The Airing of Grievances: Differences in Training Philosophy | Dojo Talks

Chess Dojo sensei IM Kostya Kavutskiy, IM David Pruess, and GM Jesse Kraai hash out their differences in chess training philosophy in today's episode of the Dojo Talks podcast!
Interested in improving? Check out the Dojo Training Program: chessdojo.club
Chess is more than a game, it's a lifestyle. Live it with ChessDojo merch: www.chessdojo.club/shop
Want to support the channel? Donate here - streamelements.com/chessdojol...
Find all of our chess book recommendations (& more!) on our Amazon storefront: www.amazon.com/shop/chessdojo
Follow ChessDojo here:
Website: chessdojo.club
Twitch: / chessdojolive
Discord: / discord
Twitter: / chess_dojo
Patreon: / chessdojo
Instagram: / chess_dojo
Podcast: chessdojotalks.podbean.com/
0:00 Intro
0:41 Saint Louis Chess Club, Chesscom, and US Chess
9:55 FIDE and USCF Rating Deflation
18:11 Differences in Chess Training Philosophies
18:23 The Airing of Grievances
1:12:57 How to Submit Questions

[@bradleyj7801]

the main thing I got out of all of this was that 3 smart guys made a concerted effort to be honest with each other, and my elo would gain 500 points if I did half of what any of them suggested

[@ChessDojo]

😂😂😂

[@isaacbragg-gardiner2456]

Most of their issues seem to be logistical anyways, like they all agree about how you get better they just don't know how to best help force their pupils into situations that breed growth & progress

[@sachinpaul2111]

I just find myself nodding along to every single word that David says most of the weeks. Very nice bloke who provides a good middle ground between some extreme old school views of Jessie and Kostya’s ultra new school ways

[@yzfool6639]

Most of us are like you. We suffer from confirmation bias. We need to listen to people we disagree with like Jesse and Kostya more often if we want to improve since our nodding at every single word we agree with sees us at the same ELO most of the weeks.

[@sachinpaul2111]

@@yzfool6639 oh no, I didn’t mean about chess though. I mean his general view on the world is somewhere between modern and old school and very nuanced

[@chesscomdpruess]

@@sachinpaul2111 This is a cool parallel, because listening to ppl we disagree also lets us learn more about the world. (though of course it’s also nice for our sanity to sometimes have a bit of confirmation bias). That said, I’m pretty sure sachinpaul listens to all 3 of us equally when listening to the talks; I don’t imagine anyone ff over one of us to listen to the other. 🙂

[@austin4768]

Regarding time control, I appreciate the need for strict limits, but I think it would be nice if David and Jesse could consider this particular exception, which Kostya suggested in an old podcast episode: Keep the base time requirements but allow flexible increments ONLY if it's an OTB game (for 1200-1600, there's basically no 60+30 tournaments, but 60+5 or 60d5 is common). The difference between a 5 and 30 second increment is significant (for instance, it amounts to an extra 16 min 40 sec per player for a 40-move game), but there is compensation in the depth of concentration and hence quality of thought achieved. After all, players are generally more likely to take an OTB game seriously, and less likely to get interrupted or distracted. I also think this rule is unlikely to lead to a "slippery slope" kind of situation compared to other proposed relaxations, because you're not compromising on the base time, just on the increment, and with the important justification that there is compensation from playing OTB.

[@Secretarian]

LOL I feel that David nailed it at 7:06 wrt training. I saw the same or similar when I was in the military, going through training sessions to introduce some type of new-think that was nebulous at best and at worst seemed to be in contradiction with itself. Time and money wasted. Bottom line, follow the smell of money to see who is getting their pocket lined.

[@michaelf8221]

I totally agree with Kostya's grievance against David too. Educating people how to use the engine, rather than just saying "no engine full stop" is crucial, especially when you know every single chess player (me included) uses the engine. On my classical games, I don't turn it on until I've fully written my own annotations. But you can be sure I've combed through each and every OTB game I've ever played with an engine to spot improvements and track if my analysis was accurate or not.

[@bluefin.64]

Rather than try to strictly enforce ideals, it's better to make some adjustment to how people actually are. I think Kostya's idea is more realistic, and I also think students will really appreciate it.

[@AdamGaffney96]

Absolutely agree, I find it so surprising that people still haven't realised that anywhere in life, forbidding someone from doing something doesn't stop them doing it, it just stops them telling you when they do it. It's way more important you teach them the why of not using the engine, and the how of using the engine, than just saying "you don't use it until you're 2000 full stop". That's how you get people disincentivised as there's a tool for learning out there that their peers are using and improving with.

[@archsys307]

Fr 😂😂😂 blud thinks this the 60s on some tal shi

[@JD-td8kl]

Nice to see Kostya show his coconuts. Cracking conversation!

[@MoneyBossTV0706]

I love how authentic you guys are! Really good video :)

[@MrHockeyChessDude]

I always feel like Pruess speaks the truth from an array of circumstances and contexts and everyone looks at him like he is insane and has an extreme view.

[@lastcraft]

Kostya is right about the extreme rules on classical time controls, especially when your local club or tournaments use a different time control. They are still using a classical time control, and its OTB, which tends to be more intense anyway. Even a recognised league or touranment online will burn more mental energy than an internal Dojo game. The super long classical time controls is what puts me off the Dojo right now, as 90 minute time controls are extremely rare.

[@ChessJourneyman]

90+30 is the standard in Europe.

[@lastcraft]

@@ChessJourneyman Ah ok, interesting. In the UK, the London league has half the games now played in 30 in 75 then 15 for the whole game, and that's one of the slowest as they start 7pm. Smaller club level events/matches usually start at 7:30pm, and can have 30 in 60 plus 15. County matches are G135+10, but they are played on weekends, and not many clubs have county teams. In other words I'd have to give up weekends to meet the Dojo minumum requirement. So no go Dojo.

[@NoOne-so7jt]

Regarding the issue of deflation, Kostya is certainly right that if your goal is just improvement then you should focus on training and not worry about ratings. However, I think a lot of the Dojo's members have a long-term goal such as 2000 USCF (expert) and so it's certainly a relevant question as to whether reaching that level has gotten harder due to deflation.

[@terribleteacher]

Great conversation. Thanks for sharing your views on different interesting topics.

[@williamdalton9178]

For those dismissive of David's position on engines as unrealistic, I would just note (as the Dojo has previously) that on the recommendation of GM Vishnu Prasanna, Gukesh didn't use engine analysis until he reached 2550 because they felt 'it would help him develop his own thinking process and would sharpen him faster.' Great discussion, really interesting and impassioned contributions from all.

[@williamdalton9178]

Also and I might be in a minority on this, but I really appreciate the lack of engine evaluation on your streams. If I want get an engine evaluation of a position I know where to find that, everyone does; the evaluations of IMs and GMs are much more interesting to me.

[@Kubooxooki]

Great conversation. Thanks!

[@juhonieminen4219]

I agree with Kostya about the benefits of OTB games. Longer time control is great, but you could think about it like this: If some one goes to a local club to play 60 minutes over the board, they are more likely to talk about the game with the opponent, or chat about chess with people face to face in general. That ads up with the time spent learning. Its way better than "gg" in the chat box. It easily takes total of 5 hours to get there, play 45 minutes and drink a pint at the pub with your chess pals, while replaying the key positions.

[@bluefin.64]

Besides pleasing people and encouraging them, a thoughtful way to accommodate shorter time controls for classical games could be a source of data that tells the Dojo what the effect of different ones are. Engines show me where, despite my best efforts, I've overlooked things I might have seen. It's an inferior substitute for a coach that prompts you with hints, but it's better than not knowing. When I can't understand what an engine tells me, I ignore it, the same as I do with human annotations that are over my head.

[@DaydreamVacations]

As an adult improver I do the best I can. I believe 90+30 is better. But I have access to monthly OTB at three rounds of 60/d5 one Saturday a month. So that’s what I play and analyze. It’s not best, buts it I have available. It’s still better than other options. I do think I work harder in a competition than friendly play.

[@chesscomdpruess]

Perfect!

[@austin4768]

You see, I think this 60d5 should count for 1200-1600 if it's OTB, simply because I don't think 60+30 OTB tournaments even exists. I think people are going to focus on the game more in OTB, so we should be allowed to fudge the increment if the game meets the base requirement.

[@archsys307]

@@austin4768points this points that lmfao fuck the Mickey Mouse shi and show them what’s up when you strut in the discord server on some +400 OTB elo in 3 months by gasp playing practically bullet chess 60d5

[@southernrun9048]

Great episode

[@Nemtomi]

The fact that Jesse is dogmatic about the time controls is the reason I can identify with the Dojo.

[@isaacbragg-gardiner2456]

The fact that Jesse is dogmatic period, is the reason I identify with the dojo. Jesse is just so real and based in his own experience and he's really good at reassuring you that you don't need to try some weird new pseudoscience stuff, the old stuff that people have been doing for years always has and always will work

[@Nemtomi]

@@isaacbragg-gardiner2456 spot on.

[@michaelf8221]

I totally agree with David's grievance against Jesse. I don't think sparring has to be a fight. I have really enjoyed doing chill opening sparring sessions with people where we analyze together immediately after the game with an engine to see what would be a more interesting area to explore for round 2.

[@kdub1242]

The sole purpose of corporate training is to protect the company from liability, not to actually instruct anyone.

[@mathewpankratz5767]

Thats nonsense. Most training provided is to make sure you can actually do your job and do it better.

[@kdub1242]

@@mathewpankratz5767 I'm talking about HR and legal department training, like anti-harassment, anti-insider training, anti-IP mishandling, etc. I thought that was clear from the context.

[@laurentsaltoflife9267]

David is the Ultimate Sensei !

[@AndersHPhotography]

I was sure thinking that Kostya was breaking up with the dojo for a moment right there hehehe :D

[@aikidoka117]

Great discussion as always. I do wonder about something Kostya said with respect to the evaluation bar. That it can give a beginner a "sense of what's going on", which, to me, isn't necessarily a positive for teaching (spectating, sure). Because that beginner (from personal experience) really does NOT know what's going on and instilling a false sense of understanding seems like a negative for teaching and learning. But I also see the upsides for giving confidence (however false) to keep interested in the game.

[@Chill_Pills]

One consequence of rating deflation that does concern me is that a lot of people are not playing. I personally think that the rating is just a number and I don't mind if I lose rating points, however many people do not feel that way, especially a lot of strong players. I think there is no question that the field is most tournaments that I have played in is weaker because many strong players do not want to risk losing to an underrated kid and losing their rating points.

[@alanmay6172]

Not going to comment on names and who says what. I found a legitimate value in hearing these major points discussed. In life there are things that are very hard to do for most people but do bring benefit to the few that do them.

[@bruceelio1606]

An indiviudals ELO should roughly correspond to their percentile among chess players. As the player pools overall have been getting stronger with access to a greater amount of chess knowledge one should expect to have to continue to learn to maintain ELO. The bigger issue is children generally improve at faster rate than the ELO algorithm can keep up and, therefore, their ELO is in no way representative of their actual current playing abiity.

[@sylvainlandry7419]

Thank you Kostya for bringing some of the topics I found problematic with Dojo's plan. The Dojo training plan could be improved by following your improvement suggestions.

[@BradenLaughlin]

I dont like seeing my chess dads fight but I'm still excited for this one 🙈

[@vartananq]

I just played in Armenia @Tsaghkadzor open, the difference in for example Armenia and US, is that no adults play in their tournaments, at least in a group B, so you have bunch of kids that are becoming 1600 strength but only play each other; so they don’t gain any rating points until they to Europe and beat 2000, I imagine the same thing is happening in India, here you have bunch more adults with nice floors still playing and helping kids climb up faster

[@sachinpaul2111]

Happens in the Bay Area in California as well. 1600 here is 2000 in Minnesota or Texas

[@Watercolordragon]

Nice level 2 conversation here

[@AdamGaffney96]

18:00 I think though, whilst I agree that improvement is about outcompeting your peers, I'd argue that the issue with deflating and massive underrating of these up and comers means that you don't actually know who your peers are. Because you could come up again a 2100 whose clearly 2400 strength and just needs their rating to catch-up, but you as a 2400 going into that wouldn't think of the 2400 as a peer until they smash you OTB. So whilst the general idea of outcompeting may not have changed, the definition of who is a peer has.

[@Ireniicus]

If someone plays a game for their club against another club and it is standard-rated it should count. For example, I live in the UK and games are in the evening and cannot be that long if anyone wants to get enough sleep to work the next day. All the games I am likely to play is around this time control as that is what is mandated by my Regional association. So unless I give up my weekends to play 4NCL its very hard to get match play recognised by Dojo.

[@ChessDojo]

We recently updated our requirements to allow for 45+30 (or equivalent) up until 1600, and 60+30 up to 2000

[@paulgottlieb]

I According to Caruana, Hikaru declined his invitation because he had a scheduling conflict. His other commitment fell through, but by then the field was full

[@shouldersofgiants4649]

Top Gear for Chess! 🙂 Make it happen gents! 🚀

[@ChessJourneyman]

As an athlete, you can tell the difference between being coached by a good coach, bad coach, or a fellow active athlete. Like Jesse said, the benefit of a coach & system is that you focus entirely on doing what the coach says and don't worry about anything other than doing your best. However, that utmost trust has to be built upon a reasonable foundation. Is the system tested sufficiently & good for that particular athlete/student? Has the coach been able to consistently showcase he understands the student better than he understands himself? Has the coach been able to make accurate predictions and set expertly measured expectations? Coaches in sports use decades of knowledge and well-known systems to craft an optimal program. We'll get back to that. But to briefly categorize the three of you - all three of you are still players with a chip on your shoulders. As long as you have something to prove personally as players, you can't make a complete transition to being coaches. The above is relevant because your approach seems incredibly similar to active athletes doing some coaching. They tend to draw from personal experiences and pov too much. They make for great training partners, but full time coaches...that takes a different mindset and complete commitment. Sure, just about anyone can teach someone chess, but to be among the world's best coaches...you need to make peace with your chess dreams. In addition to being one foot into coaching and other into chasing personal chess goals (or I guess in David's case waiting for them to whither away), you are also developing an experimental program. As there is evidently some pushback from the (potential) students and disagreements among yourselves, the system seems too rigid and still in its relative infancy. Can't fully side with any of you myself - Jesse's strict regime reminds me of the dear to my heart old Eastern European ruthless coaching style that creates two monsters for every ten kids it breaks, Kostya has a more modern & adaptable approach that's appealing but may wander off course more, and David pulls you into his sea of thoughts. To get back to the main point; not saying you can't teach people, but to get the level of trust Jesse expects...you need to offer a system that warrants it. Until then, being open-minded and taking feedback into consideration will help you optimize the system faster. Chess has a lot of room to improve in terms of coaching compared to other sports where everything is exact science, and the more people explore big coaching projects like you three are doing, the better.

[@ChessWithMouselip]

Jesse/David to Kostya (paraphrase by comedian Pat Paulsen): "We've upped our standards, so up yours."

[@archsys307]

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂shit a low T male would say

[@juhonieminen4219]

Davids warning about the use of engines might concern mostly club players, who have reached a plateau because of relying too much on it. I've met some lower lever players who never do game analysis and they repeat the same opening misstakes and same tactical mistakes. They have attitude that computer can't teach human. All they need to do is replay the game and notice the most obvious mistakes.

[@chesspurist]

I agree with David's assessment on these inadequate apologies. Of course SLCC had to admit more culpability - they had a predator prowling on their grounds for years.

[@NotAllWhoWanderAreLost641]

Thank you Jesse for being a real one. Kostya if you put your ego at the door and listened to Jesse verbatim you’d have the results you want. He literally did the thing you’re striving to do. Everyone dismissed Jesse as old man yelling at clouds

[@sirenbrian]

Regarding the time controls, I can appreciate that longer time controls lead to system 2 thinking, but is system 2 the only way for a, for example, under 1600 to improve? You might find more people will to sign up and stick with the program if shorter time controls were allowed at lower levels. I'm about 1500 rapid on lichess and for me a 15+10 game seems about right. I literally don't have deep enough chess thoughts to require more time to find them during a game. I've played 25+5 games OTB at my chess club and they also seemed like PLENTY of time to dig into my chess skills and see what I could find. The dojo can, I think, help people improve without requiring games that take multiple hours to play.

[@chessjess510]

Sheesh. “Dojo Group Therapy Session Episode 1”

[@edl5731]

45 + 45 should be equal to 60 + 30. It is 90. 0 + 90 or 90/G.

[@chesscomdpruess]

Agreed. That is our actual policy. The main time + increment must equal the total. So the 45+45 *do* count for those needing 60+30 games.

[@austin4768]

@@chesscomdpruess Is this a new development or has this always been the case?

[@AdamGaffney96]

23:00 I absolutely agree with Kostya here, as someone who was actually interested in joining the program but decided against it mainly due to the time control. I don't know exactly how strict it is you guys are on it, but for example many of my local tournaments are not standard, and the few that are actually in the standard time bracket (which isn't many) are 90+15, or 60+30. That's not 90+30 so does it count? Because if it doesn't I just cannot use any tournaments as games to count towards the program, except the 1 tournament a year that's 110 + 30. When you don't have much time due to work, family duties and also trying to enjoy things in life that aren't chess, it'd be the case of choosing between playing 2 games with someone in the Dojo to meet a requirement, or going to that tournament knowing that I can't count any of those games. I think that level of commitment to chess and only chess isn't something you can expect of the average sub-2000 player.

[@michaelf8221]

The requirements for time controls are lower if you are lower rated. So what you just described would definitely count towards your dojo score if you are

[@christopherday6447]

I am 2200+ classical on Lichess attained solely through league play and my actual OTB strength is probably closer to 1950 FIDE accounting for the fact I've not competed OTB in 5 years. @@michaelf8221

[@Extirpo]

Im 100 with Kostya on the time kontrolls requirements: too dogmatic (boarderline thickheaded). When you have a thriving Lichess turnament going, thats *this* close to the Dodo requirements but still reject the Lichess cause its not *exactly* the same… Thats dogmatic.

[@chesscomdpruess]

We actually do accept 45+45 for the 60+30. But not for the 1800+ who need 90+30 (which I don’t think is what you consider “this close”).

[@Extirpo]

@@chesscomdpruess Appreciate clarification. Im not sure it was mentioned in video(?). What I heard was the argument of risk of diluting Dojo’ long time controls - which has no meaning as that is entirely up to the 3 sensei. Im happy that the subject isnt carved in stone, but can be aligned to allmost identical alternatives ouside Dojo.

[@chesscomdpruess]

@@Extirpo You are absolutely right: I did not get the chance in the video to say that 45+45 is accepted for 60+30. An argument I made which you may disagree with is: if for the 90+30, we accept 90+15, and then we go from that to accepting 90+5, etc. there’s no clear line for where that stops. The numbers we have offered are minimums, and the “range” and “flexibility” is that people can play slower games than that. In other words, these numbers have already been moved down somewhat through a process of discussion among the three of us, and that process of moving them down has to stop somewhere.

[@Extirpo]

@@chesscomdpruess Fair enough. Yes I kinda disagree but no biggie. Anyways the local club is doing the 90+30 thingy, so if joying (planing to) all is good.

[@archsys307]

@@chesscomdpruess move them down to the point of local efficiency in a game theoretic sense if many people can play 60d5 etc OTB but 90+30 is out of touch, while few people would be only be able to find strictly rapid OTB games in their area, then obviously the slippery slope argument fails and there is a natural resting place, which is X time that most people can find OTB in their area which is still >some minimum

[@odysseas573]

51:30 I am strongly leaning towards David's point of view here. But just out of curiosity: could a great chess culture decrease the rating requirement? Like for example wouldn't a 2000 rated "russian schoolboy" be more in tune with the nuances of chess and thus better at understanding the engine than the rest of us? Or does general chess understanding and knowledge not matter when it comes to the engine?

[@chesscomdpruess]

Chess knowledge and understanding plays a role in being able to understand what the engine tells you. You also need to be able to follow the variations, understand why other moves are not in the variations, etc. Then you have to remember what you learn, which for most people requires having been actively engaged in trying to understand it.

[@jimmccann3856]

Re Ratings: what is the KEY characteristic of a ruler? Its the SAME length, ALL the time. If some math wiz says my ruler shrinks or expands, how smart is he, really?

[@Evilanious]

If I use a ruler of some metal that expands with relatively small heat fluctuations that's obviously a problem of the ruler. If some metrologist or person with common sense points out the ruler has it's limitations he's got a point. There's a reason seconds and meters are no longer defined the way they used to be.

[@MrHockeyChessDude]

Did you recently get mated?

[@lordchampion2724]

If long time controls are what it takes to improve but you don't have time to play long time controls then you're just not cut out to improve. Simple as that.

[@synesthetically]

18:27 😂

[@lazydetective4774]

The Eval bar is totally ruining the experience for me. Every curiosity just disappears for me. No excitment thinking about the position and moves. You cant think "wow that seems wrong, cant the oppenent just take on f4 and win the rook and the game". Because the Eval bar has already told me that there is no win. I hate it. St.Louis dont have it. I like the US Chess Championship right now on St. Louis own youtube channel.

[@libertopian]

You have missed one very important argument against 90+30: it is not the minimum time control according to FIDE for classical chess. According to FIDE, a classical game allows a minimum of 90 minutes for the first sixty moves. This means that 75+15 is a classical game, and 75+15 tournaments are rated as classical games. I think the Dojo should be in line with FIDE on this.

[@chesscomdpruess]

We are in line with our honest opinion (averaged across the three of us) of what is best for an average student's improvement. Students with different goals will not always align with that, and nobody is forced to follow our suggestions and guidelines. And as we get to know different students who hang out in a lot of our streams or tournaments or discord, we can give them more specific guidance (for example, there are students who are interested in raising their blitz rating, not their fide rating). As far as what FIDE says, how to say “nobody cares too much what FIDE says."

[@paulgottlieb]

Speaking of rating stability, didn’t FIDE once award 100 rating points to every female player EXCEPT the Polgar sisters?

[@archsys307]

It’s true I was lazslo polgar

[@peepshow1035]

I have an enormous interest in rating deflation, because the standards to achieve NM are still the same: 2200. There seems to be about a 200 point deflation, so now you'd have to be 2400 in the 90's to become a NM today... the problem is that it's simply not possible for some people. It's going to be harder to become an NM now or maybe even impossible if your limit is 2200 (in the 90's), now you'll be an 1800 USCF rated player, but without a title.

[@user-zm4th9xr3b]

There's no evidence of there being anywhere near that much rating deflation. 200 points? That's completely crazy.

[@SenatorBluto]

Yeah sure, whiners in the 1990s without engines would say they were 200 points underrated compared to the 1980s, and whiners today with engines claim they're far stronger than players of the 1990s.

[@bluefin.64]

Ever notice how some of the whiniest people are the ones who carp about whiners? Irony at work. 🙂On the actual subject of deflation, 200 points does seem unlikely, but not completely out of the question.

[@SenatorBluto]

@@bluefin.64 How would you know whether deflation or inflation has occurred, you fish?

[@bluefin.64]

@@SenatorBluto I don't for sure, but I listen to the experts. Maybe try it sometime. Troll.

[@oldman-badchess]

7:20 lol welcome to corporate America 😅

[@sachinpaul2111]

My biggest problem with the Dojo (particularly Jesse’s ) way of talking, while I respect their methods a lot, is how dismissive they are of 1600s and say stuff like “a 1600 wouldn’t know that “ Not all 1600s are equal. Some of us have spent years learning the game and are at 1600 for a myriad of reasons (just as Kotsya mentioned, stamina being one of the biggest ones . At our level, we have to play 3 games or 4 games a day against kids who are supposedly 1600 in the Bay Area who are actually 1900) The dojo would probably say something along the lines of “no way a 1600 would know a knight + bishop mate” while in fact many 1600s including me, use resources like Danya’s channel or even the Dojo chess school to learn a lot of things This kind of , what I call “rating banding” of what a particular rated player “should” and shouldn’t know is why when a 1600 beats a 2100, immediately accusations are thrown about I once drew a game against a 2100 because the line played happened to be my favourite game of Anand. As a result, I played 20 moves straight from the game while the 2200 had to figure it out OTB and burned the clock. I offered a draw when he had 20 seconds left and I had 1.25 hrs and it was an equal position and he took it.

[@michaelf8221]

Fun fact: the bishop knight mate is actually one of the endgame algorithms the dojo asks everyone 1600+ to learn and spar. So maybe you chose the wrong example there!

[@archsys307]

Nah bruh take the W. Chess is merciless. Low competitive drive is a sign of T problem. Consider tren

[@med017784]

Irritating how superior he is and always seems to be disgusted. Looks like to be insane to play this game…or not. Thanks for showing us this.

[@archsys307]

Who I agree tho these mfers seem like unchill nerds lmfao

[@vartananq]

So I think part of the issue is in some parts of the world, there are almost now adults play classical tournaments, so kids fighting each other, don’t get their real ratings until they have the resources to play in higher tournaments. which brings up the point that classical chess is too long and stressful for an average 30+ adults. So shortening the classical time control will bring more average folks in and not just kids that don’t understand anything or some ironman adult like Jesse that can sit trough a 4+ hours of stressful game loose and come back the next day and 9 days in a row. The game is popular among the masses now, and to take advantage, you need to p%^}*,£fy the game a little bit

[@vartananq]

I actually played next to Kostya my last LA tournament in the first day of a 2 day schedule room where you play 3 game 50s. Those 3 game by far my favorites, I started playing classical 3 years ago, even though I’m addicted to the competition of the classical chess, it often fills like torture and completely different than game. 30s or 50s

[@vartananq]

The question is, should chess be the tool to test a strength of the human’s nervous system or should have it be a display of their creativity ?

[@karmapolice42]

I am only 2000-2100 Rapid on lichess; and universally ppl would advise me "study GM games"; play solitaire chess w/ GM games; obv better w/ annotation but ppl wouldn't balk w/o annotation. And when I put GM games through an engine it's uncanny how many GM moves are the top 1-2 moves of the engine. So...I'm quite confused why I shouldn't be studying engine games and trying to learn from those. Fair enough some moves are based on variations calculated so far ahead they're useless to humans; but those are in the extreme minority. When you have 5 engine arrows on a board w/ respective evaluations it's usually very obvious what the engine is saying; if there's a massive divergence in evaluations then there's a tactic in the air; if all 5 evaluations are similar then you're usually positionally or materially ahead. Obs when studying own games or GM games, best to start w/o engine; but if you want to check if your intuition was right, is it better to have no answer (assuming no annotation, no coach); or get an answer from Kasparov (but he can only give answers, he can't explain why). Imagine getting Kasparov to analyze all your games (after you have) to tell you if you missed tactics; or maybe his top five moves are to develop a piece (get the hint!) or don't move this pawn because, click click click, oh right I made an outpost for the opponent. Anyway, great chat, it's all a massive grey area but personally I couldn't imagine having not gone through all my games w/ an engine to tell me when I went wrong, how I could have improved, what I missed etc (after I have tried to figure it out myself); Maybe if you're 2400 maybe it's less important bc you don't miss a lot.

[@sgs138]

On the training Kostya went through in St Louis (not chess training), the actual content of things like that is often a lot of common sense, but I think the broader goal is to establish a culture that takes sexual misconduct seriously, and having everyone go through the training and keeping the issue in the open is a big part of that. I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss it as just a money grab by consultants.

[@jcup4702]

It can be both a cash grab and still provide value for the participants.

[@jcup4702]

I see it like police presence. 95% of times officers are just loafing around and grabbing their belts or safety vests, but still they prevent crime by demonstrating that you are gonna get hurt if you mess with society.

[@Fluxion11]

​@jcup4702 agreed. I can tell you this: de&i is a grift 100% of the time.

[@justinmichot5298]

I don't know of any other stream that offers a stream without the eval bar. It is very distracting for me personally. Please do not add it.

[@shawnnevalainen1337]

The one person of the three who did figure out how to become a GM criticizes the two who have not become GMs for not following the program. They both give a lot of excuses about why they're bouncing around doing other things and why they think winging it is just as good as following the program. Checkmate.

[@gmchess5184]

They start by talking about 8-9 year old accusations and why or why didn't this chess site or that site do something remember they want you to have what they have nothing. I was thinking of joining before they "totally" switched to Blitz. 41 points overage gain. Well if you just play people below your rating you will get 41 points or more maybe. Pardon my French but what somebody I don't know says something about somebody else I don't know doesn't help anybody but it makes money on youtube

[@ChessDojo]

It's just Kostya doing the blitz! Btw we can help you become a real GM 😛

[@Opferschach]

Jesse: You two are not trusting the program the way I designed it. David and Kostya: Design the program the way we want it to be designed, then we'll be following it.

[@jlconn9142]

Kostya hit the nail on the head ... rating does not equal chess ability; Jesse can't seem to understand that basic fact - ratings exist only to rank players relative to each other. In spite of his entertaining the folly of rating players throughout time, Arpad Elo addressed this fairly clearly in his book. Inlation/deflation are concepts that only matter to those who maintain the misconception that rating is equivalent to chess ability. There is no such thing as "a 1600 player" or "a 1900 player" - this is simply a misconception. Ratings are only useful generally for ranking a group of players that regularly plays among themselves and for a particular player to show trends in changing chess strength.

[@shawnnevalainen1337]

OMG Kostya. On and on with "yeah but" and weak arguments about why what you feel like doing is "correct." In my opinion, special cases and exceptions and hypotheticals are exactly the wrong things to present to students if you want them to follow a plan. Just let the point land that David and Jesse are trying to make about engines. It's rude at a certain point. Students working without engines and doing the suggested work will improve. Students buying into all your exceptions and excuses and playing around with engines like all the other people who don't improve could very well not improve themselves. Maybe one in a hundred will improve 5% faster, but why bring in all the complication and mental gymnastics to allow for that? It's your ego talking, and it's irrational. Your self deception is clear to see, and it wouldn't surprise me if it holds you back from ever reaching your goals. Rigorous honesty works wonders.

[@theemptyatom]

Gets worse every year with more and more woke nonsense, so I am way happy to work from home then have to deal with modern day wokeness. 2 more years to retire (2 more annual wasted training sessions), so hopefully I can make it.

[@defqqq]

7:00 So David, you think, that that the opportunity people have through the training to learn how to act in difficult situations they may not have experience with, or they learn not to act in a certain way they may consider innocent or appropriate but it actually isn't, is a waste of time? And no one except consulting company is benefiting? Jesse seems to agree as well. You two really are pathetic. Poor Kostya... is all I can say😂😂

[@bluefin.64]

There is enough reason to be skeptical about a lot of this kind of corporate training. It's an industry built on fear of lawsuits more than concern over meaningful issues.

[@chesscomdpruess]

Of course it depends on the training, and I have not participated in the one Kostya just did. I am generally skeptical of them for very good reasons, which you don’t address, but surely I can be wrong about individual trainings or even all of them. That’s why I asked Kostya what he had learned from it: to explore the possibility that it may have been of value to him. From his response, I understood that it was of minimal value; what did you glean from his response?

[@chesscomdpruess]

Personally I have even participated in a training that was worthwhile, and another that had some small but non-zero value. So I don’t mean to dismiss them all. One extra reason I was skeptical of this training is because I am skeptical of the motivations of those who are buying and instituting it for their staff. I think they are doing so for P.R. purposes, when they don’t actually care about the issues the training is supposed to be about.

[@defqqq]

@@chesscomdpruess You know David, I just spent 10 minutes thinking and typing a relatively nice response, but then I rewatched your answer at 7:00, got amazed by your ignorance again and to top it off I misclicked and lost the whole comment and I'm not writing it again. If you want to know what I gleaned how about you listen to Kostya's answer to your question about what he learned. It's probably going to be the first time you actually listen to it anyway, because I think that as he spoke all you were thinking about was your rebuttal. If from his answer you don't understand how that training was of value to him and others who went through it, then I doubt I will be able to explain it.

[@ChessJourneyman]

It's 80% corporate bs to justify the money expenditure.

[@3Torts]

David gives off creepy Socialist vibes.