How do YOU Study Chess ??

@ThunderClap said in #30:
> "Learning The Lines" ,,, Is That all you think Studying is ?
No I just don't really know what you mean sorry I'm just a very lowly average player I mean I do the daily training once a day.I'm not meaning to upset you. I think what I'm saying is it's better to have fun and enjoy your level than be a bored GM xxx ignorance is bliss in chess xxx

I'm going to make a Chess Book recommendation for you that you will Enjoy ... A Suetin is the author & the book is Plan Like A GM which is a collection of many games that are very Short & you will see the mistakes made & the brilliant moves to enjoy but also Learn From ... Enjoy ... The book has alot of words also which is nice

@ThunderClap said in #32:
> I'm going to make a Chess Book recommendation for you that you will Enjoy ... A Suetin is the author & the book is Plan Like A GM which is a collection of many games that are very Short & you will see the mistakes made & the brilliant moves to enjoy but also Learn From ... Enjoy ... The book has alot of words also which is nice
Thankyou, I've not read a chess book ever but I'll ask my girlfriend to get it for my 50th next month better be better than a bottle of vodka xxx

I agree that learning to improve just for improving might seem empty. I understand though that others might not.
But studying chess is not just about wanting to win. There are many ways.

I also agree that GM games, by their conservatism (and the fact that they are tournament context), do not have enough accidents in them to really be informative for levels that are not competitive focussed, let's say amateur chess.

I don't think that amateur chess is less worthy, we may want to keep at that level, because we enjoy chess and want to keep it that way, instead of being forced to always use best move no matter what, or avoid unknown adventures.

It is not the draw aspect though that i find boring, but the duration of the opening conventions, and the subtlelty beyond my perception for too long a depth. I don't think one can learn from perfect examples, not enough information, if not near that level already (by perhfect I best human level).

It may be nice to get exposed once is a while to see what it out of our reach and confort us in wanting shorter sequences with more accidents to see how the legos fit or don't fit together.

but studying is certainly never going to be about looking at solo mainlines for me, and not long ones. I would rather doodle on many puzzles. yet I do think I do some study. maybe not tournament prep. but some journey in chess land... by practice more than examples from others though.

Edit: when I look at GM games (or famous games more), I get the sense that all the information is in what is not being played. that one ought to be in the heads of the players, not looking at the mainline leftover. So I would rather do my own in the face thinking than guessing some invisible one... maybe i am wrong.

Thanks to ALL who responded ... Maybe ALL of us can change the way we Study Chess so it's good to see what others do >>> Never have i been to Chessable site for instance but I did visit an Endgame only site once ... these sites are interesting & everything seems helpful as long as it's done & not just thought about doing or being done ... Study Play Play Study Balance it out a bit' heh'

I'm playing at least 1 game a day (usually Rapid 15/10 on Lichess or Chess.com) and spend time after analysing. I compliment this with tactics training (either a book on tactics, puzzle rush and Aimchess is good) and also watch YT videos - a favourite at the moment is Building Habits on Chessbrah Extra.

Although I'm slowly improving I get tunnel vision on a 'plan'. I really REALLY need to re-evaluate after every move. I won my last game BUT missed a hanging rook AND a mate in one!

I am not strong. Maybe my opinion is not important. But i believe my modest rating is not due to my talent or training, but more to serious health problem.

3 books i highly recommend :

-Chess for zebras (Rawson)
-Seven deadly chess sins (Rawson)
-Move first think later.

Opening : important to get chessbase (at ur level). Create a deep and reliable repertoire.

Analyse : maybe create PGN files full or ur mistakes ? Go and searching for metacognition ?

But the think Rawson advices is to work on concrete positions at training with serious difficulty.

Depends on your training, but personally I think I've learned the most from analyzing games in the computer.

Wow, these 3 are actually close to my top 3! And I know really many!

Either way: tons of practice, practice > theory.

@PolishPeople said in #37:
> I am not strong. Maybe my opinion is not important. But i believe my modest rating is not due to my talent or training, but more to serious health problem.
>
> 3 books i highly recommend :
>
> -Chess for zebras (Rawson)
> -Seven deadly chess sins (Rawson)
> -Move first think later.
>
> Opening : important to get chessbase (at ur level). Create a deep and reliable repertoire.
>
> Analyse : maybe create PGN files full or ur mistakes ? Go and searching for metacognition ?