Main
Date: 06 May 2005 15:17:38
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
The 1/x rule is simple: the value of chess study is worth 1/x, with x
representing the move number of the game. Move #1 is worth 1 point, move #2
is 0.5 points, move #3 is 0.33 points, and so forth.

What this means is simple: for any given player, the quickest way to improve
is to extend your opening repretoire one or more moves further out. The
first blunder is the costliest, and most world champions outbooked their
opponents.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.






 
Date: 09 May 2005 19:56:45
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
[Egregious cross-post trimmed]

Ray Gordon <[email protected] > wrote:
> The 1/x rule is simple: the value of chess study is worth 1/x, with x
> representing the move number of the game. Move #1 is worth 1 point,
> move #2 is 0.5 points, move #3 is 0.33 points, and so forth.

This is patent nonsense. Firstly, it suggests that studying anything in
the middlegame or endgame is practically worthless. Secondly, it suggests
that the decision of whether to play 1.e4, 1.d4, 1.c4 or something else is
the single most significant part of a chess game.


Dave.

--
David Richerby Revolting Dish (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ fine ceramic dish but it'll turn
your stomach!


  
Date: 10 May 2005 07:40:45
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
>> The 1/x rule is simple: the value of chess study is worth 1/x, with x
>> representing the move number of the game. Move #1 is worth 1 point,
>> move #2 is 0.5 points, move #3 is 0.33 points, and so forth.
>
> This is patent nonsense. Firstly, it suggests that studying anything in
> the middlegame or endgame is practically worthless.

It is, until the opening has been perfected.

>Secondly, it suggests
> that the decision of whether to play 1.e4, 1.d4, 1.c4 or something else is
> the single most significant part of a chess game.

It is, until it is played.

Every game has a first move.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.




   
Date: 10 May 2005 16:05:44
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
Ray Gordon <[email protected] > wrote:
> Every game has a first move.

Well spotted. Now demonstrate how your argument differs in structure from
the following false syllogism.

``Every game of chess includes pawn moves but not every game ends in
checkmate. Therefore, it is more important to move pawns than to
deliver checkmate.''


Dave.

--
David Richerby Old-Fashioned Painting (TM): it's
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a Renaissance masterpiece but
it's perfect for your grandparents!


 
Date: 07 May 2005 01:35:07
From: Error Flink
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
Just recently I have rejoined rgcm,rgcc after a long break.Your name,
rating (which I read about not earlier than 3 minutes ago) or whatever
has not at all affected my opinion about this 1/x idea. We don't have
to agree about it. When you are happy with that concept still, stick to
it. We cannot do much more than to express our doubts. Peace. :-)



 
Date: 06 May 2005 23:56:57
From: Don't Spam Me
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule

Ray Gordon wrote:
> Pay my entry fee, otherwise I'll keep training with machines.

LOL. It'll be a cold day in hell before I pay your entry fee.



 
Date: 06 May 2005 18:34:26
From: Error Flink
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
Chess in practise isn't science, it's a game. Best theory can, in
average (since the opponent usually isn't a fool either), give you +/=
with White at best before you must start to think. Then chess begins
with all kinds of challenges from the early middle game to maybe the
late endgame. There, you win, draw or lose. So what...

Forget 1/x, or do you study if 1.e4 or 1.d4 is stronger? :-) My really
honest advise, forget it quickly. Study the openings, it's good, but
trash 1/x. If it was good, opening theory dudes would have mentioned it
once or twice, since Ruy Lopez' days. Nobody did. Do you think you can
invent the wheel in chess opening theory?



  
Date: 07 May 2005 08:02:03
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
> Chess in practise isn't science, it's a game.

It's one big geometry equation.


>Best theory can, in
> average (since the opponent usually isn't a fool either), give you +/=
> with White at best before you must start to think.

That leaves Black one mistake away from disaster and White one mistake away
from equality.


>Then chess begins
> with all kinds of challenges from the early middle game to maybe the
> late endgame.

The "early middlegame" is just a long opening, and the "early endgame" is
just a large tablebase.

>There, you win, draw or lose. So what...
>
> Forget 1/x, or do you study if 1.e4 or 1.d4 is stronger? :-) My really
> honest advise, forget it quickly. Study the openings, it's good, but
> trash 1/x. If it was good, opening theory dudes would have mentioned it
> once or twice, since Ruy Lopez' days. Nobody did. Do you think you can
> invent the wheel in chess opening theory?

I've studied enough opening theory that I can innovate, and have.

All you're saying is that you judge ideas by who speaks them.


--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.




 
Date: 06 May 2005 17:35:54
From: TheGarageSailor
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
I think the most important thing to study is end games. If you can
play a perfect openning, and you can't mate you cannot win.



  
Date: 07 May 2005 02:00:47
From: Morphy's ghost
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
In the year of our Lord 6 May 2005 17:35:54 -0700, "TheGarageSailor"
<[email protected] > wrote:

>I think the most important thing to study is end games. If you can
>play a perfect openning, and you can't mate you cannot win.
>
I really tend to think that you should not concentrate on just the
opening, the middle or the end. You need all of it to play a full
game.


Truth can never be told so as to be understood, and not be
believ'd.-- William Blake


   
Date: 09 May 2005 21:19:00
From: Harold Buck
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
In article <[email protected] >,
[email protected] (Morphy's ghost) wrote:

> In the year of our Lord 6 May 2005 17:35:54 -0700, "TheGarageSailor"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >I think the most important thing to study is end games. If you can
> >play a perfect openning, and you can't mate you cannot win.
> >
> I really tend to think that you should not concentrate on just the
> opening, the middle or the end. You need all of it to play a full
> game.


Actually, this is a silly argument: opening, middlegame, endgame . . . .

Really, the most important moves are 1, 3, 9, 13, 17, 18, 23, 41, and 56.

--Harold Buck


"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson


    
Date: 09 May 2005 22:34:59
From: Chris F.A. Johnson
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
On Tue, 10 May 2005 at 02:19 GMT, Harold Buck wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Morphy's ghost) wrote:
>
>> In the year of our Lord 6 May 2005 17:35:54 -0700, "TheGarageSailor"
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >I think the most important thing to study is end games. If you can
>> >play a perfect openning, and you can't mate you cannot win.
>> >
>> I really tend to think that you should not concentrate on just the
>> opening, the middle or the end. You need all of it to play a full
>> game.
>
> Actually, this is a silly argument: opening, middlegame, endgame . . . .
>
> Really, the most important moves are 1, 3, 9, 13, 17, 18, 23, 41, and 56.

Only in open games; in Q-side openings 10, 11, and 12 are far more
important than 9 and 13.

--
Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org >
==================================================================
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach, 2005, Apress
<http://www.torfree.net/~chris/books/ssr.html >


  
Date: 07 May 2005 00:39:44
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
>I think the most important thing to study is end games. If you can
> play a perfect openning, and you can't mate you cannot win.

Play against a supercomputer and see if you even get to an endgame.

I love it when people try to refute the 1/x rule.


--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.




 
Date: 06 May 2005 15:06:56
From: Don't Spam Me
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
Ray Gordon wrote:
> > En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:
> >> (...)
> >> I play at around a 2200-2300 level now. What do you call
"modest?"
> >> (...)
> >
> > That 2200 rating you have is FIDE rating? ... The strongest Ray
Gordon I
> > can find is a player who was rated 1702 in ICC last year.
>
> I hit 2050 on Playchess and now train with 2900-level computers (that
I have
> beaten with Black). I recently played some games against FIDE 2200+,
and
> was holding a solid plus score.
>
> My USCF rating is 1900.

12482187: GORDON R PARKER
Regular Rating 1900 1990-01

Play in some OTB tournaments, or you'll be relegated as a Mig copycat
(who claimed a 2300 rating and has a USCF rating U2000).

When you do play, be sure to have some excuses ready, just like Mig did.



  
Date: 07 May 2005 00:36:26
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
>> I hit 2050 on Playchess and now train with 2900-level computers (that
> I have
>> beaten with Black). I recently played some games against FIDE 2200+,
> and
>> was holding a solid plus score.
>>
>> My USCF rating is 1900.
>
> Regular Rating 1900 1990-01

Yes, it hit the floor right before I quit. It was hovering near 2000 and
had hit 2000 before that. There's no financial incentive to lose
eligibility.


> Play in some OTB tournaments,

Pay my entry fee, otherwise I'll keep training with machines.

>or you'll be relegated as a Mig copycat
> (who claimed a 2300 rating and has a USCF rating U2000).
>
> When you do play, be sure to have some excuses ready, just like Mig did.

You'd be the one needing them.

I see most players are still lazy on their own, and jealous of those who
work hard. Glad to see that never changes.

I train like a motherfucker these days and am probably the hardest-working
player in the US once again. It'll be nice to know wherever I wind up that
so many people were so supportive all along.

Be thankful I'll "never" make it to the world championship, because it'd be
a cold day in hell before I ever represent this country in chess for
anything.


--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.




   
Date: 07 May 2005 11:09:23
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:
>>> I hit 2050 on Playchess and now train with 2900-level computers
>>> (that I have beaten with Black).
>>> I recently played some games against FIDE 2200+, and
>>> was holding a solid plus score.
>>>
>>> My USCF rating is 1900.
>>
>> Regular Rating 1900 1990-01
>
> Yes, it hit the floor right before I quit. It was hovering near 2000 and
> had hit 2000 before that. There's no financial incentive to lose
> eligibility.
>
>> Play in some OTB tournaments,
>> or you'll be relegated as a Mig copycat
>> (who claimed a 2300 rating and has a USCF rating U2000).
>> When you do play, be sure to have some excuses ready, just like Mig did.
>
> You'd be the one needing them.
>
> I see most players are still lazy on their own, and jealous of those who
> work hard. Glad to see that never changes.
>
> I train like a motherfucker these days and am probably the hardest-working
> player in the US once again. It'll be nice to know wherever I wind up that
> so many people were so supportive all along.
>
> Be thankful I'll "never" make it to the world championship, because it'd be
> a cold day in hell before I ever represent this country in chess for
> anything.

Yeahhhh, ... I find very strange to improve your level with no games
with stronger human opposition in OTB chess. I find incredible to pass
from 1700-1900 to a "suposed 2300" mainly playing 2900 computers. (I
think it's needed less difference to be able to learn something).

Can you convince me you are not a liar showing here some of your wins
with 2900 computers and those games you won 2400 FIDE players??

thanks
AT



    
Date: 07 May 2005 23:24:30
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
En/na Antonio Torrecillas ha escrit:
> En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:
>> I see most players are still lazy on their own, and jealous of those
>> who work hard. Glad to see that never changes.
>>
>> I train like a motherfucker these days and am probably the
>> hardest-working player in the US once again. It'll be nice to know
>> wherever I wind up that so many people were so supportive all along.
>>
>> Be thankful I'll "never" make it to the world championship, because
>> it'd be a cold day in hell before I ever represent this country in
>> chess for anything.
>
> Yeahhhh, ... I find very strange to improve your level with no games
> with stronger human opposition in OTB chess. I find incredible to pass
> from 1700-1900 to a "suposed 2300" mainly playing 2900 computers. (I
> think it's needed less difference to be able to learn something).
>
> Can you convince me you are not a liar showing here some of your wins
> with 2900 computers and those games you won 2400 FIDE players??
>
> thanks
> AT

That last sentence sounds impolite, I mean "Can you convince me you are
not wrong feeling you are actually 2200-2300 showing here ...?"

AT



   
Date: 07 May 2005 03:25:17
From: John J.
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule

"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>>> I hit 2050 on Playchess and now train with 2900-level computers (that
>> I have
>>> beaten with Black). I recently played some games against FIDE 2200+,
>> and
>>> was holding a solid plus score.
>>>
>>> My USCF rating is 1900.
>>
>> Regular Rating 1900 1990-01
>
> Yes, it hit the floor right before I quit. It was hovering near 2000 and
> had hit 2000 before that. There's no financial incentive to lose
> eligibility.
>
>
>> Play in some OTB tournaments,
>
> "Pay my entry fee, otherwise I'll keep training with machines."

What are you training for? Are you going to eventually play in OTB
tournaments?



>
>>or you'll be relegated as a Mig copycat
>> (who claimed a 2300 rating and has a USCF rating U2000).
>>
>> When you do play, be sure to have some excuses ready, just like Mig did.
>
> You'd be the one needing them.

Who's Mig?

>
> I see most players are still lazy on their own, and jealous of those who
> work hard. Glad to see that never changes.
>
> I train like a motherfucker these days and am probably the hardest-working
> player in the US once again.

Are you and Sam Sloan related?



It'll be nice to know wherever I wind up that
> so many people were so supportive all along.

You really can't blame folks for questioning your statements. There is no
shortage of folks out there who claim to play better than their rating
indicates.

Regarding your 1/x theory, I would venture to say that unless your a high
expert or above player the most bang for your buck is concentrating on
tactics..I've got a book full of GM and IM quotes which support the tactics
theory...



>
> Be thankful I'll "never" make it to the world championship, because it'd
> be a cold day in hell before I ever represent this country in chess for
> anything.

What did the US ever do to you?

John


>
>
> --
> Ray Gordon, Author
> http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
> Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women
>
> http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
> Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion
>
> Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.
>




    
Date: 07 May 2005 08:17:22
From: Ron
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
In article <[email protected] >,
"John J." <[email protected] > wrote:

> Regarding your 1/x theory, I would venture to say that unless your a high
> expert or above player the most bang for your buck is concentrating on
> tactics..I've got a book full of GM and IM quotes which support the tactics
> theory...

Isn't the "1/x theory" basically refuted by the fact that it's
impossible to lose a game on the first move?

-Ron


 
Date: 06 May 2005 14:54:45
From: Mr. Wizard
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
Maybe there is some truth to this 1/X stuff. Wasn't it Bobby Fisher
who said:"e4 I win".



  
Date: 06 May 2005 22:48:33
From: Morphy's ghost
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
In the year of our Lord 6 May 2005 14:54:45 -0700, "Mr. Wizard"
<[email protected] > wrote:

>Maybe there is some truth to this 1/X stuff. Wasn't it Bobby Fisher
>who said:"e4 I win".
>
LOL.

I'm still convinced that Weaver Adams was right and that the Vienna is
a forced win for White.




What is now proved was once, only imagin'd. -- William Blake


   
Date: 07 May 2005 00:39:14
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
>>Maybe there is some truth to this 1/X stuff. Wasn't it Bobby Fisher
>>who said:"e4 I win".
>>
> LOL.
>
> I'm still convinced that Weaver Adams was right and that the Vienna is
> a forced win for White.

Actually, chess is a forced win for BLACK because White is in Zugzwang.


--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.




 
Date: 06 May 2005 13:21:31
From: Error Flink
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
There is no refutation of 1.g4. Also, my practise has provided my an
edge for White after 1.e4 c5 2.e5?!, in average.

Theory is way overestimated. Practical strength and creativity is much
more. - Of course, studying traditional openings and learning some
variants, is absolutely required for the advanced player. It's just no
guarantee for good scores.



  
Date: 07 May 2005 00:38:10
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
> There is no refutation of 1.g4. Also, my practise has provided my an
> edge for White after 1.e4 c5 2.e5?!, in average.

Your practice and chess theory are two separate things.


> Theory is way overestimated.

So is science. Why on earth do they use it so much in our everyday lives?
Can't they just GUESS if a building is structurally sound?

>Practical strength and creativity is much
> more. -

Chess is a finite game. What you call "creativity" is actually "ignorance."

>Of course, studying traditional openings and learning some
> variants, is absolutely required for the advanced player. It's just no
> guarantee for good scores.

In and of itself, obviously one must be a complete player, but for any level
of study, openings will yield more rating points.

The 1/x rule applies.


--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.




 
Date: 06 May 2005 09:53:49
From: Error Flink
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
1/x is stupid. How can White blunder in the very first move? So, move
no. 1 cannot be worth the most.

I like to play, for example 1.e4 c5 2.e5?!. That's what I call
"outbook" :-)) Opponents with a 100.000 moves repertoire make stupid
faces confronted with that. Years of intensive memorizing worthless
after a small movement of my fingers.



  
Date: 06 May 2005 19:39:53
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
> 1/x is stupid. How can White blunder in the very first move?

1. g4?

The first move is the *most important* move.


So, move
> no. 1 cannot be worth the most.
>
> I like to play, for example 1.e4 c5 2.e5?!.

The "blunder" is giving Black equality at move two.

>That's what I call
> "outbook" :-)) Opponents with a 100.000 moves repertoire make stupid
> faces confronted with that.

Sharp opening players will eat that stuff for breakfast.

>Years of intensive memorizing worthless
> after a small movement of my fingers.

Not worthless if it chases you into playing weak moves like that as White.
I see so much garbage when I play on the servers that I begin mistaking them
for main lines and study them with the same depth.


--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.




   
Date: 06 May 2005 22:38:40
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:

>>1/x is stupid. How can White blunder in the very first move?
>
> 1. g4?
>
> The first move is the *most important* move.
>
>
> So, move

That shows you can not find any worse 1st move,

... sure you can find moves in 20th move who lead to self mate or lose
important material, ... that shows 1st move is not so important!!

AT



    
Date: 07 May 2005 00:38:42
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
>> So, move
>
> That shows you can not find any worse 1st move,
>
> ... sure you can find moves in 20th move who lead to self mate or lose
> important material, ... that shows 1st move is not so important!!

It is in terms of dictating what happens after that.





   
Date: 06 May 2005 20:01:28
From: Morphy's ghost
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
In the year of our Lord Fri, 06 May 2005 19:39:53 GMT, "Ray Gordon"
<[email protected] > wrote:

>> 1/x is stupid. How can White blunder in the very first move?
>
>1. g4?
>
>The first move is the *most important* move.

Any single move is meaningless. Play a computer set to analyze 2 ply
ahead and find out just how little one move means. What matters is
the plan behind the move, whether the player has evaluated the
relative worths of possible plans correctly, and whether the opponent
has recognized them and has an ability to interfere with their
development or execute a more devastating plan.
>
>



As the air to a bird or the sea to a fish, so is contempt to the
contemptible. -- William Blake


    
Date: 06 May 2005 20:11:37
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
>>> 1/x is stupid. How can White blunder in the very first move?
>>
>>1. g4?
>>
>>The first move is the *most important* move.
>
> Any single move is meaningless. Play a computer set to analyze 2 ply
> ahead and find out just how little one move means. What matters is
> the plan behind the move, whether the player has evaluated the
> relative worths of possible plans correctly, and whether the opponent
> has recognized them and has an ability to interfere with their
> development or execute a more devastating plan.

For any given position, there is usually only one absolutely best move, even
if several others come close.


--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.




     
Date: 06 May 2005 20:17:13
From: Morphy's ghost
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
In the year of our Lord Fri, 06 May 2005 20:11:37 GMT, "Ray Gordon"
<[email protected] > wrote:

>>>> 1/x is stupid. How can White blunder in the very first move?
>>>
>>>1. g4?
>>>
>>>The first move is the *most important* move.
>>
>> Any single move is meaningless. Play a computer set to analyze 2 ply
>> ahead and find out just how little one move means. What matters is
>> the plan behind the move, whether the player has evaluated the
>> relative worths of possible plans correctly, and whether the opponent
>> has recognized them and has an ability to interfere with their
>> development or execute a more devastating plan.
>
>For any given position, there is usually only one absolutely best move, even
>if several others come close.

If that were the case, there would never be a "mate in 3." Face it,
the value of the move is determined by the moves that come AFTER it.
>
>
>--



What is now proved was once, only imagin'd. -- William Blake


 
Date: 06 May 2005 16:37:59
From: Lee Harris
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule

"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> The 1/x rule is simple: the value of chess study is worth 1/x, with x
> representing the move number of the game. Move #1 is worth 1 point, move
#2
> is 0.5 points, move #3 is 0.33 points, and so forth.
>
> What this means is simple: for any given player, the quickest way to
improve
> is to extend your opening repretoire one or more moves further out. The
> first blunder is the costliest, and most world champions outbooked their
> opponents.
>

as a player with fairly modest skills, I think you're talking rubbish to be
honest. What do you mean by worth? winning blitz games? beating players your
own level? improving to GM level? It seems pretty obvious to me that the 1st
blunders are not the costliest unless you are at a very high level, and for
more "normal" levels, the study of tactics seems to offer the best
improvement.




  
Date: 06 May 2005 18:31:20
From: Morphy's ghost
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
In the year of our Lord Fri, 6 May 2005 16:37:59 +0100, "Lee Harris"
<[email protected] > wrote:

>
>"Ray Gordon" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]
>> The 1/x rule is simple: the value of chess study is worth 1/x, with x
>> representing the move number of the game. Move #1 is worth 1 point, move
>#2
>> is 0.5 points, move #3 is 0.33 points, and so forth.
>>
>> What this means is simple: for any given player, the quickest way to
>improve
>> is to extend your opening repretoire one or more moves further out. The
>> first blunder is the costliest, and most world champions outbooked their
>> opponents.
>>
>
>as a player with fairly modest skills, I think you're talking rubbish to be
>honest. What do you mean by worth? winning blitz games? beating players your
>own level? improving to GM level? It seems pretty obvious to me that the 1st
>blunders are not the costliest unless you are at a very high level, and for
>more "normal" levels, the study of tactics seems to offer the best
>improvement.

It's a chess truism that it is not the first blunder that is the
costliest, but rather the last one.
>
>



The fox condemns the trap, not himself. -- William Blake


  
Date: 06 May 2005 15:44:26
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
>> representing the move number of the game. Move #1 is worth 1 point, move
> #2
>> is 0.5 points, move #3 is 0.33 points, and so forth.
>>
>> What this means is simple: for any given player, the quickest way to
> improve
>> is to extend your opening repretoire one or more moves further out. The
>> first blunder is the costliest, and most world champions outbooked their
>> opponents.
>>
>
> as a player with fairly modest skills, I think you're talking rubbish to
> be
> honest.

I play at around a 2200-2300 level now. What do you call "modest?"



>What do you mean by worth? winning blitz games? beating players your
> own level? improving to GM level?

*ding*ding*ding*!!


>It seems pretty obvious to me that the 1st
> blunders are not the costliest unless you are at a very high level,

How do you think they GET to that level? Do you think they just do
something else on the way and then magically learn how to punish one mistake
when they hit GM strength?

>and for
> more "normal" levels, the study of tactics seems to offer the best
> improvement.

It's not true improvement since you have to scrap the whole tactic once you
hit your ceiling.

Silman calls that "perfecting one's mediocrity."

The study of openings involves the study of all phases of the game. The
simple fact is that every game has a first move, so that move is the most
important one. If you happen to last for many moves, those moves become
important, but only as tiebreakers.

--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.




   
Date: 06 May 2005 18:33:34
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:
> (...)
> I play at around a 2200-2300 level now. What do you call "modest?"
> (...)

That 2200 rating you have is FIDE rating? ... The strongest Ray Gordon I
can find is a player who was rated 1702 in ICC last year.

> The study of openings involves the study of all phases of the game.

I agree ...

> The simple fact is that every game has a first move, ...

I agree ...

> ... so that move is the most important one.

Non sense for me, ... It's like cooking, the main moment is last one
just before all to be burned. (at leat in my case)

I think the most important moves seldom are the last ones.
I seldom resign after a blunder. :-)

AT



    
Date: 06 May 2005 19:43:30
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
> En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:
>> (...)
>> I play at around a 2200-2300 level now. What do you call "modest?"
>> (...)
>
> That 2200 rating you have is FIDE rating? ... The strongest Ray Gordon I
> can find is a player who was rated 1702 in ICC last year.

I hit 2050 on Playchess and now train with 2900-level computers (that I have
beaten with Black). I recently played some games against FIDE 2200+, and
was holding a solid plus score.

My USCF rating is 1900.


>> The study of openings involves the study of all phases of the game.
>
> I agree ...

Okay.


>> The simple fact is that every game has a first move, ...
>
> I agree ...

And....


>> ... so that move is the most important one.
>
> Non sense for me, ... It's like cooking, the main moment is last one just
> before all to be burned. (at leat in my case)

If you don't do everything leading up to that moment correct, it's not
important at all.

Hence the 1/x rule.


> I think the most important moves seldom are the last ones.
> I seldom resign after a blunder. :-)

I'm talking theoretically, as in what will give your game the greatest
boost. If that's something at move five rather than move one, it just means
you've already solved move one and moved on, not that move one is less
important.


--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women

http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion

Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.




     
Date: 09 May 2005 19:58:17
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
Ray Gordon <[email protected] > wrote:
>> En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:
>>> (...)
>>> I play at around a 2200-2300 level now. What do you call "modest?"
>>> (...)
>>
>> That 2200 rating you have is FIDE rating? ... The strongest Ray Gordon I
>> can find is a player who was rated 1702 in ICC last year.
>
> I hit 2050 on Playchess and now train with 2900-level computers (that I
> have beaten with Black). I recently played some games against FIDE
> 2200+, and was holding a solid plus score.

This is, presumably, at 3-minute games and faster. In games that fast,
memorizing opening lines deep into the middle game is much more
significant but you don't seem to realise this.


Dave.

--
David Richerby Cheese Gnome (TM): it's like a smiling
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ garden ornament that's made of cheese!


     
Date: 06 May 2005 19:53:44
From: John J.
Subject: Re: Train Like A Chess Champion: The 1/x rule
1900 is a far cry from 2300.

I can't find your 1900 rating on the USCF web site.

If you are indeed playng at a 2300 level I would suggest playing in the
World Open where you would make mincemeat out of the Under 2000 section and
win a cool $10,000. Or even better, the HBC tournament in MN where you could
win $20,000 !!!

John
"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>> En/na Ray Gordon ha escrit:
>>> (...)
>>> I play at around a 2200-2300 level now. What do you call "modest?"
>>> (...)
>>
>> That 2200 rating you have is FIDE rating? ... The strongest Ray Gordon I
>> can find is a player who was rated 1702 in ICC last year.
>
> I hit 2050 on Playchess and now train with 2900-level computers (that I
> have beaten with Black). I recently played some games against FIDE 2200+,
> and was holding a solid plus score.
>
> My USCF rating is 1900.
>
>
>>> The study of openings involves the study of all phases of the game.
>>
>> I agree ...
>
> Okay.
>
>
>>> The simple fact is that every game has a first move, ...
>>
>> I agree ...
>
> And....
>
>
>>> ... so that move is the most important one.
>>
>> Non sense for me, ... It's like cooking, the main moment is last one just
>> before all to be burned. (at leat in my case)
>
> If you don't do everything leading up to that moment correct, it's not
> important at all.
>
> Hence the 1/x rule.
>
>
>> I think the most important moves seldom are the last ones.
>> I seldom resign after a blunder. :-)
>
> I'm talking theoretically, as in what will give your game the greatest
> boost. If that's something at move five rather than move one, it just
> means you've already solved move one and moved on, not that move one is
> less important.
>
>
> --
> Ray Gordon, Author
> http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
> Four FREE books on how to get laid by beautiful women
>
> http://www.cybersheet.com/chess.html
> Free Chess E-book: Train Like A Chess Champion
>
> Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.
>