So as I mentioned in the 2008 improvement thread, it's probably about time for a new thread for the new year. This will be a good opportunity for me to sit and think about my strengths and weaknesses, my long and short term goals, and my plans for achieving those goals.
In 2008, I played 83 USCF rated games at time controls of G/75 or slower, and my USCF rating went from 1335 on January 1 to 1540 today, though I peaked at 1599 in September.
The fact that I never hit the 1600 mark to get an automatic 1400 rating floor still bugs me. I don't expect to drop back to 1400 any time soon, but I have an 86 year old friend at the local club who's been sitting at a 1500 floor for as long as I've known him. It'll be nice to have the security of knowing that I can do that in 50 years, too, without having to worry about dropping to an embarrassingly low rating, no matter how badly I play when I'm old and senile.
In the 2008 thread, Planetchess.org recommended that I shoot for 1800 by the end of 2009. Back at the Miami Open in September, I had said that if I was over 1800, I'd consider playing in the Open section, just for the chance to play some FIDE titled players. It would be like paying for individual lessons from 9 different master strength opponents. Ok, probably just 8 since I'm sure I'd get a bye, probably in the first round, but still...
So in the spirit of being ambitious with my long term goals, that's what I'll shoot for: 1800 by the Miami Open in September (if that tourney's even held in 2009). That's roughly one rating point increase per day, which is similar to the goal I didn't make this year. If I don't make it, I've got the secondary goal to fall back on of trying to hit 1800 by the end of the year. And if I do make it, then I can work towards 1900 by the end of the year, or just re-evaluate my long term goals at that point. I actually don't think that a 260 rating point increase in one year is unrealistic. After all, I did that much this year, though I dropped 50+ of those points again at the end of the year.
As for short term goals, that's easy: 1600 or bust! I still want that 1400 rating floor!
No specific time line on that one - just shooting for it ASAP. Getting there by February or March is probably a realistic goal, though.
Before detailing my study plan going forward, this will be a good time to re-assess my strengths and weaknesses as a player, so that I can think about what it is I need to work on and why.
Strengths:
I'd say my main strength is getting strong positions early in the game. Even when my opponents get me out of my "book" opening lines, I do a good job of improvising to get all my pieces out and lined up in a way that puts pressure on the opponent's position.
A related strength is that I'm good at finding ways to add pressure to a position in the middle game. For instance, I went over both my tourney games from yesterday, and there were moments in both games where I didn't have a specific plan, so I just moved an inactive rook to an active spot. I just put them on files where I didn't have any specific plans, but their support helped control a key part of the board and put pressure on the opponents' king positions. And in both cases, those rooks turned out to be useful a few moves later.
This is just an obvious example of the type of thing I'm talking about, but basically what I'm saying is that I follow the guideline, "When in doubt, put your pieces near the opponent's king". This has led me to attacks on several occasions, when I wasn't specifically planning an attack when I made those moves.
Weaknesses:
Doing something with those strong positions that I get out of the opening! Basically, coming up with and implementing plans in the middle game is a big weakness for me right now. As I just mentioned, I often have times where I just add pressure to a position in the hopes of something good coming from it. While this can be useful, the fact is that I usually do it because I'm out of more specific ideas.
My other two big weaknesses have to do with tactics.
First, I'm sometimes slow at noticing the obvious. For instance, my opponents will make moves that serve more than one purpose, and I'll only notice the obvious purpose. ie I'll notice that the knight he just moved is attacking my bishop, but I won't notice that he also just cleared a path at the same time for his own bishop to move to a killer spot. Luckily, I'm good at playing slowly and looking around for these things, so I rarely get burned by this lack of vision in slow tourney games, but a lot of them are things I should notice instantly and don't. And this REALLY kills me in blitz. It also hurts when trying to do deeper calculations, which brings me to the second tactical weakness.
I need to improve my tactical calculation ability. The frustrating part is that I used to be much better at this than I am now. I did a ton of deep tactical puzzles, and they helped me to calculate as much as 8-10 moves deep by both sides in some situations. I just really suck at that now.
On a related note, I guess my endgames could use some work, too. I'm actually not terrible at them, but I need to work on calculating more quickly and accurately, and knowing what plan to use and when. If I had more time in the endgames, I wouldn't have such trouble with them, but I often use most of my time before getting there, so I have to play more quickly at that point. I especially have problems with knights in the endgame, though I seem to be particularly good at bishop endgames.
For that matter, I guess I have problems with knights most of the time. It's just that they don't have as much freedom of movement earlier in the game, so my overlooking good moves for them is a bigger weakness in the endgame, when they're less restricted by other pieces and pawns.
I guess I should talk about the strengths and weaknesses of my opening repertoire, as well. The biggest strength, IMHO, is the Smith-Morra Gambit. It might not be the strongest opening I play, but it's a lot of fun, and I'm very comfortable playing it. I also really enjoy attacking typical French positions as white, and I enjoy attacking the Pirc/Modern with the 150 Attack. Oddly, I'll consider playing black against 1. b4 to be a strength. For some reason, it's an opening that I always seem to do well against, as opposed to some others that throw me off.
As for opening weakness, I've always had trouble playing against the Caro Kann as white. As black, I can play typical 1. e4 e5 positions in the Ruy Lopez and Scotch, but I sometimes get lost in the middle game when doing so. My biggest weakness is probably playing black against the English, though I'm not very happy against 1. d4, either. As mentioned in my 2008 improvement thread, I recently ordered a book on the Dutch to give me something new to try against 1. c4 and 1. d4.
So that brings me to the question of what to do about all those weaknesses, and how I intend to hit that 1800 mark.
I think the main thing I need to do is just play a lot, and study my games afterwards. I keep saying that I probably study too much and don't play enough.
Regarding spotting things quickly, I've been told by a well respected professional chess coach that going over lots of master games quickly will help with that. This will also help me learn about middle game planning, as I see their plans in action. This will also help me see how they play in all areas of the game. And since I'll probably be studying master games from books on the openings I play, I'll get used to how to play those openings while I'm at it.
For endgames, I recently picked up Starting Out: Rook Endings as an e-book, just because I like e-books, so it's easier to study than a normal book. I also want to keep going with Silman's Complete Endgame Course, which I had sort of put aside for a bit.
As for the deep tactical calculations, I've seen recommendations quite a few places, including some reputable masters on the internet, which say to study every once in a while by staring at a complex middle game position from a master game for an extended period of time. Many of them say to write down every line you can see, and just go for as long as you can with it. I think I might try that once every week or two, and see how much it helps me with visualizing long variations in my head.
Also, tactical puzzles here and there are always a good thing. I just think that if I'm doing the above exercise for deep calculation and going through lots of master games quickly to try to spot things faster, as well as playing a lot, then tactical puzzles are probably less of a priority than they've ever been before in my improvement plan.
Given that I mentioned having problems with planning, I just know someone's going to suggest that I read Silman's How to Reassess Your Chess and The Amateur's Mind. And I probably will. Eventually.
But as I said, I think I'll learn more right now from playing than studying. Also, I know myself well enough to know that if I get too many books going, I'll never finish any of them. So I'm better off focusing on just a couple of things at a time, and I've already got quite a list going here.
So here's the current study plan:
1. Play a lot. Study my own games.
2. Play over lots of master games quickly, starting with the ones in books on the openings I play.
3. Deep calculation exercises once every week or two.
4. Endgame study from books, as I get to it.
5. Tactical puzzles in my free time.
6. Eventually get around to reading Silman's middle game books, but not right away.
There are two other things worth mentioning now.
First, my playing schedule. I know I should practice more on the internet. But as for USCF tournament games, I just started a new job, and hopefully my schedule will let me play at the Wednesday and Friday evening clubs that I couldn't go to before, as well as continuing to go to the Saturday club. So I should be playing 2-4 USCF tournament games most weeks at time controls between G/75 and G/120. On the other hand, I'll probably have to miss some of the big weekend tournaments that I traveled to last year, because I can't take time off from the new job to drive a long distance to them every time. I'll still go to some, just not all. I'll have to see over time how that goes.
Second, I was thinking of hiring a chess coach. As I said, I started a new job, and I'm making more money now, as well as having a two month overlap between my new paychecks and my severance pay from the old job that laid me off. Also, as I said, I won't be making quite as many weekend trips, so that's an expense that will go down as I skip a couple of those. So I actually have more money available right now, and spending some of it on a chess coach might be a worthwhile investment.
I'd definitely want a master level or higher coach, and I don't know of any who live within half an hour drive of me, though I do know of a couple who are about an hour or more away. Given that, I was thinking of looking into who gives lessons via the internet. I know NM Dan Heisman does this, and I've always liked his Novice Nook column on chesscafe.com, so that's one possibility. I'll have to think about that, see how my work schedule works out, and look into what coaches are available before making any definite decision.
So that's the new plan for the new year. I knew this would be a long post. That's why I waited for a day off with nothing going on before writing it.
--Fromper
Fromper's 2009 improvement thread
Linear Mode
