Rating the metrics.

[Dewi Jones]

When I ran my own business I revelled in measuring different parts of the companies performance in order to ensure every part of what we were doing contributed to the health of the business.

Just like everyone else I am trying to improve my chess. My openings are in my opinion fine for my level, Despite regularly playing people 20-30 ECF higher than me I have only come out worse from the opening a handful of times in hundreds of games. And Therefore I am concentrating on tactics and end games, Despite opening books being an easier read.

I would like to measure the effect of my practice and study on different elements of my game. I use "Chess Tactics Pro"

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Emmanuel-Mathi ... B00KNSOMLM

and Chess Tempo for measuring the progress of my tactical training. 5 problems a day on each (not for training but for measuring the outcome of the training). I use the Chess King "Total Chess Endgames"

https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... hessending

for measuring my Endgames, and also do some of my studying on there. It has quite a lot of good teaching content as well as the tests. But I am not very happy with this as a tool to measure progress because it gives points (just less) for wrong answers when compared to not having done the test before.

I am.also using games against my phone on this software

https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... tory.chess

to measure my game in a more holistic fashion.

Can anybody point me to software or websites that will give me a metric on Endgames where I am unhappy with what I have and Openings and Strategy where I currently have nothing to measure progress or otherwise.

Currenrly here is what i do to study.
OPENINGS
Play 10 moves against different engines on chessbase and just try to not to be worse than -0.30 after ten moves. I can now do this fairly easily. I also have read and studied a few nice books on the Openings I choose to play.

TACTICS
I am using the tactics portion of the chessimo software and doing a unit (90-480) puzzles a day.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/deta ... essimo.app

I have also twice read "chess tactics from scratch" but only got to the half way point of the book then lost my way. Maybe I will start from the middle on my third attempt .

STRATEGY
I have completed the first three books of Yusupovs chess course. Which has some strategic units. And I have also read some simple Chess strategy books like "Teach yourself better chess - Bill Hartson" and "Weapons of chess - Bruce Pandolfini".

ENDGAMES
The app mentioned above and reading up to my level in Silman's endgame course.

Any comments on what I do and what I might be forgetting to do or measure would be welcome too .

As you can see from my rating history, whatever I have been doing hasn't worked so far , but I am motivated again as it is January.

[MJMcCready]

How extensively are you studying your own games and using the positions from those as a basis for further study?

[Dewi Jones]

not very extensively. because I don't really know how to do it. Plus of course it is hard work!

What I do with my games is usually look at the opening and where I strayed from book, just try and dig out the next book move or look what weakness has been created by my opponent straying from the book. Usually with an engine. Look at where the biggest error was. The tactical slip that dropped a material, walked into mate or the exchanging into an ending at the wrong time etc. Also, If I agreed a draw I force myself to play it out against a computer.

I also save them in a database because in the league I end up playing a lot of the same players and it helps me know what to expect openings wise when I play them next.

How do you think I should go about working on my games?

[Nick Burrows]

Go over your games in detail without the use of a computer. Pay particular attention to tactical phases, explore variations you considered during the game, lines that you were fearful of. Only then run it through a computer. Most mistakes come from missing candidates early in variations. It teaches you to broaden your search rather than going round in circles trying to stretch it.

[MJMcCready]

not very extensively. because I don't really know how to do it. Plus of course it is hard work!

What I do with my games is usually look at the opening and where I strayed from book, just try and dig out the next book move or look what weakness has been created by my opponent straying from the book. Usually with an engine. Look at where the biggest error was. The tactical slip that dropped a material, walked into mate or the exchanging into an ending at the wrong time etc. Also, If I agreed a draw I force myself to play it out against a computer.

I also save them in a database because in the league I end up playing a lot of the same players and it helps me know what to expect openings wise when I play them next.

How do you think I should go about working on my games?

Well, I usually go through the game move by move and make note of why I played each and every move. From that you will quickly see patterns of play which indicate strengths and weaknesses but improving is a slow process. From that you can teach yourself what to do in positions where you are going wrong, again there is much to explore there. It is hard work but mastery, or perhaps genius, is more about perspiration than inspiration.

I forget who it is, although I believe he is Scandinavian, a strong GM who wrote a book 3-5 years ago where he mentions how he became a GM without going beyond his own games. It was interesting but having read so extensively I can't quite remember who wrote it. I did think it's Eric Hansen but its not him. In terms of insight into chess, I think you would find it hard to beat GM Jonathan Rowson.

[Roger de Coverly]

What I do with my games is usually look at the opening and where I strayed from book, just try and dig out the next book move or look what weakness has been created by my opponent straying from the book. Usually with an engine. Look at where the biggest error was. The tactical slip that dropped a material, walked into mate or the exchanging into an ending at the wrong time etc. Also, If I agreed a draw I force myself to play it out against a computer.

It's always worth knowing where you or the opponent missed a tactic and where your or your opponent's losing error actually was. I wouldn't be too concerned about "departing from book" unless the theory move is an only try or your move is an outright blunder. One person's departure from theory is the other's dangerous novelty.

If you don't think of positions this way already, you might try knowing the tabiyas. These are positions that can define a variation and can be reached from many move orders. As an example, a sequence in the English that could run. 1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 d6 3. g3 Nf6 4. Bg2 g6 5. Nf3 Nc6 6. d3 Bg7 7. 0-0 0-0 8. Rb1 can be reached in many permutations of the opening move order. You learn where the pieces go, rather than the exact order in which they get there.