parting ways with you today. Chess looks like a knowledge game. If you know more opening theory than your opponent, or know the precise handling of this or that rook ending, it seems that you’ll do better. Obviously, someone who’s read 500 chess books will have a huge advantage over someone who’s read 5. At least it seems that way.
But my experience is that this is absolutely incorrect. Strong players are not strong because they know certain facts. They’re strong because they know how to play. To play chess requires great skill in decision-making, calculation, strategic thinking, psychology, even courage. The player who does these things well will win much more than someone who knows a lot of theory or knows anything else for that matter.
Grandmaster Johnathan Rowson addresses this topic when he says that chess is about “know-how” rather than “know-that” - about “skill” instead of “knowledge.”
Recently, I was watching the 2009 US Championship where a few very interesting endings were reached. Unclear rook endings, precarious opposite-colored bishop endings, queen endings, and so on. While watching on ICC, GMs could be found debating who whether or not the better side had enough to pull out a win. More than once, baffled spectators asked, “shouldn’t grandmasters simply know whether this is a win or a draw?”
The answer, it turns out, is no. A GM actually may not know that much more than, say, an expert. But in a practical game, he’ll destroy a weaker player, or avoid the ending altogether if it doesn’t “feel” right. Do you see the subtle difference? He may not know the “answer” to the position, but he knows how to set a goal, how to handle his pieces, can sense better whether he should go here or go there. In other words, he doesn’t “know” the ending, but he knows how to play chess – and he’ll still handle the ending far better than 99% of chess players.
GMs may or may not know a ton of precise ending positions. They may or may not know a great deal of opening theory. Chances are they know a fair amount, but you’d be surprised how many gaps there are (world class trainer Mark Dvoretsky, says that a great number of grandmasters are deficient in even basic endgame positions). So why are they GMs? Because chess isn’t about knowledge – it’s about skill. They know (or feel) how to play.
Anyone with a great interest in this discussion should check out Jonathon Rowson’s excellent book on the topic, “Chess for Zebras”. But for all practical purposes, what this means is that during your “study” sessions, you should put the emphasis on training.
Instead of passively reading about rook endings, take a diagram, set it up on the board, and try to find the answer to it before reading the analysis. Instead of passively reading a book such as “Attack with Mikhail Tal” consider playing “guess-the-move” with the games. Cover up the master’s moves and see how well you can attack. Rather than committing a long list of variations to memory in your favorite opening, play several online blitz games in the opening and immediately look up the theoretical recommendations afterward. Ask yourself why you chose a different move and what all this teaches you about that particular position. You get the idea.
By the way, Dvoretsky himself repeatedly claims at the beginning of practically every one of his books that a player must constantly set difficult tasks for himself in order to improve – rather than “study” openings, or anything else.
Instead of “studying” chess for ten hours a week, try “training” your chess for ten hours a week. Set yourself challenges, get feedback about how you did (with an engine, trainer, or book), and above all else – spend time outside of your comfort zone. If it’s pleasant and passive, it’s much less likely to help you.
You should target such training at those precise aspects of your play which cause you to lose the most games. To reap the best rewards, you should stick with such training for a few weeks, giving it a chance to succeed despite initial frustration. You don’t need an overly complex plan to help yourself improve through training – but it can often help if you find some way to track your results. Perhaps when you started playing “guess-the-move” with a particular book you were guessing around 30% of the moves accurately – but now you guess 60%. That means you doubled your accuracy. This kind of information is really helpful and provides motivation. It also lets you know when you’ve hit the point of diminishing returns.
Phew! We’ve covered some very important topics here. But there’s still a lot more. Please read also: analysis of one’s own games, endgame study, solving tactical puzzles, opening study, studying the classics.
Subscribe