The Three Pillars of Chess Ability

What determines a player's strength?  Said differently, what makes a good player different from a weaker one?  Fundamentally, better players find better moves, and they do it more consistently.  Easy enough, but that begs the question: how do you find good moves?  What determines chess skill?

This is a huge question with many different subtleties, but I think it breaks down into three broad areas: there's understanding (knowing what to do generally), there's pattern recognition (seeing ideas without effort), and there's calculation (seeing ideas with effort).  Taken together, these pillars make up most if not all of your chess ability, so let's dive in and take a closer look.

Inside, I will look at each pillar: what it is, how it helps and how to improve it.  I also warn what happens if we rely on one too much.

Update 1: Using the ChessMood Opening Method (Change of Plan!)

You know what they say about the best laid plans...

Yesterday I announced my intention to learn GM Shankland's Neo-Catalan repertoire using the ChessMood recommended approach.  I fully intended to do that ... and then immediately changed it.  Why?  Because about two hours later, my friend NM Matt Jensen released a new course on the QGD Exchange.

I will thus be learning the QGD exchange instead of the Catalan.  Fortunately, this probably improves the experiment:

• The course is literally 10x shorter, 3.5hrs instead of 30hrs.  It's actually something I can complete before 2024;
• The course is primarily plan-based, which seems better for the "re-creation" aspect of the ChessMood method (admittedly, this is an assumption on my part);
• It covers the most common moves at club level, so it should be easier than the GM-approved mainlines from Shankland;
• If the Method works, I can then approach the Catalan with confidence.  If the Method doesn't work, then at least didn't have to bang my head against the wall with a much harder course to find out; and
• It supports my friend.

So, in short, I am still trying the ChessMood approach, but I'm doing it with a less-ambitious course.

My Challenge: Learning an Opening through the ChessMood Method

How to learn an opening?  Everyone asks this question.  I have tried several different methods, with varying degrees of success.  Let's try something new: for the rest of 2023, I will try the ChessMood approach to memorizing an opening.  

I've meant to try this for awhile now but had other priorities come up.  With those priorities lessening and GM Shankland finishing his Neo-Catalan repertoire yesterday, there's no better time.

This post will describe the general process and explain how I plan to finish 2023 chess-wise.  Let's go.

Josh Waitzkin's Influence

Many books and people have influenced my chess development, and I've written about most of them at various times.  One, though, I had completely forgotten about until I saw his book in the local library.  A rush of memory came back as I remembered the amazing Chessmaster videos of IM Josh Waitzkin.

We now live in a golden age of chess content, where you can find an endless supply of YouTube videos touching on everything chess.  That's likely why Josh's 12 videos on the ancient Chessmaster 8000 slipped my mind.  Nonetheless, these remain some of the best videos ever recorded, and they showed me what high-level chess, and a high-level chess thought process, was for the first time.

It literally changed my life.

(2023) Smithy's Review of "The Woodpecker Method"

From approximately December 2018 into March 2019, I went through the infamous "Woodpecker Method" on Chessable.  I'm sure by now the method is well known, but for completeness, the book gives you a large set of exercises and asks you to repeat them over and over.  If you run through the 700+ problems seven times, you are supposed to do it faster, do it better, have more confidence, become a GM and nab the girl of your dreams... or at least that's what the marketing spin tells you.

I recorded the entire journey on my old blog ... which has since disappeared when I cancelled my hosting plan.  Chessable doesn't record user stats, and my old notes have vanished when my ancient computer finally gave up the ghost.  I won't be able to point to any hard stats as I would like to, but my conclusion will still ring loud and clear.

I really didn't like the Woodpecker Method.

Smithy's Calculus 2.0: Picking an Opening for Black (revised!)

Back in 2019, I wrote my most popular blog post, where I suggested a unique way of deciding on an opening.  Whereas most people ask, "What opening fits my playing style?", which doesn't seem to help, I asked, "What do I prioritize when playing chess?"  I listed several factors and then ranked each opening on them.  This was fun to write and produced some thought-provoking results.

But, and there is always a but...

Re-reading it four years later, I basically disagree with the entire premise!  At the very least, I have not followed my own advice: I currently play very different openings and I fell into those openings for a very different reason.  My old idea is not discredited, but it definitely needs an update.  Here it is.

(2019 Version) My Woodpecker Method Experience

(Note: This is a copy-paste from my original 2019 version.  The more time has passed, the more I disagree with what I wrote.  Basically, I was too nice, and I will write an updated review shortly.  However, this was one my most popular posts on the old blog, so I have copied it here for reference.  Unfortunately, the images did not save, so you'll have to use your imagination on what my rating graphs looked like.  Sorry!)

The Woodpecker Method #10: Final Update

Final thoughts on my experience with this book.

It seems a lifetime since I went through the Woodpecker Method. It’s been 4 months since I did the last problem … and then I basically stopped playing chess. From mid-April until mid-June, I didn’t play a game. I did some other chess-related activities, such as creating my free course on openings, but I didn’t play a single game.

This makes it hard to draw conclusions. I had hoped to play several hundred blitz, bullet and longer-games and then compare the results, if any. This post thus has less hard data, but I can still state some conclusions with decent certainty, I feel. Let’s take a look.