Very cool! Love the focus too. I’ve been telling myself I’m going to Take Chess Seriously again, if I find the time I’ll join for sure.
I’m curious if there was any discussion of including simpler puzzles in some way, like a puzzle rush/storm/survival. Anecdotally they helped me a lot, more so than doing puzzles at the limits of my calculation. I play tennis and it sometimes feels like focusing on tough puzzles is the equivalent of practicing your down-the-line passing shot, which you should definitely practice and feel great to hit, but 90% of points are going to be decided by unforced errors, and most players would be better served by practicing easy baseline shots until they never miss.
Maybe a stretched analogy. Anyways, just curious what your thoughts are on easier puzzles in general, and then if that was a point of discussion at all for the gym.
The idea is not necessarily difficult calculation per se, but practicing making realistic in-game decisions. So that includes calculation, strategic thinking, etc. This kind of exercise is harder to find elsewhere.
But I agree that drilling simple puzzles can also be helpful. Some ideas we're considering to address that...
-Adding a third level of daily positions, easier than the two we currently have.
-Recommended training plans for those who have time to go beyond the core daily activities. This could include outside resources like puzzles on Lichess, Chess.com, etc.
-Courses (Circle actually makes it really easy to create these inside the platform). So there could be one that takes you through basic tactical patterns, for example.
What will be the minimum rating recommended for joining? The core activities, as described, will work well for intermediate and advanced players. Low-rating players may not be able to find a suitable partner for the weekly game or may not be able to contribute much in their analysis to the daily position. Asking for a friend (of course!).
There is no minimum rating! In fact, one of our big goals was to be accessible to everyone, and not create a hierarchy based on rating. Practice games have been firing off frequently with players of all levels. We are looking at adding an easier level of daily position as well.
Well, I joined. I'm willing to try it and see how it goes. I didn't quite get yesterday's position, but I think that my thoughts were not far off. I'm happy with that level of discomfort, I think I'll learn by attempting those positions and reading how others think about them.
Very cool! Love the focus too. I’ve been telling myself I’m going to Take Chess Seriously again, if I find the time I’ll join for sure.
I’m curious if there was any discussion of including simpler puzzles in some way, like a puzzle rush/storm/survival. Anecdotally they helped me a lot, more so than doing puzzles at the limits of my calculation. I play tennis and it sometimes feels like focusing on tough puzzles is the equivalent of practicing your down-the-line passing shot, which you should definitely practice and feel great to hit, but 90% of points are going to be decided by unforced errors, and most players would be better served by practicing easy baseline shots until they never miss.
Maybe a stretched analogy. Anyways, just curious what your thoughts are on easier puzzles in general, and then if that was a point of discussion at all for the gym.
The idea is not necessarily difficult calculation per se, but practicing making realistic in-game decisions. So that includes calculation, strategic thinking, etc. This kind of exercise is harder to find elsewhere.
But I agree that drilling simple puzzles can also be helpful. Some ideas we're considering to address that...
-Adding a third level of daily positions, easier than the two we currently have.
-Recommended training plans for those who have time to go beyond the core daily activities. This could include outside resources like puzzles on Lichess, Chess.com, etc.
-Courses (Circle actually makes it really easy to create these inside the platform). So there could be one that takes you through basic tactical patterns, for example.
What will be the minimum rating recommended for joining? The core activities, as described, will work well for intermediate and advanced players. Low-rating players may not be able to find a suitable partner for the weekly game or may not be able to contribute much in their analysis to the daily position. Asking for a friend (of course!).
There is no minimum rating! In fact, one of our big goals was to be accessible to everyone, and not create a hierarchy based on rating. Practice games have been firing off frequently with players of all levels. We are looking at adding an easier level of daily position as well.
Well, I joined. I'm willing to try it and see how it goes. I didn't quite get yesterday's position, but I think that my thoughts were not far off. I'm happy with that level of discomfort, I think I'll learn by attempting those positions and reading how others think about them.