I agree with Bob re your writing style. To your point regarding weaknesses, I believe that my Biggest Weakness is that I don't know what my Biggest Weakness is. Perhaps it is better to be Unconciously Incompetent than be Conciously Incompetent about the wrong thing?
Love your stuff! It seems like good coaches talk about this specific aspect (with various angles and analogies) but 90% of the streamers, youtubers, authors, do not.
(BTW NM Dan Heisman has a great analogy describing the difference between your stage 3 and stage 4: We all know how to calculate 7x6 (it's 7+7+7+7+7+7), but *none* of us do it this way -- rather, we all know (because we've memorized) that 7x6=42. Same thing with the "chunks" of which you speak.
To elaborate, puzzles serve two functions -- and this is rarely talked about. One is to practice calculation (your stage 3) but another is to memorize patterns/chunks (your stage 4). E.g., we all can see a bank rate mate-in-1 in less than a second. Almost all of us can see the Nxc7 king-rook fork in a second.
And so, doing simple puzzle books (like the famous Bain book, or the new Giannatos book) should be looked at as *recognizing* patterns, rather than learning how to calculate. In other words, learning those chunks to get from stage 3 to stage 4. My two cents.
Very insightful. I overloaded myself with different skill improvement (tactics, endgame, motifs. mate in 2 and 3) and at the end it was just frustrating. Now I focus on one simple skill (Clearence patterns for example) which has the most development potential.
Nate, your writing is so clear and enjoyable that it fools me into thinking I understand chess. Then I play a game and am brought back to reality. 😂
Very useful
Great article, I use the same method for my students in law school.
I agree with Bob re your writing style. To your point regarding weaknesses, I believe that my Biggest Weakness is that I don't know what my Biggest Weakness is. Perhaps it is better to be Unconciously Incompetent than be Conciously Incompetent about the wrong thing?
Seriously, always thought provoking Nate. Thanks
Good Stuff! Thanks for posting!
Love your stuff! It seems like good coaches talk about this specific aspect (with various angles and analogies) but 90% of the streamers, youtubers, authors, do not.
(BTW NM Dan Heisman has a great analogy describing the difference between your stage 3 and stage 4: We all know how to calculate 7x6 (it's 7+7+7+7+7+7), but *none* of us do it this way -- rather, we all know (because we've memorized) that 7x6=42. Same thing with the "chunks" of which you speak.
To elaborate, puzzles serve two functions -- and this is rarely talked about. One is to practice calculation (your stage 3) but another is to memorize patterns/chunks (your stage 4). E.g., we all can see a bank rate mate-in-1 in less than a second. Almost all of us can see the Nxc7 king-rook fork in a second.
And so, doing simple puzzle books (like the famous Bain book, or the new Giannatos book) should be looked at as *recognizing* patterns, rather than learning how to calculate. In other words, learning those chunks to get from stage 3 to stage 4. My two cents.
Nice article!
Very insightful. I overloaded myself with different skill improvement (tactics, endgame, motifs. mate in 2 and 3) and at the end it was just frustrating. Now I focus on one simple skill (Clearence patterns for example) which has the most development potential.