2000
I've hit the 2,000 mark on CTS. My rating, as it stands now, is 1554, and my success rate is 60.9%. I am just focusing on raising the percentage at this point, but my rating has pretty much stayed put, fluxtuating around 1560. I am now taking more time to get each problem right, and I was at a 80% success rate for the latest session. So, overall I think I will see improvement soon.
posted by Calvin @ 9:41 AM
10 comments
10 Comments:
To gain 1 ratingpoint at CTS I need to solve 570 problems (long term estimated average). I'm curious what figures you will find.
pretty much the same here.
alternately--but comes to the same effect--i am trying to raise my percentage success. so to go from 84.0% to 84.5%, with 14,551 tries, i 'only' have to do only another 5,449 problems at 87.172% or 701/4750=5449 (about 700 failed, 4800 success=5500 etc) to hit my next integer on the decimal rounded ranking of percentage success.
last night i finally turned to 83.5+, so "printed" as 84%. all this pretty much says i need to do another 10,500 problems to hit my next goal at 25,000, if i can can run around the mean between 83.5 and 87.2%, at my more likely average performance daily now of 85.1% (on 'bad' days im 82%, and on good, 88 to 89% across a hundred problems).
at 2018 tries you have a lot more room to change.
congratulations, sounds like you got it nailed. dk
for comparison, my improvement figures have been 1 point for 106 problems. although I do believe it'll be significantly slower now after I've reached 1500. hmm, that's probably something worth of putting into a graph, to see how improvement speed varies as rating goes higher. too bad I lost the first 6 months of training diary in a computer meltdown. :-/
do you guys actually keep a training diary? because i don't know how you guys are getting such precise numbers. if you guys think that a training notebook or whatever is worthwhile, please let me know. is it nice to have numerical proof of your improvement? and to analyze strengths and weaknesses?
generalkaia, i just removed it. tempo said the same thing. you both had two good votes. thx, dk
No diary. The calculation is simple.
My estimated average rating increased with 95 points from 1470 to 1565. I needed to solve 54,500 problems to make that happen. 54,500/95 = ca 570
generalkaia: thanks again for your valuable feedback on the issue earlier tonight. tempo said similar (he said he liked it but only so much time, etc) but comes to my stuff for chess specifically.
as for the log. remember the old iowa tests in the us school system? mabye im too old (im 47) or you too young, but they had these big pages and you circle the answer. since im higly visual as a classically trained architect, but prefer freehand (no rulers) by far, i take a fresh sheet and do rows of ten problems, divided in two, or five and five. when i succeed, i darken the circle. no fancy numbers, just a raw count. for more detail, i can go back to recent activity.
i put an 'X' next to fail. as i run, i keep track, like 1/9=10 but specifically. if i get too many wrong, as wormstor wrote so well days ago similarly, i buckle down and try VERY hard to make sure i get no more wrong, resulting in some decline in ELO. but if i get on a run, i can speed up. since as i wrote extensively, on my Alogrythm last week, as long as im above 1500 or 1505 i only focus on success. i have been below 1500 or 1497 once in a week or ten days. ive been to 1518 but not much concerned. i could have been back to 1530 fast, with an elevated RD, but elected to keep the RD backing down to where it was before my old Dell died, so traded % for ELO as many do here.
accuracy, accuracy, accuracy.
if you really are 1580 it will come and not as a flash but you will BE there. world top ten elo dont jump around. they stay there with a few exceptions--ie adams, gelfand, polgar, morozevich, shirov.
rating is not a spike but a stable aggregation--IMHO
one quick non-chess note, fyi, im a runner too, marathon age 15, resting heart 33 at that time. then mountaineering up north here, one mile up at a time often fast, but other places better to say that and more now! yet a little side chatter can yield little factoids on affinity paralleling chess!
sorry, but i have no way to forward the response to your earlier comment, as i have moved the post to another blog. pls let me this one time post a link here, and thereafter not to mention it, so at least you can read my reply.
i posted the reply right away, but when i copied the post, i lost all comments.
dk
http://transformation-dks-inner-work.blogspot.com/2006/07/why-dont-they-just-swim-globalism-and.html
and, yes, i was being sarcastic. im not at all materialistic. thanks and bye as regards THAT conversation, if you care to see my constructive, hopefully thoughtfull reply.
I keep a training diary, and store all games I play. It's easy to feel you're not progressing or not doing it fast enough, if you don't take a peek at where you were before. It gives perspective and is a great motivator.
I also keep it for future days, when someone asks me 20 years from now: "how did you start, what kind of things did you train, and how much?" -and I won't remember anymore. it takes next to no effort to keep a diary, but as time goes by things will accumulate.
Sure. Consider it done
Post a Comment
<< Home