Because of time constraints, I opted to take only half of
the test ( first 50 problems) in IM Khmelnitsky’s Chess Exam and training
guide. I used a spread sheet to tally the score and adjust for the 50% portion.
After making these adjustments and checking the percentiles, I highlighted the
4 weakest areas in order of priority:
-Tactics
-Recognizing threats
- Middle Game
- Openings
I scored rather well ( relative to my current rating) in Counter Attacks, Standard Positions and
endgames. Falling in the middle ground
were, Calculations, Sacrifice, Attack and strategy.
I wasn’t all that surprised to see the low score with
tactics but it was very discouraging to see such a low score given I’m a
disciple of the MDLM ( Michael De La Maza) circles training having done the 7 circles of
hell method ( aka Knight’s Errant) 4 times since 2007. For those not familiar with the “circles”
method, you start with a set of problems, either with a book, website or
program and work through all of them 7 times each. The idea is to cram as many
patterns into memory as possible so you become better at pattern recognition
and less reliant on calculation.
The problem I have is memory. Some problems stand out more
than others. When it comes to doing tactical problems, it’s as if I have chess Alzheimer’s
and each time I see the problem, it’s like I am solving it for the first time,
OVER and OVER again. For me, part of this issue has to do with a short term
memory incapable of handling “chunking” patterns into my active playing region.
Scoring better in the counter attack seems counter intuitive
if you group counter attacking in a more general category like tactics. Counter
attacking is a defense mechanism. The
position is already under an attack, and I have much practice in playing the
underdog. The reason I can recall these “patterns”
is because I’ve already mapped this to my long term memory through practical experience. Memory markers
made from a fight for survival scenario in a game has a longer lasting effect
than static tactical problems. The
emotional struggle fighting with the logic of the moves creates a lasting
narrative that I can then retrieve when that SAME EMOTION is triggered.
Engames and Strategy being in the upper middle is an indication
of the pawn structure analysis I labored through to understand. These are
reinforced more in practical play in my games as I struggle with the strategy
of positional games. The memory markers for these are also emotional based. This
is not as much of a fear trigger as it is more of an annoyance or discomfort trigger.
With pawn structures and endgames, usually there is goal I’m trying to make, but my opponent will
either annoy me, or make me very happy. The struggle of working through the annoyance
creates another one of those illogical memory markers for me that resonates a “
I’ve ran into this petulance before, what did I do then?”
Recognizing key chess patterns through emotional responses is a way I can unlock my memory mapping of
the concepts in this game that seems to be just out of grasp. Its an internal
narrative that acts like a director on a movie set shouting “ CUT! Bring in the
action double.” Finding the key
narrative is similar to unlocking learning a new language. Once it’s practiced
out, it eventually moves from the long term memory to more of a motor memory and
thus becomes a bonafide skill. Until
then, I can only expect to be a novice/ amateur.
The question now becomes, how can I train my tactics in a
way that creates an emotional struggle
to resolve ? I’ve tried to approach this
in the past from looking at practical
applications of typical tactics in my games. Setting up my own problem set from
my games was only marginally successful. Though, to be honest, it was a pain in
the ass to set up and I lost motivation building the data base. I looked for
short cuts to build up a problem set based my openings and related traps.
Some of those things seemed to work for me as long I
practiced them before the an event, but then again, I always seem to over
prepare for the rare chances and under prepare for the curve balls always
thrown. This always came back to “annoyance” and the need to resolve that
struggle.
I am searching, and open to new techniques for tactical
training that may improve my chances of actually recognizing these in practice.
