30 Days of Puzzle Racer: The Challenge That Made Me Feel Weaker

Very nice blog post! I love how you structure your learning and your desire to know how good you really are.

As for the feeling of getting slower and dumber during serious study, have you heard of Dunning-Kruger? It basically says that the difference between your perception of how good you are and your actual skills is inversely proportional to your skill. Once you begin to truly get better, you realize how many things you could improve and it makes you feel stupid, but without going through that part you can't improve at all.

So it's your choice whether you want to feel good and be terrible or get good and feel terrible.

Very nice blog post! I love how you structure your learning and your desire to know how good you really are. As for the feeling of getting slower and dumber during serious study, have you heard of [Dunning-Kruger](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect)? It basically says that the difference between your perception of how good you are and your actual skills is inversely proportional to your skill. Once you begin to truly get better, you realize how many things you could improve and it makes you feel stupid, but without going through that part you can't improve at all. So it's your choice whether you want to feel good and be terrible or get good and feel terrible.

Rank-8_RK

Great blog, sadly i cant give any tips since im not good myself :)
But keep it up and good luck with your challenges, may God be with you!

Great blog, sadly i cant give any tips since im not good myself :) But keep it up and good luck with your challenges, may God be with you!

svensp edited

I think there's a big difference between training calculation on the one hand and training tactical pattern recognition on the other and your post reads to me as though you did calculation training during a pattern recognition exercise and this slowed you down, as calculation is more conscious and pattern recognition is more of an unconscious process.

Perhaps integrating the failed puzzles into separate calculation training exercises while not changing anything about how you do puzzle racer (more intuitive training of pattern recognition instead of calculation) could be helpful, instead of trying to change the puzzle racer approach.

The idea behind this would be that over time it could lead to an improvement with the patterns in question, but to have that improvement take place outside of the actual puzzle racer exercises, so that there is no effect of slowing down.

Interesting experiment and blog post. I'm not close to your puzzle racer level (my best score is 66), but I may have something to contribute on the issue described with getting slower while paying more attention to accuracy. I've had similar experiences with puzzle storm. I think there's a big difference between training calculation on the one hand and training tactical pattern recognition on the other and your post reads to me as though you did calculation training during a pattern recognition exercise and this slowed you down, as calculation is more conscious and pattern recognition is more of an unconscious process. Perhaps integrating the failed puzzles into separate calculation training exercises while not changing anything about how you do puzzle racer (more intuitive training of pattern recognition instead of calculation) could be helpful, instead of trying to change the puzzle racer approach. The idea behind this would be that over time it could lead to an improvement with the patterns in question, but to have that improvement take place outside of the actual puzzle racer exercises, so that there is no effect of slowing down.

GaunterODimm01

idk, at one point doing puzzle races seemed to me as just to memorise all the patterns and the score will be okayish

djconnel edited

Unlike chess-com puzzles, lichess puzzles are taken from real games. Chess-com puzzles are often simplified positions, where you can get the result by blinding throwing pieces at the opposing king. Lichess positions tend to be more cluttered, as are real game positions, so identifying the winning line is a bit more challenging, at least in the initial stages. I do both, and both have merit, but I find puzzle racer substantially less repetitive than chess-com puzzle battle.

One change I might like to see would be a penalty, for example 5 points, for wrong moves. This would encourage accuracy over speed to some extent, and better represent skills applicable to real games.

I really appreciate your puzzle races. It's more fun than playing anonymous random people from a pool. There's more continuity game-to-game. I usually finish last, which is fine, but my focus is on success rate, not on how many points I get. I find in puzzle racer some of my best scores come when I get puzzles wrong. So going for high score encourages being sloppy. For my games, I think it's more important to be accurate. But you and other top players really amaze me at how fast you can solve some of these relatively complex positions. Unlike chess-com puzzles, lichess puzzles are taken from real games. Chess-com puzzles are often simplified positions, where you can get the result by blinding throwing pieces at the opposing king. Lichess positions tend to be more cluttered, as are real game positions, so identifying the winning line is a bit more challenging, at least in the initial stages. I do both, and both have merit, but I find puzzle racer substantially less repetitive than chess-com puzzle battle. One change I might like to see would be a penalty, for example 5 points, for wrong moves. This would encourage accuracy over speed to some extent, and better represent skills applicable to real games.

DaBassie

To be honest, I have real difficulty believing puzzle racer could help for substantial improvement. Maybe for people that have not been playing for years, it might be good to get rolling again, but I wouldn't think it's more than that.

Racer (and rush) just forces the brain to make decisions under heavy time pressure. The brain just falls back onto established habits then. I strongly feel it's better to take loads of time, so that the brain can explore new ideas and substitute old habits with better ones.

That's my theory. No idea how to do that in practice though, lol. Not sure if anyone does, to be honest.

Good luck though, hopefully you prove me wrong :P
-Ray

To be honest, I have real difficulty believing puzzle racer could help for substantial improvement. Maybe for people that have not been playing for years, it *might* be good to get rolling again, but I wouldn't think it's more than that. Racer (and rush) just forces the brain to make decisions under heavy time pressure. The brain just falls back onto established habits then. I strongly feel it's better to take loads of time, so that the brain can explore new ideas and substitute old habits with better ones. That's my theory. No idea how to do that in practice though, lol. Not sure if anyone does, to be honest. Good luck though, hopefully you prove me wrong :P -Ray

Bleak_Mind_Emptiness

edited

I'm also hooked on Puzzle Racer and often play Bullet or fast blitz (3+0). It's terrible. You are a maniac, you probably spent about a month on racing (taking into account the analysis). We need to play slow, meaningful games (and creative variations like Chess 960) and solve standard, hard puzzles (not speed ones).
There are two things in chess: understanding the game and speed. Many people are firstly fast. Sometimes, even a bullet rating can be 500 or more points higher than a blitz or rapid (many players almost do not play rapid) rating. Understanding deserves more respect, and those who "understand" the game well are usually fast, while "fast" players don't necessarily understand it well, and I don't like last type of players.
It's strange, but your Bullet/Blitz/Rapid stats suggest you're a slow but "understanding" player. But you prefer the fast-TCs first. Although maybe I'm wrong and you're more of a balanced player with a bias towards understanding the game.
But your skill level doesn't improve in adults (at least not as much as it might in a child or teenager) and, on the contrary, it actually declines around age 25-30.
Although, even if someone hasn't been playing chess very seriously before (even if they've been playing for years), they can still improve a bit if they practice properly. There are also other chess variants. Antichess is particularly prominent. There are people who are weak at standard chess but incredibly strong at Antichess. Some people compare addiction to antichess to drug.
There's also the issue of ratings/performance—it's not entirely objective, and it's also very difficult to stop thinking about it. People are very vain, even when their level or that notorious rating isn't all that high.
I try not to think about the ranking, but the most I've done is start playing in Zen mode. But almost always, right after a game, I check who I played against, and I'd better stop doing that too.
Equality is nonsense, it will never happen.
It turns out that equality is absolute nonsense; it will never happen. And our game is a miserable, dismal existence, a degradation, especially compared to masters and champions (comparisons with programs are probably not entirely appropriate, but still).

I'm also hooked on Puzzle Racer and often play Bullet or fast blitz (3+0). It's terrible. You are a maniac, you probably spent about a month on racing (taking into account the analysis). We need to play slow, meaningful games (and creative variations like Chess 960) and solve standard, hard puzzles (not speed ones). There are two things in chess: understanding the game and speed. Many people are firstly fast. Sometimes, even a bullet rating can be 500 or more points higher than a blitz or rapid (many players almost do not play rapid) rating. Understanding deserves more respect, and those who "understand" the game well are usually fast, while "fast" players don't necessarily understand it well, and I don't like last type of players. It's strange, but your Bullet/Blitz/Rapid stats suggest you're a slow but "understanding" player. But you prefer the fast-TCs first. Although maybe I'm wrong and you're more of a balanced player with a bias towards understanding the game. But your skill level doesn't improve in adults (at least not as much as it might in a child or teenager) and, on the contrary, it actually declines around age 25-30. Although, even if someone hasn't been playing chess very seriously before (even if they've been playing for years), they can still improve a bit if they practice properly. There are also other chess variants. Antichess is particularly prominent. There are people who are weak at standard chess but incredibly strong at Antichess. Some people compare addiction to antichess to drug. There's also the issue of ratings/performance—it's not entirely objective, and it's also very difficult to stop thinking about it. People are very vain, even when their level or that notorious rating isn't all that high. I try not to think about the ranking, but the most I've done is start playing in Zen mode. But almost always, right after a game, I check who I played against, and I'd better stop doing that too. Equality is nonsense, it will never happen. It turns out that equality is absolute nonsense; it will never happen. And our game is a miserable, dismal existence, a degradation, especially compared to masters and champions (comparisons with programs are probably not entirely appropriate, but still).