lichess.org
Donate

I want to improve, but I'm busy !!!

So I did misunderstand to some extent. There are other practices that take a long time to reap the benefit of as they are needing to incorporate lots of information not all of it visible consciously given our limitations that way.

Having to give some quality attention each day, would put it on some memory track. So it might be about touching the subject with quality attention every day, if possible to let that experience make its way. We are not only learning what we think we are, consciously, but overnight during sleep there is still processing, clearly of the subconscious kind (i.e. defined as non-conscious, nothing more constructed needed).

So thanks for adjusting. Sometimes I read a bit too fast. I would not think you would do clicbait anyway. This not worded like a recipe. But a principle to adapt. And 10 minutes, is hard to argue not having (to oneself).

Deliberate practice minded. Some theories of general expertise, I think, do mention deliberate practice as a key element.

But you propose that daily pace, and I find it interesting for another reason, close to my way of playing chess, which forces me such pattern, although I also hand around and study more than my games, as a player I would say, I do spend such amount of time per game, in correspondance, as it is my sustained attention relax setting 10-20 chunks. I would say I keep in touch with the same slowly evolving game (my thinking at each position fluctuates in their nature from calculations to just ideas of where there might be a target to seek, by making a deep lazy sequence to test if it is even possible legally, i.e. not much resisting imagination on the other side).

I misunderstood and said would not apply to me, because I have many limitations to keeping sustained attention over a game, and I am squeezed on the other side by wanting to learn more and not stress about time management conflict with that priority, where I get to make a move only if I have some reason or hypothesis of one, i would be testing. So I find your 10 min (order of magnitude) can be used many times in one day. If one is having other stamina limitations than having a non-chess busy day.

But now it seems you are not targeting what I thought you were. The already fully serious dedicated chess player. It might already be applying to me. It was the stamina prolongation that kind of sent me off.
@dboing said in #31:
> I misunderstood and said would not apply to me, because I have many limitations to keeping sustained attention over a game, and I am squeezed on the other side by wanting to learn more and not stress about time management conflict with that priority, where I get to make a move only if I have some reason or hypothesis of one, i would be testing. So I find your 10 min (order of magnitude) can be used many times in one day. If one is having other stamina limitations than having a non-chess busy day.
>
> But now it seems you are not targeting what I thought you were. The already fully serious dedicated chess player. It might already be applying to me. It was the stamina prolongation that kind of sent me off.

The same person who asked me about studying chess within a limited amount of time also asked me "What are your chess goals?"

I told them "To have fun, read chess books, and learn." He brought the discussion back to ratings and such. I told him "I am not really interested in ratings and tournaments anymore." I really just enjoy chess, and learning about it. I like playing through games, solving tough puzzles, learning a new opening I've never played before, and trying to understand complex endgames with no simple pattern.

Yes, this article is aimed at busier people, and new people. Obviously, anyone who is able to budget dozens of hours a week to studying chess is going to improve. There have probably been a million articles written on the subject, and I don't think I have much to add to that discussion.

But from a practical perspective, most people are not trying to become GMs. Most people want to improve, and most people are busy. It isn't silly, or wrong, or ridiculous to try to cater to this crowd because they, as a crowd, exist. I did not make any false promises to people in this category, promises like "You can become a GM" or "You will gain rating points after doing this for a month." I simply said you can increase the time you spend with chess incrementally, and this will also increase your cognitive stamina as well.

The most interesting thing that has come out of this for me and my "Exploring Chess" article series, is "Why is studying chess always the same, regardless of age?" That is a very good question, one I have not seen explored, so I have begun exploring that process.
@RyanVelez
I agree, you did not. But that must be the assumption that those with such ambition, and only such ambition, however deluded or possible for them, might have taken reading the title. And I suspect of lot of the blogs cater to those by the 3 prong lobby presentation with an algorithm based on some subjectivity of some few or/and popularity contest. It would be interesting to have real times series of all the blog popularity to see how many gather their views slowly, from those that spike and stay there.

The impatient crowd would be taking such title as a promise of recipe. The impatient crowd would also make a blog view spike.

Keep exploring, and damn the torpedoes. Never mind some disappointments that an eager crowd might have misunderstood the gamut of peoples goal in their interest with chess. I think I understand the width of the target audience now. And I do fit in it.
@dboing said in #34:
> @RyanVelez
> I agree, you did not. But that must be the assumption that those with such ambition, and only such ambition, however deluded or possible for them, might have taken reading the title. And I suspect of lot of the blogs cater to those by the 3 prong lobby presentation with an algorithm based on some subjectivity of some few or/and popularity contest. It would be interesting to have real times series of all the blog popularity to see how many gather their views slowly, from those that spike and stay there.
>
> The impatient crowd would be taking such title as a promise of recipe. The impatient crowd would also make a blog view spike.
>
> Keep exploring, and damn the torpedoes. Never mind some disappointments that an eager crowd might have misunderstood the gamut of peoples goal in their interest with chess. I think I understand the width of the target audience now. And I do fit in it.

Oh, I am not discouraged by trolls and criticism. Good criticism is helpful, trolls are just jealous people who should be ignored.

One thing I take away from some of the critiques is people are assigning meaning to the title that I certainly did not intend. I tend to name things exactly what they are. So, in this case, an article about learning chess for busy people.

In some of the newer articles I have written, I have begun saying who the audience is for. I did do that with this article, too. I notice that when I had a more narrow audience, my views were smaller (which makes sense). This one has been more popular (and my audience was more broad). In my opinion, this is the main reason for the differences in viewership.

I am not writing for views. I am writing because I want to, it is fun, and some people support me. My next topic I have settled on will be an interesting read. I have absolutely no idea if it will be popular or not. It is certainly on a unique topic.
<Comment deleted by user>
look it is very help full but I am busy reading this. (Don't you dare say "then how are you not busy writing all of this) ....
Hm, it seems as if my brain has had "a week off". Now I am improving again. :)
Both in Blitz and in long OTB chess. I could achieve a draw in a team match against a clearly stronger opponent
(and we won 7:1), and I could secure a draw in the last round of our club championships (which I could win - I just
needed this last draw, but it was not easy).

I've returned to my old habit of playing c5 (Sicilian) against e4.
And I have included the e3 variation of Queens Indian in my white repertoire.