We all understand the meaning of learning from our mistakes, but what if what is working for us is wrong?
When we play chess in a rating system we most often play against players in our own category with about a 50% win rate.
When a player tries to play a category above what works stops working, so that means that our conception of what is good is wrong and we need another way of evaluating what we are considering 'good'.
Those 50% good is wrong, and those 50% bad is bad too... A player, if you can understand me, is 100% wrong (lol!?)
That 'pun' dont matter too much... My question is:
"What if we work on our conception of what we consider good?"
When we play chess in a rating system we most often play against players in our own category with about a 50% win rate.
When a player tries to play a category above what works stops working, so that means that our conception of what is good is wrong and we need another way of evaluating what we are considering 'good'.
Those 50% good is wrong, and those 50% bad is bad too... A player, if you can understand me, is 100% wrong (lol!?)
That 'pun' dont matter too much... My question is:
"What if we work on our conception of what we consider good?"