Timeline for How long to get a 200 rating point increase from serious chess study alone according to this academic paper?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 28, 2016 at 18:04 | comment | added | jaxter | I would agree that the relative sizes of v5 (6.3) and v6 (20.3) suggest that it's 3 times more valuable to spend an hour playing in a tournament game per week than it is to study for that hour. It's intuitive to suspect, though, that this variable has its own point of diminishing returns; in other words, if you play for 40 hours a week, do you get twice the benefit of 20 hours / week? The model says you should not. What if I switch the extra 20 hours to study? Is that more beneficial? If not, what are the right crossover numbers? More research is needed; it seems the factors must vary... | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 17:54 | comment | added | jaxter | @sharcashmo The factors for v1, v2 and v6 are 195, 32.5 and 20, respectively. So, v6's factor is about 60% as influential on the Predicted ELO as v2's. Adding v2 and v6 together results in 52.5. This combined factor is only 27% as influential as total hours of serious study, so it takes 4 hours of tournament play (total and weekly combined) to accomplish what you can achieve with 1 hour of total serious study time. Interestingly, the number of hours per week of study is insignificant; it's the total hours that matter. Don't rush. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 8:00 | comment | added | sharcashmo | It's interesting that, beside these two variables, v6 (current hours/week tournament play) is also very important, near to the total hours spent in tournament play. I'd think there's some correlation between v6 and v1, so the difference between study and tournament play is not so large. On the other hand v5 is not so great, so one could conclude that the diference between study and play is not so large, but positive effects of study are actually more permanent while playing must be practised or otherwise its effect is partially lost. | |
| Sep 28, 2016 at 0:56 | history | answered | jaxter | CC BY-SA 3.0 |