playing is more important than studying, hanging a pieces is not a thing u can study, about the percentage, dont know, I mostly play but on rare occasions I watch a game and I find advanced ideas or themes, hence I should watch more games or study them but I still favour playing because Its what I enjoy most and I like to find the ideas on my own, but its true that if u study the games u may find a faster growth as a player, so that u dont have to reinvent the wheel, but even if u dont study like me because frankly I dont, u still can learn something if u do face strong opposition because they may have studied the game so even if u have not studied the game u can play against players that have studied, so somehow u get the idea right
playing against strong opposition which I dont because I play casual to have fun its almost like studying the game but in a tick tack scenario, more sportive.
I think because ironically today I have overviewed a game of capablanca, I think that studying gives u also a sense of beauty,
its well spent time because u are looking at good oves already instead of finding them urself, so even if u dont study the game u can get the feeling of the arrangement of pieces or the pawn
structure, It can be very well spent time, I am more into overwieving games than studying just a fast look of five minutes or so because Its what I like, I dont like to spend two hours beating my head against a line or subvariation or whatever but maybe thats why I am not a strong player, I dont think I would be strong player either even if I did that because I think chess is a lot about personal ability applied knowledge because u may study the game but then if u dont see the fork in the game, hence what?
best thing is to spend time on chess, if u are gonna spend 3 hours playing vs one studying then playing, because u might buy a book of chess and then dont read it so the idea is to know urself in that regards, I know I can play a lot because I like playing but studying I ll probably get bored fast.
I think the better the player the more he has to study
for example kramnik spent a great deal of time preparing the Berlin defence against the kasparov, but why would I study the berlin defence if my opponent is not gonna play the mainline,I would still learn some things no, anyway but u get the idea,
its mostly about precision the better u are the more u have to study because precision is requiered but still there is room so
dont know.
It also depence what u study because its not the same to study rook endgames than to study an a3 or opening or a surpise weapon, the first is more fundamental, studying can be good but it may be addictive, but so its playing.
If you know how to play, then to progress, focus on quality (Knowledge), not quantity (Games). If you can explain the reason for every chess move, then you can help others to progress.
Progress does not have a limit. The horizon is my limit. It takes time to progress to any level of play.
Beginners play well with rules of thumb. As I progressed I tried to hone my studies to understand more about the underlying principles of chess. I started questioning principles, like why knights before bishops?
The quantity of time spent studying is probably going to be the same as any other school subject. It is hard to progress without a lesson plan. Many will need hands on to learn.
As I progressed in chess, I picked up good and bad chess habits. I now believe it's my bad chess habits, that are limiting my progress.
Potential (undeveloped ability) is required to progress. Our abilities are different, so will the results. To get results, a person must find time to apply what they learned, before they forget it.
So practice what you learned until it is assimilated.
That’s the optimum ratio.
Well im sturggling,since i dont really how to "study"games
yeah it may be difficult start maybe with morphy
even if u dont study it u may get an awe feeling.
I mean,how do u guys study games-in which way do im prove by doing so?
I think its rather difficult to be true, first thing that comes to mind its that u have two options, either study the game by urself ur own mind, or use an engine.
I think first option is better, much much better, which is the old fashioned one, things like reading books and so, like boby fischer
because by relying too much on engines u see the moves but u become lazy, now I dont study chess games I only skip or watch youtube videos sometimes in a while but if I were gonna study chess games I would do it the old fashioned way, even with a physical board and spending some time, even minutes on each move, so thinking my variations and so,
I think good studying its almost like semiblindfolded chess
its demanding thats why I dont do it because for me chess is relaxing or I want it to be relaxing but if u put effort in the board u get a lot of compensation feedback its very rich in ideas
u have to stop into a position and explore it until it develops like a tree and u can spend a lot of time, thats why they play correspondence, u might want to try that variation or time control because that gives u time to think and understand the position fully, because there are a lot of positions which are +0. -0.2 which is like 0 on a blitz game, it has more weight the time
if u get profound if u get into the detail chess its very amazing and its very demanding but its not blitz, there is something in blitz which is almost like a contradiction, once the time constraints are more important than the value of the position
chess loses its charm of its tiny accuracy and it becomes more like eh an aggresive fast endeavour like a race of cars but the subtle thing which is really chess, its only in the long time controls, hence to study pure chess, u have to stop into the position and spend a great deal of time, without hurry easier said than done, but I think its a matter of practice, custom, habit, u see if u only play blitz u think blitz is ok but as soon as u spend some time in a long game and then u go back to blitz
its like u are missing the whole thing, like u are looking chess very far away, because a good chess player should spend half an hour deciding whether to trade or not to trade a piece
or even a week, chess used to be played without time scramble without time control and since ur question is about study which is a question of knowledge rather than a question of winning
then u should treat chess in the old way take one game and spend a week with it for example, so that u have time to see the variations, whether its a marshall attack an accelerated dragon or whatever, because in every game of chess u have a lot of games if u look carefully then u see the game unfolding, keeping the queens, trading them, what type of minor piece endgame, I think fischer was right in that regards
blitz chess kills ur ideas, it may be good as part of training but its not the real thing.
didnt answer my question
how to study games, by playing them on ur head with slow time controls as simple as that, and u can use database, books or engines but thats secondary.
