Smithy's Monthly Update: Jan 2024

As a way to keep myself accountable, I promised to provide monthly training updates.  I'll record what I have done, what I have achieved, what I have struggled with and suggest what I might change going forward.  Sounds awesome, let's do it....

... and unfortunately, my first month was terrible.  I basically stopped training chess.  Whoops.  But I have a good excuse.  I've reignited an old hobby, older even then chess, and basically have devoted all my freetime to it.  Chess has fallen off the radar.  I like to think I'm not being lazy, but I guess I'll let you be the judge.

GM Smirnov's Advice: The Four Levels of Knowledge

As mentioned, my new year's goals include going through GM Smirnov's "Grandmaster's Positional Understanding."  One lesson in particular has really opened my eyes.  It's not even about chess per se, but rather about training in general.  Essentially, there's a world of difference between knowing something and knowing something, and we need to train ourselves to get from the one to the other.

He specifically included this because some of his lessons seem simple or even obvious.  "Develop my pieces? Thanks, Igor, I've known this since I was rated 800."  Smirnov's point, though, is that many players (and not just beginners) know they should develop their pieces, yet they frequently play games and fall behind in development for whatever reason.  They chase material, they worry about pawn structure, they try to attack, etc etc.

They might "know" about developing their pieces, but it is not their first thought when they look at an opening position.  Or, alternatively, they don't know how to do it: they might develop their pieces to poor squares, forcing them to move them again, falling behind in time. Basically, until "development" is their first thought and they do it easily and effortlessly in any given position, they don't know it.

This lesson struck a chord with me.  I don't remember even reading it the first time I did GMPU, honestly.  I'm not going to reproduce the whole lesson here, for obvious reasons, but I am going to discuss the general themes, which resonate with much of my earlier thoughts and writings on chess.

Chess as a Mirror: Learning About Yourself

 "Mirror, mirror, on the wall..."

I've often heard that a person's personality shines forth on the chess board.  It goes beyond the choice of opening and into the moves themselves: you can often tell which famous player played a particular game, and no one confuses a Tal brilliancy with one of Petrosian's, even if they started from the same position.

Whenever we play chess, we look into a magic mirror, one that reflects back at us.  If you look at it critically, you might see portions of yourself otherwise hidden.  Today, I've stared deep into the abyss.  Let's see what the magic mirror says about me.

Weaning off of Forums

Social media addiction gets a lot of press.  Fortunately, I don't suffer from this.  I don't use any of the big sites (Facebook, Instagram, Twitter ... or whatever Elon is calling it).  I guess I use YouTube, but watching how-to videos and listening to music in the background is about as far away from doom-scrolling as you can get.  All-in-all, I have a healthy relationship with the Internet...

Except for chess forums.  That one has proven a problem.

Curse this easily accessible link!

I like chess.  I am a teacher.  I like talking about chess and I really like helping people get better at chess.  I have spent a considerable amount of time doing this.  I don't regret it ... but, and of course there's a "but" coming, refreshing a page 15 times an hour to see if someone might have posted something is a wee bit overboard.

My story may or may not resonate with you, but I think the subtext, of spending a lot of time around chess and discussing chess but without actually doing chess, is quite common.

What IS Opening Theory?

The following comments litter chess forums: "I'm looking for a low-theory opening" or "The Sicilian has too much theory" or "How much theory do I need to know to play X?"  Chess theory is a boogieman, overshadowing all our opening discussions ... but what is chess theory, and why do we care about it so much?

Many of these forum posts proceed as if theory is to be avoided as much as possible. On Monday, I gave an introduction to theory, at least as I understand it. Today, I'd like to suggest that this preconception with theory is largely misplaced.

Understanding Opening Theory

"People don't know theory at my level."  You hear this all the time, and there is almost an element of reproach lurking here.  "Uncultured swine, not knowing the right moves."  On the flip side, we have some people who study lots of opening theory, knowing it by heart, and never get to play it in their games.

At this point, we should back up and ask, "What IS theory, and why do we need to know it?"

I have a lot of thoughts on this topic.  Today, I want to look at just one base element of opening theory and describe its general evolution.  Ultimately, opening theory is simply the most principled and challenging way to develop your pieces and create a plan out of the opening.  This will explain it in action.

Why I Stopped Using Online Opening Trainers

Chessable.  Chess-Tempo.  Chess Position Trainer.  These are just some of the opening trainers out there.  They all work more or less the same: you train your openings on a real board, and spaced repetition determines what positions you are to train.  They differ in features but essentially serve the same niche.

I spent 3+ years using Chessable.  I spent another year on Chess-Tempo.  And now I've stopped.  Completely.  This post will explain why. The short answer: these don't provide enough value for the time investment.  The longer answer... well, read on.