Wednesday, August 31, 2005
DOH
I need to read blogs when I'm not sleepy ... it was Jason Rihel is doing the circles, not DG.
I won against the 9-year old in a long OTB. I didn't understand my advantages going into the late middlegame, so my winning position turned even. He returned the favor in the endgame.
My ICC rating has dipped below 1500, and my blitz there just went above 1400 (!?). Although I don't consider blitz serious chess, the circles seem to be helping there. It's strange how 1250 rated blitz players still blow me off the board in blitz, and higher rated players are just playing awful.
I am doing worse on the circles. I need to slow down again. I am taking anywhere from a few seconds to 2 minutes, although ostensibly I am aiming at using 4 minutes per problem on Steps 2 and 3, 5 minutes 4 and 5.
I won against the 9-year old in a long OTB. I didn't understand my advantages going into the late middlegame, so my winning position turned even. He returned the favor in the endgame.
My ICC rating has dipped below 1500, and my blitz there just went above 1400 (!?). Although I don't consider blitz serious chess, the circles seem to be helping there. It's strange how 1250 rated blitz players still blow me off the board in blitz, and higher rated players are just playing awful.
I am doing worse on the circles. I need to slow down again. I am taking anywhere from a few seconds to 2 minutes, although ostensibly I am aiming at using 4 minutes per problem on Steps 2 and 3, 5 minutes 4 and 5.
-=-=-=-=-
TCT Results | Circle 1 | Circle 2 | Circle 3 |
| Step 1 | 97% | 99% | 99% |
| Step 2 | 93% | 96% | 95%* |
| Step 3 | 93% | 97% | ?? |
| Step 4 | 80% | 86% | ?? |
| Step 5 | 74% | 77% | ?? |
Thursday, August 25, 2005
Circle 3, Step 1 Complete
This was tougher than I expected. 30 seconds per problem was kind of tight, thought I did perfectly till near the end. I felt a little sleepy, which didn't help.
-=-=-=-=-
I got 4 wrong, and I sort of expected 100 percent, and so I will review the last group of tests on circle 4.
Oh, and a welcome to DG, our newest Knight.
-=-=-=-=-
TCT Results | Circle 1 | Circle 2 | Circle 3 |
| Step 1 | 97% | 99% | 99% |
| Step 2 | 93% | 96% | ?? |
| Step 3 | 93% | 97% | ?? |
| Step 4 | 80% | 86% | ?? |
| Step 5 | 74% | 77% | ?? |
Monday, August 22, 2005
Finished Circle 2
It's the last 400 that are the hardest ;-). Onward to Circle 3...
-=-=-=-=-
TCT Results | Circle 1 | Circle 2 |
| Step 1 | 97% | 99% |
| Step 2 | 93% | 96% |
| Step 3 | 93% | 97% |
| Step 4 | 80% | 86% |
| Step 5 | 74% | 77% |
Thursday, August 11, 2005
Just Plain Wrong
TCT is good but not perfect...
Step 5, exercise 9a, #9 3rd move of Rook to b8 is works just as well as Rook to b7 but is marked as incorrect.
Step 5, exercise 11c, #6 marks Queen to h7 checkmate as incorrect!
Step 5, exercise 9a, #9 3rd move of Rook to b8 is works just as well as Rook to b7 but is marked as incorrect.
Step 5, exercise 11c, #6 marks Queen to h7 checkmate as incorrect!
-=-=-=-=-
TCT Results | Circle 1 | Circle 2 |
| Step 1 | 97% | 99% |
| Step 2 | 93% | 96% |
| Step 3 | 93% | 97% |
| Step 4 | 80% | 86% |
| Step 5 | 74% | *77% |
Sunday, August 07, 2005
Minor Injustice
Several writers have remarked how KNN vs. K seems short-changed, since only KBB vs. K and KBN vs. K can force mate on an open board. A strange truth, and made stranger still by the number of special cases where KNN vs. Kp(s) or even KB does force mate. The extra material gives the weaker side enough poison tempi to screw up the whole stalemate.
I think there is a reverse "injustice" that gives compensation. Simply put, KNNN vs. K can force mate, but if you had 8 Bishop underpromotions made on the same color, a KBBBBBBBBB vs. K ending cannot force mate. That's alot of material, and perhaps a fairer comparison.
I think there is a reverse "injustice" that gives compensation. Simply put, KNNN vs. K can force mate, but if you had 8 Bishop underpromotions made on the same color, a KBBBBBBBBB vs. K ending cannot force mate. That's alot of material, and perhaps a fairer comparison.
-=-=-=-=-
Down to just over 10 problems per day because they are so tough.
I lost a OTB last night, which I don't mind since Chessmaster rated his game as 0 pawns worth of error. That's much better than my 5.13!
TCT Results | Circle 1 | Circle 2 |
| Step 1 | 97% | 99% |
| Step 2 | 93% | 96% |
| Step 3 | 93% | 97% |
| Step 4 | 80% | 86% |
| Step 5 | 74% | *76% |
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Incremental Chess Improvement
I was thinking about the MDLM approach recently, partially prompted by recent blog criticisms. Comparing my study time verses the time MDLM put in, I would say that I am hoping for 400 points in about 800-900 days. I started out Step 5 going way too fast and got even worse scores than in circle 1. Now I have slowed to 6 minutes or less per problem and it averages to quite a bit under 4 minutes as some of them pop-out as more obvious.
I found an honest to goodness incorrect answer in TCT. In Step 5, 7a, #10 move 1... d5 is marked it as incorrect but is the best at 3.50 vs playing 1...c5 at 3.07 (Fritz @ depth 11). Horray for instinct!
[Event "Tasc Chess Tutor"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2005.08.03"]
[Round "?"]
[White "White"]
[Black "Black"]
[Result "*"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "r1bqr1k1/pp1p1ppp/1bp2n2/8/3NP3/2NBQP2/PPP3PP/R4RK1 b - - 0 1"]
[EventDate "2005.??.??"]
1... c5 (1... d5 2. Rad1 c5 3. Qg5 h6 4. Qg3 cxd4 5. Nxd5 Nxd5 6. exd5 Qxd5) 2.
Nde2 c4 3. Nd4 cxd3 4. cxd3 d5 5. Nce2 Qd6 *
-=-=-=-=-
TCT Results | Circle 1 | Circle 2 |
| Step 1 | 97% | 99% |
| Step 2 | 93% | 96% |
| Step 3 | 93% | 97% |
| Step 4 | 80% | 86% |
| Step 5 | 74% | *75% |
