lichess.org
Donate

David's Chess Journey - Installment 59

Having checklists / "OS" is good.

However, how does one train on making this automatic and really part of one's system wherein there's a conscious effort to use this for every move?

Playing blitz or bullet forces one to abandon this OS. Even rapid is too short, one wouldn't be able to follow this OS for every move. And then poor habits (abandoning the OS) build up over time.

TLDR

  1. os is good, if used every move
  2. Fast time controls forces us to not use the OS every move
  3. Soon, we get used to not using the os at all / bad habits build up
Having checklists / "OS" is good. However, how does one train on making this automatic and really part of one's system wherein there's a conscious effort to use this for every move? Playing blitz or bullet forces one to abandon this OS. Even rapid is too short, one wouldn't be able to follow this OS for every move. And then poor habits (abandoning the OS) build up over time. TLDR 1. os is good, if used every move 2. Fast time controls forces us to not use the OS every move 3. Soon, we get used to not using the os at all / bad habits build up

BTW, was the "going rogue" part playing blitz games that your coach told you to avoid? At first when I read it, I didn't see why playing more chess than you're supposed to would be so bad, but I agree with GnocchiPup that it could give you bad habits.

BTW, was the "going rogue" part playing blitz games that your coach told you to avoid? At first when I read it, I didn't see why playing more chess than you're supposed to would be so bad, but I agree with GnocchiPup that it could give you bad habits.

I played a ton of 15+10 games and you are right, it was developing/enforcing bad habits and doing more harm than good until the bad habits are replaced with good ones. Then I will be able to play much more. I look forward to that!

I played a ton of 15+10 games and you are right, it was developing/enforcing bad habits and doing more harm than good until the bad habits are replaced with good ones. Then I will be able to play much more. I look forward to that!

A way to test if bad habits persist is to play 10 games against an easy but decent chesscom bot (Nelson or easier) with no time controls, and then import the games here in Lichess and auto analyze. Lichess Analysis is best, they explained their algo, and I believe their tagging is much better and more useful for this purpose than chesscom.

We'll win every game, but that's not the goal. The goal is to have zero blunders. Mistakes and inaccuracies are fine, we're not going for master level for now.

That's around 400 straight moves with zero blunders. It's a good indicator that somehow, the good habits are there.

If we can't do it, that means we can't even do it with zero pressure. No pressure from the bot itself, since it's not real, no pressure from the bot's moves since it doesn't do very strong ones, no pressure from the clock.

If we can't do it with absolutely zero pressure, for sure we'll do some silly blunder when faced with real pressure.

Tldr, the only reason we'll have a lichess blunder against an easy chesscom bot with no time control is because of the persistence of poor habits.

Side note: against easy chesscom bots, it's almost impossible to create a situation where we can make a positional lichess blunder. Chances are if lichess tags it as a blunder, this is a simple tactical / calculation blunder which could be an easy puzzle.

A way to test if bad habits persist is to play 10 games against an easy but decent chesscom bot (Nelson or easier) with no time controls, and then import the games here in Lichess and auto analyze. Lichess Analysis is best, they explained their algo, and I believe their tagging is much better and more useful for this purpose than chesscom. We'll win every game, but that's not the goal. The goal is to have zero blunders. Mistakes and inaccuracies are fine, we're not going for master level for now. That's around 400 straight moves with zero blunders. It's a good indicator that somehow, the good habits are there. If we can't do it, that means we can't even do it with zero pressure. No pressure from the bot itself, since it's not real, no pressure from the bot's moves since it doesn't do very strong ones, no pressure from the clock. If we can't do it with absolutely zero pressure, for sure we'll do some silly blunder when faced with real pressure. Tldr, the only reason we'll have a lichess blunder against an easy chesscom bot with no time control is because of the persistence of poor habits. Side note: against easy chesscom bots, it's almost impossible to create a situation where we can make a positional lichess blunder. Chances are if lichess tags it as a blunder, this is a simple tactical / calculation blunder which could be an easy puzzle.

Interesting test! But doesn't Stockfish consider it a blunder if you miss some 4+ move tactic that even a master would have trouble with?

I just looked through the Lichess analysis of my most recent 4 OTB games. Of the three blunders:

  • one was as easy tactic I just missed
  • one was an easy positional blunder (don't trade queens if you're down a pawn duh), of the kind you say doesn't occur against easy bots
  • but the other was because I didn't sac a knight for an attack that took 5 moves to win the material back
Interesting test! But doesn't Stockfish consider it a blunder if you miss some 4+ move tactic that even a master would have trouble with? I just looked through the Lichess analysis of my most recent 4 OTB games. Of the three blunders: - one was as easy tactic I just missed - one was an easy positional blunder (don't trade queens if you're down a pawn duh), of the kind you say doesn't occur against easy bots - but the other was because I didn't sac a knight for an attack that took 5 moves to win the material back

That's true. To be more precise(?) Lichess would consider something a blunder if you significantly reduced your score%.

Situation c would also happen rarely against an easy chesscom bot, since they usually give up material early on. So even if you miss some wild tactic, that won't move your score% much (e.g., completely winning to somehow completely winning). Lichess would probably only tag this as a mistake.

Side note, I checked your three imported games, I can't seem to see where situation c happened?

In any case, it would be nice to try it out, just to see what types of bad habits you're susceptible to. And also find your zero pressure blunder rate as some form of baseline. And then maybe try the test again after x months, to see if current training method is effective.

(My blunder rate nowadays is back to 2 to 3 per blitz game on average, hehe)

That's true. To be more precise(?) Lichess would consider something a blunder if you significantly reduced your score%. Situation c would also happen rarely against an easy chesscom bot, since they usually give up material early on. So even if you miss some wild tactic, that won't move your score% much (e.g., completely winning to somehow completely winning). Lichess would probably only tag this as a mistake. Side note, I checked your three imported games, I can't seem to see where situation c happened? In any case, it would be nice to try it out, just to see what types of bad habits you're susceptible to. And also find your zero pressure blunder rate as some form of baseline. And then maybe try the test again after x months, to see if current training method is effective. (My blunder rate nowadays is back to 2 to 3 per blitz game on average, hehe)

Yes, you were right about case C; I misremembered. I was thinking of

https://lichess.org/study/Hx2xVugw/tOnvwLlB
(move 15), but it was only tagged as a mistake, not a blunder.

Yes, you were right about case C; I misremembered. I was thinking of https://lichess.org/study/Hx2xVugw/tOnvwLlB (move 15), but it was only tagged as a mistake, not a blunder.