Controversial Thoughts (Abbreviated)

by Mark Dvoretsky

1. Components of success

Mikhail Botvinnik defined as follows the main factors determining the strength and prospects of any
chess player.

1. Natural chess talent

2. Health, reserves of energy
3. Purposefulness, will-power, competitive character
4. Specific chess preparation

Of these four factors, only the first – natural talent – is out of our control; it is ‘God-given’. The rest
can be developed – here all or nearly all depends on the player himself and those who help him
(trainer, parents, friends).

Note that, according to Botvinnik, pure chess preparation is only one of the factors, a very important
one, of course, but not more than the others.

Practical Strength of a Player = Personal Qualities x Chess Mastery

2. The role of opening theory

I suggest that you remember how many times you or your pupils have lost points because of
difficulties in the opening, and how many in the subsequent play. I am sure you will find that, rather
than in the opening, the result of the game is decided far more in the middlegame or endgame.
Moreover, there it is easier to achieve significant progress, which will inevitably entail a rapid and
reliable improvement in your overall class of play. These arguments are justified even for very strong
competitors, and much more so for young players.

Opening knowledge is necessary, of course. But, firstly only part of the time should be spent
studying the opening (and the less experienced and less strong the players is, the less the time). And
secondly, a chess player should not become a slave of his own opening knowledge. It is important to
learn to use it for the independent solving of problems that arise on the board.

3. Principles of efficient work

I have already said how important it is to devote the most serious attention not only to chess
preparation, but also to psychological and physical preparation, and to the comprehensive
development of personality. And that chess study should not reduce merely to the assimilation of
opening theory.

Concrete information (variations, analyses, specific endgame positions) is only a necessary starting
point for subsequent generalizations. The study of the endgame, and especially the middlegame, is
mainly the assimilation of endgame and middlegame ideas: general and more specific principles and
rules, typical evaluations, and methods of playing different positions. The richness and diversity of
the arsenal of ideas possessed by a player largely determines his class, and this means his practical
strength.

Chess lessons should not reduce merely to an expansion of knowledge – opening, middlegame or
endgame, specific or more general. There is another aspect of improvement, no less important than
the assimilation of information. I am talking about skill in employing your knowledge, the ability to
take correct decisions in a variety of situations, arising on the chess board.

Incidentally, the same conclusion was reached by Rowson in Chess for Zebras:

‘aspiring players should place much more emphasis on developing their skill then increasing their
knowledge. This means that chess work should be less focused on ‘learning’ and more on ‘training’
and ‘practising’ whereby you force yourself to think’.

What is meant by “skills”, and what is signified by an ability to employ your knowledge?

First, a possession of basic qualities such as combinative vision, accurate calculation of variations and
objective positional evaluation, which in turn are divided into numerous more specific skills. Without
them, knowledge is useless, since it cannot be employed automatically. Each time one has to analyse
a specific situation on the board, and it will almost certainly differ in some details from positions that
we have studied before. Here one cannot get by without concrete calculation and evaluation.

Secondly, a mastery of the general (in particular – psychological) principles of searching for a move
and taking a decision in a variety of situations, arising in the course of play. Themes like attack or
defence, the conversion of an advantage or outplaying an opponent in a roughly equal position, and
so on.
How can progress be achieved in any of the indicated directions? The prescription is well known
from other spheres of life (and in particular – from the field of sport): what is needed is purposeful
training.

I will again quote Rowson:

‘Now I believe that the main function of chess trainers should be to guide the training of their
students, rather than to teach them directly. The best thing you can do for a student is to select
interesting positions for them, and analyse them carefully so you can see the kind of things the
student is missing’

(I should mention in parentheses that in fact there are, of course, also other important directions, in
which a trainer is capable of helping his students. For example, in diagnosing the features of their
play, their virtues and deficiencies, followed by deciding on a program of work on chess).

Training is more effective, the more successfully the atmosphere of a real tournament game is
imitated – and as a consequence, maximum concentration is ensured.

Alas, there are very few chess players who train. The majority of them just process information.
Many reassure themselves with the thought that analyzing the opening and playing in tournaments
will inevitably lead to an improvement in their overall chess mastery. But this is only partially
correct. Chess mastery includes numerous components, and, as in other types of sport, for the rapid
development of any of them what is required is purposeful training in the given field.
Honoured Trainer of the Ukraine (Quotes/Extracts)
A Conversation with Alexander Vaisman

First and foremost, you need a present from God – specific chess talent. This talent can be greater or
lesser, but if it is entirely lacking, then it is impossible to scale the chess Olympus. Not even the most
fanatical devotion to chess study, nor participation in numerous tournaments will help. Talent can
only be developed. Not even the most gifted trainer can confer talent on a pupil who lacks it.

But chess is a deep and rewarding game. Those who study it seriously, even if only for a short time,
before giving it up, develop skills that are extremely useful in life… learn to think, to forsee and
work out what his opponent is up to, and to take independent decisions in practice – chess is a
model of life!

“What is talent? It is this: it exists when it exists, and when it doesn’t exist, it doesn’t exist!”

Although it is impossible to say what exactly chess talent consists of, an experienced chess trainer
can detect it almost immediately. A talented youngster absorbs chess knowledge more quickly, and
uses it more effectively. He quickly identifies the main points in what his trainer tells him, or in what
he reads in books, correctly identifies the moments when it is right to follow this or that chess
principle, or to use a certain technical device.

There is a good rule of thumb for trainers – ‘blitz reveals talent’. I mean specifically talent, not
strength – for the latter, talent is necessary, but not sufficient.

Once should draw a distinction between chess talent and ordinary memory. Many children can easily
and quickly remember a large number of chess variations, especially things that they like, but this
does not necessarily mean that can use this knowledge effectively. For the latter, chess talent is also
needed. Any form of memory, including one’s chess memory, can be developed and improved with
the help of special exercises. The main things needed are desire, patience and time.

Talent comes from God, but the role of parents is no less important in the development of a young
player.

Choosing a trainer

Unfortunately, when it comes to this vitally important step, parents are unlikely to have any serious
information as to what their child needs from a trainer, or how they should choose one. Indeed
where can one read about what chess training involves? What are the rules of chess training? Is
there such a science as that of training a chess player? Are there scientifically-based books on chess
training?
How do practical players manage when they act as trainers? This is how. The weaker ones teach the
children what they know themselves, turn the children into pale copies of themselves, and kill all
traces of originality in the child. If the player is strong, then he usually fulfils the role of second which
he is likely to be well qualified. This is an important role but only at a high level of chess.

A mistake in the choice of trainer can often lead to very serious consequences, One cannot go back
in time…

How should one choose a trainer for one’s child? In the opinion of Mikhail Botvinnik, the most
important quality of a serious trainer, as opposed to a dilettante, is the ability to pass on his
accumulated professional knowledge and experience. It is not everybody who can do this, and can
bring real benefit to a young talented player. Once can have great personal experience and serious
practical strength, and yet be ineffective as a trainer, if one does not have the ability to pass on this
experience to one’s pupil. Such a trainer may not actually spoil a pupil, but can seriously hold back
his progress.

By the same token, one can have considerable teaching experience, and the desire to work with
young players, yet still be ineffective, if one lacks the necessary practical chess knowledge and
experience. He will be unable to pick out from the ocean of chess knowledge that which is most
important, or distinguish the truth from falsehoods. His pupils will often waste time and effort on
matters which are of little or no importance, or on mistaken ideas or conceptions, or on ineffective
training methods. I am familiar with several such trainers, and their unfortunate ‘victims’.

But whereas the results of an incompetent doctor can be clearly seen, chess trainers tend to get
away with their errors – the chess trainer is rarely held responsible for his mistakes.

To succeed in modern chess, one must have a universal style of play, handle all stages of the game
with confidence, have the ability to play positions of widely differing types and from many openings.
This program for such preparation requires several years of extremely hard work, under the
guidance of an experienced, qualified and thoughtful trainer.

But how does one find such a trainer? To be quite honest, I don’t know! I believe that the decisive
role is played by the experience and intellect of the child’s parent. ‘Parents are our greatest help,
and our greatest hindrance!’

A player must be able to work hard and systematically. ‘Talent has one advantage – the right to
work harder than others’. There is only one formula for success in this world: TALENT + WORK.
Helping Chess Players Improve (Extracts)
By Anique B. H. De Bruin

Scientific theories that tend to explain the abilities of expert chess players generally fall into one of
two categories. On the one hand, there are several theories that focus on describing chess experts’
knowledge structure. These theories, for example, try to explain what aspects of chess experts’
thinking can account for their superior memory of meaningful chess positions, even though these
are presented for a few seconds. These theories are referred to as knowledge representation
theories. On the other hand, there are theories that concentrate on uncovering the developmental
process of chess experts, and that attempt to explain how chess experts have reached their current
level of performance. In the latter category of theories, the deliberate practice theory, postulated by
Ericssson, Krampe, and Tesch-Romer (1993) most clearly describes which factors contribute to the
development of expertise in chess.

Ericsson and colleagues noted that, at the time they were writing. No documented examples existed
of individuals performing at exceptional levels without intense preparation over approximately 10
years (Simon & Chase, 1973). Either in the presence or absence of a teacher or coach, the individual
striving for excellence is required to dedicate a vast amount of time to training and practice in the
domain concerned, be it chess, science, art, music or sport. In this regard, Ericssson, Krampe, and
Tesch-Romer (1993) maintain that not only any practice, but particularly practice of high quality will
foster performance improvement. Their extensive review of studies on learning and skills acquisition
led them to conclude that for optimal and performance improvement a number of conditions have
to be met:

1. The individual’s motivation to invest effort in the study task is considered indispensible.

2. The task should be at the right level of difficulty for the particular student. If not, it will be either
too easy or too difficult. And little benefit will be obtained from the training.

3. Informative feedback is needed to optimize learning efficiency.

4. Finally, ample opportunity for repetition and correction of errors is vital.

In sum, for the best results, individuals need to go over then least well-understood subjects over and
over again. Since time is mainly dedicated to rehearsing parts of the individual understands poorly,
this type of practice demands a high level of concentration and will generally not be especially
enjoyable. When practice meets all the above-mentioned criteria, it is deemed ‘deliberate practice’.

Deliberate practice can be considered as being opposite to usual work activities or practicing for fun,
as it is primarily concerned with training of those skills that are performed poorly. By contrast, usual
work or practicing for fun is mainly concerned with performing skills that are well-understood.

According to Charness, Krampe, and Mayr (1993), deliberate practice is the main road to
improvement.
Charness, Krampe, and Mayr (1996) analysed to what extent several factors, such as how young a
person started playing, when they joined a club, etc, had on their current playing strength. Their
findings showed that serious solo chess study (i.e. analyzing by oneself chess games played by others
or oneself, but not analyzing chess games with others or playing in chess tournaments) contributed
significantly to current chess rating. Moreover, the age at which one started to play, or the age at
which one joined a club, were not predictors of current chess rating, nor was having a coach.

In a subsequent study, Charmes and colleagues (2005) again found that cumulative hours of serious,
solo chess study was the strongest predictor of current chess rating. In sum, these studies
concluded that the practice activities most relevant to performance improvement in chess are
serious solo chess study and serious chess play.

Fostering performance improvement in non-expert chess players

Since most chess trainers work with chess players of lower expertise levels, research studying
optimal learning conditions for these individuals can provide useful implications for training.

Research studies conducted at Erasmus University, Rotterdam, on fostering chess performance ein
novice chess players have identified three processes that can be simulated by trainers in chess
players and that positively affect performance improvement.

1. Self-explanations when studying a chess game

When asked to explain aloud to oneself why particular problem-solving steps need to be
undertaken, or what the information in a standard text implies, learners’ understanding of the
problem-solving procedure or of the text improves.

2. Self-monitoring and self-regulation when studying a chess game

Educational research has repeatedly shown that individuals who are identified as efficient and
successful learners (usually called ‘expert learners’) tend to use a number of study strategies that
explain their positive learning result.

One of these study strategies that has been shown to affect learning is self-monitoring. That is, the
individual has a desired level of understanding of the material to be studied, and monitors during
learning to what extent this level has been reached.

A second study strategy important to increase success in learning is termed self-regulation. This
strategy is performed after the strategy of self-monitoring. If the chess player’s self-monitoring
reveals he has not learnt the subject as well as he wishes, he will decide to continue studying the
subject for a longer time.