Very Interesting! I have had the GM-RAM book on my short list for some time and inspired by another source, I decided the other day to try to memorize a few games. The pawn positions shown has all to do with the keysquares on which the king has to stand for the pawn to promote of the king. In your first example the pawn has past the 4th rank so its key squares are just in front of the pawn namely c6-d6-e6, so no matter who is to move the king will always land on such key square for a pawn which has not yet crossed the middle of the board the keysquares are two rows ahead. So for example for a pawn on e3 the keysquares for the king are d5-e5-f5. If we see at the second example, with black to move white king can not go to a keysquare, Ke8 blocks that while if white to move white can play d7 which leaves only Kc7 for black after which white can play Ke7 and on the next move promote his pawn safely.
|Country:||Turks & Caicos Islands|
|Genre:||Health and Food|
|Published (Last):||20 June 2004|
|PDF File Size:||16.37 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||18.52 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Is there any evidence or science behind Rashid and his game memorization stuff? It sounds interesting because its different from any other method of study, but I could never find anyone who became a master by his methods. I think he is just outlining the old Russian school of chess improvement though, the " key positions" idea.
So if that's the case, then yes, there is extensive evidence to support it. However, to say that he is recommending memorization is far from the truth.
Memorizing may be involved, but it's better to think of it like learning a new language, or learning martial arts. If you study for many years and become a master of a foreign language, you wouldn't exactly call that "memorization". The same way, memorizing important examples of martial arts does not help your kung fu when your opponent is throwing you to the ground. You have to learn something from the master's example, and learn it so deeply that it's part of your instinct without thinking.
After I read that, I did the math and thought, "That will take between years to learn key positions! The exciting part is, you have the road map, if you choose to follow it. I understand that his method has more than just memorization behind it, I was just shorthanding it. I just wanted to know if there was anyone who had actually followed his recommendations and become a GM from it. I dont know how he slected his games and positions.
Was there any science behind it, or did he just flip through games and say "this looks good" to me. He says if you do that, you can be at least at master level I think he might have said GM even, but that's debatable. In any case, there is a blueprint for you to follow. GM Soltis says the way to improve is to study master games. You have to try and learn something from the games you study.
It's about quality, not quantity. If it takes you hours to learn something from 1 game, then that's what you have to do. If you try to rush it, you won't learn anything and you won't improve. One way to do it is to solitare chess, where you cover up all of the moves, then you guess what the master's move will be, then you look at his move. You have to figure out why the master played a different move than you.
It's hard and takes a lot of time but it is well worth it. You can also research the idea of "deliberate practice". Basically it means you have to practice doing something that pushes you just beyond your current abilities if you practice something too hard, or too easy, you won't improve. If you push yourself just enough, and you do it every day, then after a few years have gone by you will have improved very much. Thanks for the link. I always appreciate new study material.
Also anything that could improve my tactical skill is great in my opinion. I'm stuck around on tactics trainer and on chess tempo and would like to continue improving. One of these upcoming months I might make it a goal to memorize all of these, just to see if it really will bring a big boost to my tactics skills, or atleast a moderate bump. One example comes to mind: GM Rashid Ziatdinov.
Not everyone can be grandmaster. Just accept this fact. But if you practice and play many games, you will improve and become a strong player. You don't have to pay any money for this. There are plenty of free online resources i. Also you can download a free chess software online many very good programs are free but this is optional.
The most important thing is to play chess and study grandmaster games. These will make you a better player. Good luck. One to two hours a day won't do it. Neither will 12 hours a day unless you have a whole bunch of talent. Have a look at what Laszlo Polgar has to say about the way he set about training his daughters.
Took longer than two years though. The fact that your focus is on status pretty much demonstrates that you don't have enough interest in the game for its own sake to excel so you might look for something which you like more.
At the age of That is what can be done. Crying doesn't get you anywhere. At the age of 98, George Dawson decided he wanted to learn to read. On his th birthday, he read his own birthday cards for the first time in his life. At the age of he wrote a best-selling book. It's never too late. The question is, how important it is to you.
If you feel it's your life's mission to save children in third-world countries, then you can be 50 years old and become a doctor. It's hard to think that chess is anyone's life mission though. Well, Fischer, but look how that ended. I've heard it said Carlsen had hundreds of GM games memorized when he was still just a kid. Here is what I would do:. Just about anyone can become a medical doctor, and just about no one can become a grandmaster.
Give or take a little bit. The Schweizer story is completely irrelevant. Becoming a top olympic athlete in a some sport one takes up at 25 after playing video games for 15 years is a more apt analogy. An extremely inept analogy actually considering that chess involves the mind where as olympic athletic sports involve the skeletomuscular system and the cardiovascular system. And becoming an olympic athlete has a lot to do with developing instant reflexes, which is a lot of what becoming a chess grandmaster involves.
Almost anyone who wants to can become a medical doctor. Almost no one who wants to can become a chess grandmaster. A chess grandmaster is a much rarer beast than a medical doctor. A medical doctor has less education than a PhD in just about any field. And a PhD is much much more common than chess grandmaster. Medical doctor has no place in this conversation. Elite athlete is more to the point, and there are far more elite athletes than there are grandmasters. I am not sure about how much any of us know about the "requirements" to become a Chess Grand Master or a Medical Doctor, unless we are such.
My father is a Medical Doctor, perhaps I could ask him. I think it is odd that absolutely no Grand Masters have commented on how easy or hard it was to become a Grand Master. Perhaps they are hiding something from us? This is a chess discussion site. Why have no actual Grand Masters commented on this topic, as they would be the ones with knowledge? I guess that depends on what a person wants to do with their life.
I still don't know what you mean by rewarding. I don't see why not. I started at 26 and a year later i've improve quite a bit. I think if you really want to become a GM you should seek one out in person at a local chess club and continue to find as many games with players as high as possible. I'd have to agree with the person who guesses you're in your 20s, although I'd guess you're closer to Maybe this guessing game is something people of 'her' generation play.
Thanks, Alejandro. Forums General Chess Discussion. Jan 9, He says to do them 10 at a time. Do until you get a perfect score, then , then , and keep adding 10 until you can do all of them perfectly. He says then you will have the tactical ability of a GM. It has around positions and games that he says make up most of the fundamental chess knowledge. He doesn't give you any analysis though, just the positions and games. You have to memorize them, and then do the work to study them and learn them completely read other books, do your own analysis, etc.
Ubik42 wrote: Is there any evidence or science behind Rashid and his game memorization stuff? Also you can download a free chess software online many very good programs are free but this is optional The most important thing is to play chess and study grandmaster games. Whats with this thread anyway.
Is possible? - beginner adult to Grandmaster
After five years of constant and peripatetic email writing, I have finally landed. I plan to write about current and world affairs, economic and environmental sustainability, chess study and improvement, quantitative investing and trading, workplace issues, relationships, and spiritual transformation. Much love to all. Lewin in his well recommended Complexity: Life at the Edge of Chaos discusses 'lumpy interger constraints'.
GM Ram: Ziyatdinov’s Theory
Is there any evidence or science behind Rashid and his game memorization stuff? It sounds interesting because its different from any other method of study, but I could never find anyone who became a master by his methods. I think he is just outlining the old Russian school of chess improvement though, the " key positions" idea. So if that's the case, then yes, there is extensive evidence to support it. However, to say that he is recommending memorization is far from the truth. Memorizing may be involved, but it's better to think of it like learning a new language, or learning martial arts.