There are so many free ressources. There are so many good books that are far better and more affordable.
Many professional chess players often earn less than a cleaning lady.
Many professional chess players often earn less than a cleaning lady.
By the way, you can listen to my words of advice. It is here, it is free! :D
Dear chess friends.
I just whant to write some words about topic what you speak about....Of course are good and not so good( I don't use strong words as bad coaches) coaches.Like in every other work.But generalize for all, its simple not great.Even when you go to repair your car, you can find not good workers...I have this experience many times...So in every work are good and not so good workers..Also, simple if you are FM or Im or Gm this not mean that you can be good coach.For coach need a lot of other things..My advice to all, its first take small packeg 5-10 lessons as trial lessons, and than see if you like method, approach from coach...If you don't like simple search another coach...And pls not compare work only with the books or to hire coach...With coach you will improve very fast, and of course he will give you all direction to your progress(we speak for coaches who are professional and focus to job)
Wish you good chess carrier to all.
I just whant to write some words about topic what you speak about....Of course are good and not so good( I don't use strong words as bad coaches) coaches.Like in every other work.But generalize for all, its simple not great.Even when you go to repair your car, you can find not good workers...I have this experience many times...So in every work are good and not so good workers..Also, simple if you are FM or Im or Gm this not mean that you can be good coach.For coach need a lot of other things..My advice to all, its first take small packeg 5-10 lessons as trial lessons, and than see if you like method, approach from coach...If you don't like simple search another coach...And pls not compare work only with the books or to hire coach...With coach you will improve very fast, and of course he will give you all direction to your progress(we speak for coaches who are professional and focus to job)
Wish you good chess carrier to all.
If someone is a good chess player, it doesn't mean he / she is also a good chess coach. These two skills are absolutely different.. GM David Navarra said that you need someone who has excellent coaching skills with decent chess knowledge. It doesn't neccessary mean that he has to be 2300 ELO++.
@MissFortune
I agree but there are limits I would say. Normally your coach should be at least 2-3 classes better as his pupils. For example: A player with a stable Elo of 2000 should be able to teach players with 1700 Elo without problems. Above 1700 Elo its more a kind of a corporation (exchange of ideas and opening knowledge and so on) and not like a teacher is able to give you really new insights to bring you to next level.
Best is if you are a good teacher and strong as hell as well... ;-)
I agree but there are limits I would say. Normally your coach should be at least 2-3 classes better as his pupils. For example: A player with a stable Elo of 2000 should be able to teach players with 1700 Elo without problems. Above 1700 Elo its more a kind of a corporation (exchange of ideas and opening knowledge and so on) and not like a teacher is able to give you really new insights to bring you to next level.
Best is if you are a good teacher and strong as hell as well... ;-)
@Wild-Hunt
I agree with you on the point of structured learning - this is true for all pursuits. If one is serious, a structured approach helps to make quick and assured progress.
Perhaps, this is something that is not addressed by most coaches - and a template is offered. Let's work on your endings/openings/tactics etc. This can be frustrating for most learners.
Also, there is another point to learning chess.. there is a delicate balance between quick progress and real progress. Ex: Giving a narrow opening repertoire with splendid analysis for a rote learner will get quick progress (if the learner has a decent memory) but no grasp over chess itself
I think @Ucitel made an excellent point about taking trial lessons..talk to the person, check wavelength and approach before plunging in. This is practical advice for any learner.
I agree with you on the point of structured learning - this is true for all pursuits. If one is serious, a structured approach helps to make quick and assured progress.
Perhaps, this is something that is not addressed by most coaches - and a template is offered. Let's work on your endings/openings/tactics etc. This can be frustrating for most learners.
Also, there is another point to learning chess.. there is a delicate balance between quick progress and real progress. Ex: Giving a narrow opening repertoire with splendid analysis for a rote learner will get quick progress (if the learner has a decent memory) but no grasp over chess itself
I think @Ucitel made an excellent point about taking trial lessons..talk to the person, check wavelength and approach before plunging in. This is practical advice for any learner.
@Wild-Hunt "I would probably have reached the same level (or even better) if I had only studied books and DVDs by myself."
Agreed. At your level you can progress well without having a couch if you are dedicated enough to chess. Go to local chess club, play OTB tournaments as many as you can, solve tactics regularly and just use all free stuff from the net. All in all take the advice of CM @Sarg0n :)
Agreed. At your level you can progress well without having a couch if you are dedicated enough to chess. Go to local chess club, play OTB tournaments as many as you can, solve tactics regularly and just use all free stuff from the net. All in all take the advice of CM @Sarg0n :)
Let me answer as I know both sides.
If you want to get training from a coack you should know what you want.
1) If you want a curriculum you should explicitly search for someone offering it. "Personal lessons" are no curriculum. A trainer is no book and no teacher.
2) You do the "work", i.e. solving tactics, preparing your games for analysis, putting questions in preparation of the session, play training games.
3) Strength of the trainer matters. Strength and knowledge in chess are well correlated.
4) Analyzing your games is one of the best ways to detect your mistakes and get hints.
The trainer is a person. The trainer I had was for around 20 years 26xx on the FIDE list. When I came with a game it happened I had a question about a move he even didn't pay any attention to. This first puzzled me. I felt he didn't do this to offend me. He did it because he loved the game to much to look at such a catastrophe of a move. He only looked at somewhat reasonable moves with me in the position. I remarked this and learned really much from the sessions when this happened.
As youth trainer I remarked that people don't start working. I said: Analyze this game and come next week back to the club. We look at your question. Next week: I don't know how to do this. I said: Sit down, replay the moves and look if you have any questions. Till next week. Next week: I don't know how to do this.
Not having worked between training sessions is all right. Blaming oneself for not getting progress is all right then.
Having chosen the wrong trainer for you is all right. Write down your experience with a list, what you expect and hand it out to the next trainer before starting the training.
As trainer I offered several times (free) help in the web. I have stopped doing this as I met lack of politeness and sometimes complete unwillingness to look at the mistakes in the games by the trainees themselves.
A trainer review without naming the criteria and the appointments about the methods is not worth the energy spent displaying it. Look at the trainer reviews here and in the fora. Again it's up to you to do the work. If you don't like it don't blame training. Search another universe instead.
If you want to get training from a coack you should know what you want.
1) If you want a curriculum you should explicitly search for someone offering it. "Personal lessons" are no curriculum. A trainer is no book and no teacher.
2) You do the "work", i.e. solving tactics, preparing your games for analysis, putting questions in preparation of the session, play training games.
3) Strength of the trainer matters. Strength and knowledge in chess are well correlated.
4) Analyzing your games is one of the best ways to detect your mistakes and get hints.
The trainer is a person. The trainer I had was for around 20 years 26xx on the FIDE list. When I came with a game it happened I had a question about a move he even didn't pay any attention to. This first puzzled me. I felt he didn't do this to offend me. He did it because he loved the game to much to look at such a catastrophe of a move. He only looked at somewhat reasonable moves with me in the position. I remarked this and learned really much from the sessions when this happened.
As youth trainer I remarked that people don't start working. I said: Analyze this game and come next week back to the club. We look at your question. Next week: I don't know how to do this. I said: Sit down, replay the moves and look if you have any questions. Till next week. Next week: I don't know how to do this.
Not having worked between training sessions is all right. Blaming oneself for not getting progress is all right then.
Having chosen the wrong trainer for you is all right. Write down your experience with a list, what you expect and hand it out to the next trainer before starting the training.
As trainer I offered several times (free) help in the web. I have stopped doing this as I met lack of politeness and sometimes complete unwillingness to look at the mistakes in the games by the trainees themselves.
A trainer review without naming the criteria and the appointments about the methods is not worth the energy spent displaying it. Look at the trainer reviews here and in the fora. Again it's up to you to do the work. If you don't like it don't blame training. Search another universe instead.
@gbtami
The question is how far @Wild-Hunt would have travelled with a good trainer in the same time. There is a medical proverb you should take with a little pinch of salt: A flu lasts two weeks. If you get the help of a good physician it is 14 days, if it is a bad one it is 21 days. But that's not the reason all countries try to establish a youth couch system. Ask yourself why.
@Sarg0n has some very special hints to weaker players again and again. You should countercheck them before sticking to them. [No offense intended.]
The question is how far @Wild-Hunt would have travelled with a good trainer in the same time. There is a medical proverb you should take with a little pinch of salt: A flu lasts two weeks. If you get the help of a good physician it is 14 days, if it is a bad one it is 21 days. But that's not the reason all countries try to establish a youth couch system. Ask yourself why.
@Sarg0n has some very special hints to weaker players again and again. You should countercheck them before sticking to them. [No offense intended.]
Why do people feel the need to defend bad coaching? Would you defend a martial arts instructor who gives their students a false sense of reality? Any decent human being would EXPOSE them. I remember as a kid my TKD instructor showing us moves to disarm a knife wielding assailant. He had this rubber knife we would take turns holding while we got roundhouse kicked and elbowed. GIVE ME A BREAK! I've seen kids be set up for failure due to poor chess instruction. I am NOT calling out any individual on lichess. I'm just saying there are definitely guys out there that have no business teaching. Titled players included.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.