Cunningham Prop bet to get to 2100 - Page 2 - Chess and Board Game Strategy

Dire · 03-16-2010, 02:00 AM

Any specifications? Are you playing exactly one game for the prop? If you're playing several games against him that makes the bet vastly easier. If he plans to play 'normal' chess against you and hasn't played in a decade then the bet would be pretty easy - get yourself to a decent level tactically and then book up like crazy in some trap openings such as the BDG, stonewall (as white), etc. But if he's going to play 1. b3 or 1. .. b6 type stuff then this bet is going to be really tough as even if he's lost a ton off his peak ability, playing slow maneuvering chess is going to be damn tough to learn in a year. I suppose it's also actually most likely that he does play some off beat stuff exactly for this reason.

Nezh · 03-16-2010, 04:07 AM

If someone with 1950 strength does not work on his chess for more than 20 years, it must fall at least 100 points. So I´d say Howard Lederer IF he hasnt done any ´secret training´in the past two decades (like keep following chess closely, looking through some middlegame books, practising tactics, playing regularly over the internet), he should be regarded as a player with a rating of maximally 1850, probably leaning towrds 1800.

Now Allen seems to be close to 1400 so there is about a 400 elo point gap to close. That is doable in one year, but not easy. Howard will have the strength of a decent club player, nothing more, but nothing less (certainly not a Master-strenght player as was sometimes suggested on TV).

The structure of the bet is a bit weird though. You guys should just play a match over say eight or ten semi-rapid games or something. One game of chess is a little like playing one hand of poker. You can make great progress in a years time, but the best advice is to get a coach to have a session with say once a week who reviews what you are working on, looks at some of your speedchess games and identifies where you need to concentrate your effort. Hell, this Forum´s International Master Curtains (Greg Shahade, rated at about 2450) would be an ideal coach. Poker pro, very strong chess player and hey, the forum might get some inside info and get to make sidebets. GL in your venture, chess is a rich and beautiful game.

All-inMcLovin · 03-16-2010, 10:08 AM

I agree that this should be a brief match.

One game can be pretty high variance and not prove much. Blunders do happen.

A 5 game or 7 game match where the time control is G/45 or G/60 would be a lot better than just one game.

Also like other people asked, who chooses color (random?) and what happens to the bet if the game is a draw?

Welcome to the chess forum Allen, and all the best with your journey up the mountain of chess!

Writing that, makes me think of this book cover art:

Disclaimer: not a book to get you ready for the match, this one is probably for 2000+ (or really ambitious 1800+) but I think it fits the "climbing the ranks of chess" image pretty well.

smilingbill · 03-16-2010, 10:59 AM

Seems like Allen has a good shot of making this provided he keeps training and playing for the whole year. As already stated, the match rules also matter. IF Howard is as rusty as speculated, I think rapid-ish time controls should favor Allen right?

edit: amusing timing with the Carlsen thread by the way. maybe he'd exchange poker lessons for chess lessons

cld343 · 03-16-2010, 12:11 PM

6 hrs a day for a year? I would bet on you. Any reasonably intelligent person spending that amount of time studying (not just playing blitz chess) and working on their game should get well above 2000. Similar to poker I think. Some people play a lot and study a little to get better, whereas others spend vast amounts of time with poker theory, concepts, analyzing past play, making adjustments, etc... A coach/trainer in chess would increase your chances. Just playing against Rybka alone isn't enough because you'll not understand why some moves are rated better than others until you get a deep understanding of the game. After 9 months, Rybka should be your best friend for the next 3 months. Howard should have little chance if he truly doesn't play/study between now and then.

holla · 03-16-2010, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cld343

6 hrs a day for a year? I would bet on you. Any reasonably intelligent person spending that amount of time studying (not just playing blitz chess) and working on their game should get well above 2000.

Yeah and then just another year and another 800 points and he is a worldchampion. It took 5 years for Karjakin to get to 2200 and I bet he studied hard.

cld343 · 03-16-2010, 12:29 PM

holla, there is a big difference in playing and learning as a young kid and spending 2000 hours as an adult studying in a very structured way. The second part of your post is comical. It's a lot easier to go from 1200 to 2000 than from 2000 to 2400. I didn't suggest that anyone can gain 800 a year every year. It only happens once. It isn't a linear scale. If you don't understand that, then this whole discussion is pointless. I passed the 2000 rating point in much less than 2000 hours of study. I really doubt many people here have put in that amount of time studying, including me. Most people just play to get better.

Dire · 03-16-2010, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by holla

Yeah and then just another year and another 800 points and he is a worldchampion. It took 5 years for Karjakin to get to 2200 and I bet he studied hard.

kids are dumb.

kind of funny since it goes against stereotypes for chess in particular but I'm also very serious at the same time. the reason adults typically don't experience much improvement is they don't have the time and/or motivation to spend so much time on a board game. a successful poker pro in a prop bet happens to have both.

I mean a kid who learns and starts studying the game at 6 years old (as many do) and makes 2100 at 10 years old is generally going to be considered pretty much a prodigy. If a guy learned chess at 20 years old, studied it constantly and was 'only' 2100 after 4 years (at 24) you'd probably consider him completely hopeless.

cld343 · 03-16-2010, 12:57 PM

Dire nailed it. Intelligence plus hard work equals results. If you have put in over 2000 hours and haven't vastly improved, you either didn't work hard or ....

holla · 03-16-2010, 03:57 PM

Children have more brain cells. I think for that reason they are more creative. Olders just use their few cells left better which has become with experience.

Allen C · 03-16-2010, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by holla

Children have more brain cells. I think for that reason they are more creative. Olders just use their few cells left better which has become with experience.

Little do you realize this is a point in my favor. Howard is 15 years older than I am so I'm way ahead in the brain cell department. Also your earlier post reminded me of Rocky 4 when Ivan Drago says stoically to Apollo before their fight, "you will lose." I was scared.

As far as the nature of the match it will just be one rapidish game with a coinflip deciding the colors. The bet isn't who will be the best player after one year, it's just who will win that game. It's gambling, we're gamblers. Plus that way the loser can still claim they would have won if the format were a week long Kasparov vs Karpov struggle.

What do you guys think are the benefits of hiring a live coach? At present I only plan to use an online site to send games for criticism, and of course I'll look at chess engine analysis. I've simply researched my own lesson plan and will gather the appropriate books and software as needed.

Unfortunately the existence of this thread means I'm probably doomed anyway. If HL finds it his ego might come in to play and he'll actually prepare. Maybe I should have thought of that before telling anybody.

holla · 03-16-2010, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allen C

Little do you realize this is a point in my favor. Howard is 15 years older than I am so I'm way ahead in the brain cell department. Also your earlier post reminded me of Rocky 4 when Ivan Drago says stoically to Apollo before their fight, "you will lose." I was scared.

As far as the nature of the match it will just be one rapidish game with a coinflip deciding the colors. The bet isn't who will be the best player after one year, it's just who will win that game. It's gambling, we're gamblers. Plus that way the loser can still claim they would have won if the format were a week long Kasparov vs Karpov struggle.

What do you guys think are the benefits of hiring a live coach? At present I only plan to use an online site to send games for criticism, and of course I'll look at chess engine analysis. I've simply researched my own lesson plan and will gather the appropriate books and software as needed.

Unfortunately the existence of this thread means I'm probably doomed anyway. If HL finds it his ego might come in to play and he'll actually prepare. Maybe I should have thought of that before telling anybody.

The children question was just a seperate thing. IMO coaches are not needed. Just download a strong engine and use a little bit of your brain to figure why it thinks like that. But remember you do not have to understand everything. Prob better to just concentrate to those moves that make your position more than 1 pawn worse compared to the best option.

jontsef · 03-16-2010, 09:23 PM

Hey Allen,

I personally think you have a great shot at this. I agree with the other posters in that you'd have a really good shot if you work on your tactics and spend a good portion of those 6 hours solving problems.

Tactics and calculating ability.

Howard will obviously be rusty in that department and it would, most likely, be the deciding factor.

As for the openings, in order to take advantage of your (by then) better tactical acumen, you'd want to reach positions that are highly tactical.
Messy or complicated positions would be to your benefit, basically taking him out of his comfort zone.

A poster in the Dan Harrington thread said Howard plays boring systems and not main line stuff, so I'm not really sure how to prepare for those. Perhaps that poster remembers what lines Howard plays. Anyway try to complicate the position, maybe gambit a pawn or something.

All-inMcLovin · 03-16-2010, 09:40 PM

A+ post and I agree.

Since it is only going to be one game vs HL, this is all excellent advice. His superior strategic/positional knowledge has more of a chance to show itself in a 7 game match.

AffleckKGB · 03-17-2010, 02:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Allen C

What do you guys think are the benefits of hiring a live coach? At present I only plan to use an online site to send games for criticism, and of course I'll look at chess engine analysis. I've simply researched my own lesson plan and will gather the appropriate books and software as needed.

Why in the world wouldn't you hire a coach?