Level 30, no improvement
I'm plowing through my second rep of level 30 and if my form holds I will not improve at all on my first rep percentage. Given that my 'improvement' on levels 10 and 20 was pretty small, I'm inclined to think I'm not quite going about this the right way.My current idea is that my first time through these problems was too long ago. It was 9-10 months ago that I was doing level 30 problems. In the DLM plan, the first rep takes 2 months and the second rep 1 month, etc. So the problems get repeated twice in the first 3 months. I don't know if this is an ideal timescale, but it has worked for other people. In any case, the long break that I had since last doing these problems was too long.
So I have two changes to make. One, I need to complete a program of learning these problems in one shot, starting and stopping and starting again didn't work. Two, if I don't get to the end of the problem set at the end of 2 months, I go back to the beginning no matter how far I've gotten.
CT-Art results for level 30:
Rep 1: 86%
Rep 2: 86% (162 done from 221)
Update: I've finished level 30 at 84%. Looks like I have a lot of work to do if I want to improve my percentages.
Labels: progress report
posted by Loomis @ 11:50 AM
8 comments
8 Comments:
There are definitely strong recency effects. That's one reason I broke up my solving loops into groups of 300 or so problems...
Bluedevil suggested I contact you. I have several questions regarding CT-ART 3.0. Please contact me via email.
Thanks.
Gateway
Most of what I've experienced with CT-Art is written about here in my blog, though I'd be happy to elaborate if you have questions. The reason I chose CT-Art to begin with was that a few other people have documented their progress using this particular set of problems. That way I don't feel like I'm wandering in the darkness.
Technical difficulty: I don't have your email address.
I’m sorry I have to contact you like this but I can find no other way to contact you.
Announcing the first ever Chess Blog Carnival to be held on September 1, 2007 at my blog.
There are now thousands of carnivals on the web. Almost every area of interest has its own carnival. Except for chess blogs. Until now.
The advantages of having a chess carnival: (1) For bloggers – to showcase a sample of their work to the chess community; (2) For readers – to sample content from a wide variety of chess blogs in one place. A Chess Blog Carnival will also encourage quality work. If a blogger knows that his piece is being showcased right alongside pieces from the other blogs, then that serves as a motivator right there.
I don’t mean to be presumptuous in doing this. I just know that instead of complaining about nobody doing something, pointing fingers, and endless discussing, sometimes it’s best that someone just steps up and gets the ball rolling. That’s what I’m doing. If someone else wants to take over, then that would be fine with me. In fact, I need all the help on this that I can get.
First, hosting. The successful carnivals rotate blog hosts from month to month.
Second, publicity. The successful carnivals have a number of blogs who post an announcement on the upcoming carnival on their blogs and keep doing so each month.
Third, participation. Successful carnivals have a large sample of work from their blogging communities. Note here, bloggers don’t do any additional work. A carnival is not for original pieces written just for the carnival. A carnival is for work that has already been posted onto the blog.
I’ll still to contact as many blogs this weekend as possible. I’d like the initial roll-out of this venture to be as high quality as possible. Once people see what a chess carnival can look like, then they can have a better idea of what this is all about. Please help!
Here the link for further information on this:
http://blogcarnival.com/bc/cprof_2250.html
That page includes a link to submit a post from your blog for inclusion in the carnival.
Jack Le Moine
jacklemoine.blogspot.com
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Thanks, I've removed the comment for your own privacy.
According to "Spaced Repetition" theorists, we should review new info more often when we first learn it and less often thereafter to minimize effort and maximize recall.
SM-0 is one such algorithm. It roughly says we should review new info after 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, etc weeks in order to maximize long-term retention. Of course, if you find your recall is >95% or <80% after 1 week you can do your initial review sooner or later as appropriate.
I haven't tried it myself, but I studied so many endgame positions this week that perhaps I will. I would hate to forget them!
That's interesting as it's exactly opposite of the schedule recommended by DLM. I don't think DLM based his idea on a researched theory as much as just working your rear end off until you can do a set of problems quickly and easily.
Maybe when I'm through with CT-Art I'll pick up another set of exercises and try to follow an SM-0 schedule.
Post a Comment
<< Home