April 8, 2025 • 54 mins
122 You hear the positives of competing in OTB classical events all the time (including from me on this podcast). And their improvement benefits are undeniable. However, they have some serious downsides: money, time, and energy, just to name a few. To the point where I’ve become uncertain whether they’re worth it. And so has my guest, FM Nate Solon.
In this episode, we discuss:
- The many challenges of OTB classical events, like creating difficult situations for proper eating, sleeping, and recovery.
- The identity component of "serious chess players play OTB classical" creates unnecessary pressure.
- Potential solutions like shorter time controls, more desirable tournament experiences, or online classical competitions.
FM Nate Solon is a coach, Chessable course creator, and author of a popular weekly newsletter, Zwischenzug. Here are links to all of that:
More From Nate Solon:
- Article: I Don’t Like Chess Tournaments
- Article: What Would a Fun Chess Tournament Look Like?
- Chessable Courses
- Weekly Newsletter: Zwischenzug
How You Can Support the Pod:
Join this show’s Patreon called “Podcast Perks” and get benefits like:
- Submitting questions to guests
- A shout-out of your name on the pod
- Vote on future topics/guests
- Exclusive behind-the-scenes updates about the show
- DM me any month for a brief chat on chess or episodes
Click here to join the Patreon for The Chess Experience.
Or you can…
>>Support this pod by grabbing a chess.com membership which will help you improve your chess & defeat your enemies. A small portion will fund this pod - and every bit helps! Just click this link.
>> Neither? How about checking out Daniel's chess.com profile? Witness his countless, embarrassing blitz losses. He even accepts some friend requests. (Ad)
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Daniel (00:05):
Hey, welcome to the chess experience On this show.
It's all about helping adultimprovers.
I want to make learning chesseasier for you to navigate and I
also want you to have a morefun experience along the way.
I'm your host, daniel Lona, afellow chess amateur.
Let's get to it.
This show is sponsored bychesscom, the world's largest
(00:29):
chess community.
Chesscom recently launched a newway to learn from your games
with a feature called insights.
If you visit chesscom slashinsights, you can get detailed
stats and analysis in any of thetime controls you've played and
across any time period.
What kind of things can youlearn?
(00:50):
Well, you can learn.
What time of day do you playyour best morning, afternoon or
night?
What part of the game are youstrongest or weakest?
Opening, middle game or endgame?
Are you making more or lessmistakes than opponents at your
level?
You can find out all this greatinfo and much more at chesscom
slash insights.
Welcome to this week's episode.
Have you ever been to an OTBclassical tournament, but the
(01:11):
experience didn't live up toyour expectations?
Or perhaps you've yet to attendone of these events, but
haven't because of the cost ortime needed for them?
Well, in this chat, I discusswith FIDE master, nate Solan,
some of the problems with OTBclassical tournaments, at the
very least those in the US,though some of these issues may
be present in other countriestoo.
(01:32):
In this chat, we explore whyOTB classical events may not be
as great of an experience as wewant them to be.
Some reasons for this that wetalk about include the number of
games played in one weekendthat's a big one the energy and
time required to attend an event, as well as the playing
(01:53):
conditions.
Now, this episode may offersome therapeutic grieving over
these challenges, both for Nateand I talking about it as well
as you, but we do also spendsome time considering possible
solutions to this problem.
Specifically, we discuss somechanges that we'd love
tournament organizers to make,as well as some alternatives you
could consider for getting yourimprovement benefits without
(02:14):
having to play a full weekendtournament.
Finally, you may be familiarwith Nate Solan as he's been a
guest on this show two timespreviously, but if you're not,
nate is a FIDE master, he is acoach and he's published several
opening courses on Chessable.
He also regularly publishes apopular weekly chess newsletter
called Zwischenzug, and links tothat newsletter, as well as his
(02:37):
Chessable courses, are in theshow notes.
So I hope you enjoyed thisepisode.
It's a little bit of adifferent style than my typical
episodes.
In this one we're going to justdive all in on this discussion
on this topic.
So here's our discussion on OTBclassical tournaments, some of
the big challenges that we havewith them, as well as, hopefully
, some solutions we could seefor it in the future.
(02:59):
Hi Nate, I'm excited to haveyou back on the show.
Great to be here with you today.
How are you doing?
I'm great.
Glad to be back.
Yeah, it's great to have youhere.
I'm really excited that you'rehere to talk about OTB
tournaments as a littlebackground for people listening
and or watching.
A couple weeks ago, you wrotean article expressing your lack
(03:22):
of interest these days in goingto OTB classical tournaments and
I found it refreshing because Ithink and I'm a little bit
guilty of this myself actuallyall you hear in the community is
just go to OTB classical events, go to OTB classical events and
of course, there are greatreasons to go.
But in your article youhighlighted a lot of the
(03:44):
drawbacks, which I don't thinkare discussed enough if we want
to be honest about what thatexperience is like, especially
for adults.
So do you want to talk a littlebit about that, nate, just sort
of like set it up for us, likewhat have you been doing with
OTB tournaments in the pastcouple of years, and then what
led to this decision to write anarticle about what you were not
enjoying about them?
Nate (04:05):
Yeah for sure.
So I've been.
I don't have a lot of time fortournaments these days.
I've got two kids, one who'salmost three, one who's almost
one, so I'm just not able toplay that many.
But I have been trying to playa few per year because I am a
coach and I think it's importantto keep that experience of
(04:27):
playing in tournaments of right.
When you don't play for a longtime, it all starts to seem
pretty simple.
You're sort of like you know,hey, what's the big deal?
You just play good moves, butthen, right when you go to the
tournament, you realize it'svery, very difficult and it's
maybe not even the chess side ofit, that's.
But.
But emotions, fatigue, like allthose things you experience at
a tournament and it's, it's alot harder than you would think
(04:49):
it would be.
So I'm so I try to play themsomewhat consistently to stay in
touch with that experience.
But I guess what, yeah, what,what, what drove me to, drove me
to write this blog post, andwas that like I don't really
look forward to playing in thesetournaments, like, like, if
anything, it's like I want to goand experience this pain so I
can sort of empathize with mystudents, you know and be a
(05:11):
better coach, but at the sametime, I'm like, well, hey, I
like I love chess.
Chess is a huge part of my life.
Like I wish we had sometournaments that I looked
forward to playing, as opposedto like I got to really like
psych myself up and grit myteeth to to drag myself to this
(05:34):
thing, you know.
Daniel (05:34):
So that was kind of the the background of it.
Was there a particular event ormoment that led you to say,
okay, this is kind of reachedthe breaking point for me.
I don't know if this is worthit anymore.
Nate (05:43):
Yeah Well, I wrote it specifically about after this
tournament, us Amateur Team East, which is a really popular
tournament I've gone to the lastfew years.
It's always one I'm really onthe fence about because I play
on a team with one of mystudents, with some friends, and
there are a lot of friends Ihave in the chess community who,
like this tournament is likethe only time I see them
(06:05):
throughout the year.
So in that way it's great.
I love the team format.
I think that's that's a greattwist.
I wish there were more teamtournaments so in a way it's
like really close to this greatexperience that I want.
But it also has these featuresthat that a lot of tournaments
have.
But but I think this thistournament has them like
(06:26):
especially.
So one is really really slow.
Time control it's a little bitweird.
It's not 90 plus 30, it's likemore of it slower than the
initial time and there's also anadditional time control and
move 40.
So I'm not remembering theexact time control, but
essentially it's like it's quiteslow.
The rounds are very long, whichto me is really weird for a
team tournament where you thinkthe focus, like the whole point
of the tournament to me is tolike see friends and catch up
(06:48):
with people, but you reallycan't.
There's no time to do thatbecause you're either playing or
you know you're desperatelytrying to get a meal in or maybe
a nap in, just so you can kindof survive the tournament yeah,
yeah for sure.
Daniel (06:59):
before we dive into, like, all the pros and cons of
ot events and I want to do thatand some possible solutions, I
want to just dive into a greatcomment.
You wrote in the article asentence that stuck with me.
You said that because we likechess, we feel we should like
chess tournaments and I thoughtthat was a fascinating insight
(07:21):
and really well said.
That was a fascinating insightand really well said, and I
think my opinion is that thatbrings up the topic of identity,
the notion that if you're anavid chess player, you play in
OTB classical events.
Do you think that that is apart of it, that, as an element
of what you said, that we shouldlike chess tournaments, that
there's an identity involved inthis?
Nate (07:40):
Yeah, I think that's where a lot of the pressure comes
from is.
Yeah, there's this thing thatif you're a chess player, you
should be going to thesetournaments.
I mean, some people even wouldgo as far as to say, like OTB,
classical chess is the only realchess and nothing else even
counts.
So there is that idea.
But I think, like also in thearticle, that the analogy I used
(08:00):
was it's like if the only icecream shop in town had a four
hour wait and you're justcrammed in shoulder to shoulder
and it's like so you, so youdon't go, and people are like oh
, like, oh, you don't like icecream.
It's like, no, I like ice cream, but it's like there's a limit
to what I'll put up with.
You know, this is too much,right, and that's that's kind of
how I feel about over the boardtournaments, but I also feel
(08:23):
like it's it's quite unnecessary, like we could keep a lot of
the good aspects of thesetournaments and reduce or
eliminate the parts of them thatare just incredibly unpleasant
and uncomfortable.
Daniel (08:37):
I mean that's that's definitely something I want to
get into in a little bit whichis, like, what can we do to
improve them?
I'd like to spend a little timetalking about like what, what
isn't good about them, Because,I mean, all we hear about are
the advantages and there aredefinitely, I think I think you
would agree right Like there'sdefinite advantages to going to
OTB tournaments, particularly onthe improvement side of things,
(08:57):
Right, but I don't think we'vethere's been anywhere that did
like an honest airing ofgrievances, the issues that we
have with them, and you did someof that in your article, which
is great.
Do you want to like highlightwhat you think are maybe some of
the top drawbacks that make itdifficult to enjoy OTB classical
?
Nate (09:15):
Yeah for sure.
So I think I guess I would saysort of three categories.
One unreasonable schedules.
So that includes, you know,extremely long round times of
two or even three very longclassical games per day.
You know, rounds startingreally early in the morning or
(09:35):
going really late at night, orrounds scheduled over typical
meal times.
So that'd be one.
Two would be disruption ofsleeping and eating.
Right, so at these terms, simplylike it's very difficult, if
not impossible, to to just sleepand eat in a healthy way, like
you know, very often for roundsto be scheduled that could go to
(09:55):
like 11 or midnight.
You're probably going to bekind of amped up after that, you
know.
So you're going to be.
You're up quite late, maybeplaying around the next morning.
Often there there's not reallylike like a healthy food option.
You know, if it's at a hotel orat some sort of playing venue,
it might be quite hard to gethealthy food like at or near the
venue.
So it's often quite anunhealthy.
(10:17):
You know, when you combine thatwith like stress, you know it's
it, it it's, it's prettyunhealthy.
And then finally, I would say,playing conditions, so things
like being crammed into a smallroom.
Maybe poor ventilation, maybebathrooms are not accessible or
clean.
A lot of people show up tothese tournaments sick.
(10:39):
You can hear them coughing andsneezing in this really cramped
room.
So yeah, for me, those are thethree categories I would put
them in.
Daniel (10:47):
Yeah, those are.
I mean, those are definitelysome of the big issues with them
.
There's another one I wanted tojust talk about a bit and see
if you find this to be an issueas well, or maybe it's just my
own thing.
You know, we think of an OTBclassical event and the time and
energy it's going to take fromus to do the event itself, and
that's definitely true.
But I think there's another bigfactor, which is the time and
(11:08):
energy it takes from you fromthe next week, because they're
typically on weekends.
So I'm talking about the MondayTuesday following.
You've burned through so muchenergy that you end up doing
less, and so I feel like you endup doing less, maybe
productively, on the Monday orTuesday following and therefore
kind of is taking your time eveninto the next week.
(11:28):
Do you find that as well, or amI just like a low energy person
?
Nate (11:58):
no-transcript.
Yeah, it really took me a longtime to recover in terms of
being healthy, getting my energyback.
Daniel (12:05):
So, yeah, I totally agree, that's a huge part of it
as well investments, but ratherthan just be frustrated with the
downsides of the OTB classicalevents and, like I said, I know
(12:29):
there's a lot of greatadvantages to them too but I
want to talk about how we canmaybe make the situation a
little bit better, and to methere's two broad buckets of
doing that.
One is how we could actuallymake the tournaments themselves
better, and the other is, froman improvement standpoint, how
you could maybe find some waysto still get the benefits of
these tournaments without doinga whole weekend event.
So let's start with how we canmake the tournaments themselves
better, something you alreadytouched on.
(12:50):
What would you say are some ofyour top things that you would
like to see organizers dorealistically to make the
experience better?
Nate (12:58):
Well, so my biggest thing in here, you know, I think so
far we've mostly agreed.
Maybe, maybe this is going tobe one where we disagree.
Okay, I think the round shouldbe shorter.
Like for most tournaments, Ithink they should be way shorter
.
Well, example, well, so, okay.
So, you know, 90 plus 30 is kindof this, this international
standard so I would say 90 plus30, I would say is like an
(13:27):
absolute top end, like that,that's the slowest time control
that I would even consider closeto reasonable.
For me, like you know, it'slike.
That's like.
That's like the most seriousinternational competitions.
So if you're having atournament with amateurs, it
really doesn't need to be anyslower than that.
But I would even say mosttournaments can and should be be
a lot faster, because then whenyou, when you try to put two of
those games, or sometimes eventhree, in a single day, it's
(13:48):
just totally crazy.
You're playing like 8, 12 hoursof chess in a day.
I think it's just way too muchand I think we could get.
You know, I do, I do appreciatelike that part of the appeal
and the benefit of chess is likeslowing down and experiencing
that focus over a period of time.
Right, like that's somethingthat's like kind of magical
about chess and that is real andyou know I believe in that.
(14:10):
But I think we could get thatmaybe even more so with, you
know, 60 plus 30, even 30 plus30.
One great point actually mywife made this point is that
when the rounds are too long, itactually takes away from that
(14:31):
quality of focus, because thenthe time between the rounds
becomes so compressed andfrantic yeah.
Like the overall tournamentexperience is so chaotic, even
though the rounds themselves areso long.
So, and I would also say thatyou know, so let's say, to go
from 90 plus 30 to 60 plus 30, Ithink we can have like the
decrease in the quality of play,in my opinion, would be
extremely minimal.
(14:52):
But then that frees up anadditional hour per round.
That just makes it possible tohave like such a more humane
schedule, more humane schedule,and it also makes the you know
from the tournament organizer,like that's something talking
about, like what's realisticfrom the tournament organizers
point of view.
That makes your job easier,because now, right, there's a
(15:12):
shorter round that you know hasto be essentially proctored.
You have more time, you have alot more wiggle room to create a
schedule, to get the pairingsdone and all of that.
So it it's.
You know, just by taking alittle time off, the time
control, you really make yourlife a lot easier.
Daniel (15:27):
Yeah, no, actually I agree with you, Nate, and I
think those are great ideas.
So the standard that I'veexperienced is typically either
is two games that are at least90-30 a day Well, I guess Friday
has typically been one game,but then Saturday, Sunday,
they're two, each for the 90-30.
And I do feel like that's toomuch.
As far as making the gameshorter, I'd be for that.
(15:48):
Actually, I mean to a point.
You know me, I think that's whyyou said that I prefer my long
games.
But I think 60-30 is totallyreasonable.
In fact, that's typically thelength that I do for my practice
games online at home.
So it's like, if that's whatI'm doing at home, 60, 30, why
wouldn't that be good enough fora tournament?
So, yeah, I absolutely think so.
My alternative, I'm sorry, goahead.
Nate (16:07):
I was just going to say.
I actually think that goingfrom 90, 30 to 60, 30, or even
30, 30 might, sort ofparadoxically, help the people
who struggle the most with timepressure.
Because if you're using allyour time in 90 plus 30, like
you probably have a timemanagement issue.
(16:27):
You know, like my, myexperience from from playing in
these tournaments, from workingwith students, is like very,
very few people use that muchtime effectively, like it's
actually very difficult to usethat much time efficiently.
But you have to be.
You know, alexander grischuklike can think for an hour on a
move and at the end of that hourhe understands a lot more than
(16:50):
he did after 10 minutes.
But to be able to do that youactually have to be incredibly
strong, like in visualizationand calculus, calculation and
being able to organize yourthoughts.
So when I'm at that, you know,when I'm sitting across someone,
you can kind of tell whatthey're thinking, and when they
are thinking for 30 or 45minutes I can tell like they're
not figuring out more about theposition.
(17:12):
And likewise yeah, when I, whenI work with students, you know
we and we, if we analyze aposition where I know they spent
half an hour, I mean, if theywere really using that time
efficiently, right, they shouldbe able to tell me so much about
the position.
But it, you know, usually it'sjust they've only looked at a
couple lines.
It's almost always strugglingwith something like, emotionally
(17:32):
or psychologically, element ofknowledge that you really
probably won't be able to figureout during the game.
So, all in all, it's like Idon't think having this huge
amount of time is really helpinganybody.
It's just encouraging people toreally spin their wheels and
(17:53):
get stressed out, and if you'rethe kind of person who always
gets into time pressure, wellyou know you're sort of going to
be in the same boat as youropponents a lot faster.
With a faster time control.
You're not going to have thistemptation to spend a huge
amount of time up front and thenput yourself at a disadvantage.
Daniel (18:10):
Yeah, yeah, totally agree with everything you said,
nate, and I mean frankly, asmuch as I like my longer games,
I would gladly give a littleextra time and do a 60-30 to
have lunch.
Yeah, exactly time and do a60-30 to have lunch.
I think this brings up a goodpoint, even if there was some
significant advantage to havinga 90-30 for your extra time over
(18:31):
60-30 as a club player and itsounds like, nate, you're even
saying maybe it's not evennecessarily true beyond club
player.
Even if that were true, I feellike it's lost in this setting
because of the cost on your timeneeded to eat, to recover, to
sleep, and so whatever you gainin that, I feel like you lose in
those other areas maybe, ifwe're talking about like one
(18:52):
game a day, 90 plus 30 is morereasonable that I could do, but
if we're doing two games a day.
It's really really tough, rightright, so time control was one
big bucket that you said youwould like to see altered.
Is there anything else elsethat you think they could do to
help the situation?
Nate (19:19):
I would say right now, for the most part, we like the
experience at chess tournamentsranges from terrible to
tolerable, but there's not a lotof great experiences Like the
things that count for luxury atchess tournaments are like
coffee is provided, like thereare clean bathrooms.
But you know, imagine if youtold someone like oh, I went to
(19:39):
this conference, it was soluxurious, and you're like, wow,
like what did they have?
It's like, oh, there was coffeethere.
It's like our standards arevery low and we could do a lot
of other things.
You know, simuls, classes,lectures, there's a lot of stuff
we could do.
I was actually I actually wasjust looking at this.
(20:00):
There's this company that I'mgoing to write an upcoming post
about what is called dnd in acastle.
So it it's what it sounds like.
It's a company that does thesevacations that are dungeons and
dragons, like literally in anactual castle.
So you go to this castle.
It's like all-inclusive.
You play these games of, I mean, dungeons and dragons is not
(20:22):
really my thing, but apparentlythey have like amazing dungeon
masters and stuff.
So this is for a four dayvacation.
This is like over $3,000 andthey sell them out.
And for comparison I was justlooking at the world open, right
, like a four day chesstournament, that's like $300.
So, like you know, I'm notsaying your tournament has to be
(20:42):
in a castle, although I'm thatwould be quite on theme for
chess I'd like, right, I thinkit would be cool, or, like you
know, you don't have to chargethree thousand dollars, you
don't have to try to.
Like, you know, like sometournament organizers want to
make money, some just want toprovide a service to the chess
community.
So it's like, depending on whatyou, what you want to do, but
I'm just saying like there isroom to be a lot more creative
(21:03):
with the experience and I thinkthere's a huge community of
chess players out there who arekind of invisible to tournament
organizers because they're notplaying in tournaments right now
.
Yeah, but that community isprobably much bigger than
current tournament players, thancurrent tournament players,
because if you think of, if youcompare online chess to over the
(21:23):
board chess, like US chess,just recently, somewhat recently
, crossed 100,000 members.
Chesscom had over, I think,like 200 million members, like
several years ago, and it'sgotten much bigger since then.
Now you know, some of those arelike duplicates or non-active
accounts or whatever, but, likeyou could certainly say there
(21:43):
are many, many, many times moreonline chess players than over
the board chess players.
So from an organizerperspective, I think, like you
know, how can you like thedetermines we have right now?
I think we're like we sort ofhave a blind spot too because,
like, if you've grown up playingchess, this is what you're
accustomed to.
But if you kind of step back andyou just think about the whole
(22:03):
experience of the average chesstournament in the United States,
it's like wait a second, likethis sucks, like I don't want to
be here, you know, but it couldbe, it could be a lot better.
And if it was like if you cancreate an experience that's
radically better, then all betsare off in terms of like how
many people you can attract,kind of people you can attract,
(22:23):
and like you can potentiallycharge like 10 times as much,
because it's a completelydifferent experience yeah, yeah
for sure.
Daniel (22:31):
Just a clarifying question.
So the comparison between thenumbers of us chess and the
numbers of chesscom is the pointthere that there's still like
99, 98 percent of a large chesspool that they're not tapping
into, you know, like they'rejust getting a tiny fraction
they could attract a lot more.
Nate (22:47):
Is that exactly?
Yeah, like that's what I'msaying.
There's a huge number of peoplewho are interested in chess,
are passionate about chess, butare not going to show up at a
tournament if it's enormouslyinconvenient and intimidating
and grueling and, you know, justat the end of the day, like not
really a lot of fun.
Daniel (23:06):
Right, right Outside of like the castle, which I'm for,
a couple of like easy things youfeel like they could do to make
the experience better, or, youknow, whether just from a
quality perspective or a funperspective.
I think you hinted at a coupleof things like symbols.
Right, I just wanted to kind oflike dive into that part a bit
a couple things like symbols,right.
Nate (23:25):
I just wanted to kind of like dive into that part a bit.
Yeah, I think, like I thinkthere are some little perks and
quality of life things like youknow you should, you should
definitely provide water, youshould provide coffee, like
obviously, that you know itshould be clean.
I think another one that'sthat's very low cost but is a
nice touch is to provide theboards, because I mean, if you,
you, you know, tournament chesssets are not expensive.
It's like if you buy them inbulk I don't know 10, maybe $15
(23:48):
per set, and then obviously youcould, if you're an organizer,
you can reuse those.
I think that's a nice touch topeople, especially if people are
traveling by air they don'thave to pack a chess set.
I actually one thing I found outafter writing this was a lot of
the stuff I'm talking aboutturns out to be pretty unique to
the United States.
I heard from readers not onlyin Europe but also South America
(24:11):
, australia, japan, that theywere horrified not only by the
two classical games per day,which I knew was like mostly an
American thing, right, but alsojust the overall conditions that
boards were not provided, youknow, things like pens weren't
provided.
So it seems like in the UnitedStates we have really a uniquely
(24:33):
low standard for the conditionsof tournament chess.
So I'm not entirely sure whythat is, but it does appear to
be pretty unique to the UnitedStates.
Daniel (24:43):
Yeah, have you been to a European tournament?
Nate (24:47):
I actually you know that's a great question I never have I
wish.
I really regret.
So I live in Omaha, Nebraskanow, so I'm like exactly in the
middle of the United States.
I wish I had gone to theReykjavik Open when I lived in
Boston, which is a very easyflight, but no, I don't think I
ever actually have played atournament in Europe.
Daniel (25:08):
Okay, okay, yeah, on the to-do list then, right, yeah.
So the other part of what Iwanted to talk about related to
quote unquote.
Solving this issue is until orunless OTB tournaments improve
in the US at least.
I want to think of how peoplecould still get some of the
improvement benefits of themeven without going to one,
(25:28):
because I think that is probablythe primary driver for most
people going is to improve theirchess.
So what would you recommend toget some of those benefits
outside of an OTB classicalevent?
Nate (25:41):
Yeah, I do think they're good for improvement, but I
don't think that the reason isprimarily how slow they are.
I think it's more so focus andintensity that you can access in
that environment and alsocommunity that you're going to
meet other people who arepassionate about chess, right.
So I would say you know somethings you can do.
(26:03):
A lot of local clubs run atournament where it's one round
per week.
You know, often, like oneevening per week, the same day,
you go and play one game.
I think that's a great option.
I have a lot of students who dothat and I think you know that
that's really a nice rhythm forimprovement, because then it
sort of gives you this, thisbullet point in your week.
(26:24):
You know you're sort of you'retraining, you're kind of leading
up to that, and then you havesomething to review.
So it's very consistent, but atthe same time you're not going
to not to be overwhelmed at anypoint, right?
So I think that's great.
I think you know if, if yourclub has, or you can convince
them to have faster time, youknow like 60 plus 30 we were
(26:45):
talking about, I think even 30plus 30, or even you know even
like 15 plus 10.
I don't see a ton oftournaments like that, but like
I think those can all be greatfor improvement.
Like I was saying, I think alot of the benefit it's like
it's not like oh, like once youplay like a four hour game that
suddenly unlocks improvement, Ithink that's like that's really
(27:06):
excessive for most people.
Probably even more so, actually, if you know something I've
heard from a lot of people whenthey're like thinking about
playing their first tournamentis like like, what do you even
do with all that time?
Like like what are you supposedto be thinking about?
Daniel (27:18):
so, yeah, I think right for most players, playing more
faster games, yeah, wouldactually be more beneficial I
think anything game that goesbeyond three hours, I start to
get a little punchy in mythinking afterwards.
Nate (27:33):
It's, it's not diminishing return after about three hours
for me one other thing I wouldsuggest just to add one more is
like yeah, you know, a lot oftournaments allow you to request
buys in advance, so I thinkthat's something you should
consider taking advantage of.
Like, I've created somepersonal rules for myself just
to try to make sure, like Ienjoy the experience.
(27:54):
So, for me, I don't playanything slower than 90 plus 30
and I don't play anything slowerthan 90 plus 30.
And I don't play more than twoclassical games per day.
So if there's three classicalgames in a day either, if I
could request a buy for one ofthose in advance, I'll consider
that, but if not, that'sprobably not the tournament for
(28:15):
me.
Daniel (28:16):
Right.
How do you feel about onlineclassical tournaments?
I know things like Chess Dojodoes that.
There's some leagues like a45-45 league online.
How do you feel about that as away to get in your classical
for improvement?
Nate (28:43):
for three hours playing one game, like it's just not
going to happen.
So for me, you know, if I'musing online chess for
improvement, I I might beplaying like 10 plus 5 or like
15 plus 10 or something likethat.
I it just sounds really toughto me to to sit in front of my
computer and play one game forthat long.
Daniel (28:54):
But you know if it works for you, sure yeah, I, I think
I and many others set up a, setup a board.
You you know if it's going tobe a long classical game.
So that way, yeah, staring at ascreen that long is definitely
not terribly enticing.
There's just one thing I wantto touch back on and get your
opinion that you mentioned.
You said another reason peoplego to these OTB events is for
(29:16):
community, to meet people, toconnect with people.
I don't know about you, but Ifound that difficult at these
events and it goes to everythingthat we've already talked about
.
There's so little time outsideof the games to do anything that
I find it makes the socializingjust not what I would hope it
would be.
There's people I say, well,yeah, let's meet up there at the
(29:37):
event and we just never dobecause, like, oh my, you know
my game went long or whatever.
The games just get in the way.
Have you found that to be trueas well?
Nate (29:47):
Yeah, that you know.
That's a good point.
Now that you say it, I probablyit's more so seeing people I
already know than making newconnections, yeah, no-transcript
(30:26):
.
And like I think that's thewrong way to think about it Like
you should have downtime at thetournament, so shorter rounds
would help.
Then, you know, in addition tothings like simuls or classes,
you know you could have like acocktail hour or more social
type events.
You know, maybe a blitztournament, maybe a bug house
(30:46):
tournament, that also.
You know that that also kind ofgets the issue of like kids at
tournaments, cause obviously youknow kids should not be at like
a cocktail hour but, I, thinkif you want the tournament to be
more social and more aboutcommunity, then you know I also
wish there were more adults-onlytournaments.
There's a few there's Alto atCharlotte and some other chess
(31:09):
clubs but yeah, if it's purelyabout competition, obviously I
understand there's a lot of kidswho are amazing at chess and
you know they should be allowedto compete.
But if it's more aboutcommunity and the experience, I
think we should also have moretournaments that are only for
(31:29):
adults and it's like you know weunderstand this is more about
making connections and having agreat experience.
It's not just all outcompetition.
Daniel (31:39):
Right, yeah, I mean, ideally I would like to have a
social component to it as well,which is made almost impossible
to me if the game schedule justputs such a severe time crunch
on everything that it doesn'thappen.
I wanted to ask your opinion onsomething regarding classical
events like the ones we'retalking about and improvement,
which is I've heard from severalcoaches slash title players
(32:01):
that the best way to improve, orone of the best ways to improve
, rather to be fair to them, isto go to these events.
That it'll do as much for yourimprovement as almost anything
else can.
I wonder, do you think that toomuch emphasis is placed on that
for improvement, either just ingeneral, or that these
(32:25):
classical games need to be in a,you know, otb setting?
Nate (32:31):
I think it.
I think they do tend to behelpful.
I mean, you know, it's it'salways like really hard to sort
of tease out cause and effectwith improvement.
Yeah, because we really, youknow, there's nothing like a
randomized controlled trial, soit's all just kind of still back
in the envelope, but I mean itdoes.
(32:53):
I would say it seems likethere's a pattern of people who
play OTB consistently tend toget better, of people who play
OTB consistently tend to getbetter.
I mean, again, you can go backto the cause and effect of it's
like is it they're gettingbetter because they're playing
OTB or is this a?
You know, have you selected asample of, like highly motivated
and engaged players?
Right, still, I would say, youknow, I do believe that it's
(33:16):
good for improvement, but butagain, I think it's it's good
for improvement, but but again Ithink it's it's probably less
to do with, like insanely slowchess is good for improvement
and probably more to do withit's going to create a lot of
motivation for you to trainharder before the event.
It's going to create anenvironment where you're able to
access more focus and intensitythan you could at home, just
(33:37):
because you know when you are ina room and it's quiet and it's
filled with other chess players,right, sure, in a perfect world
would be great to like turn onthat, that mentality, like a
light switch at home.
But realistically, you're notgoing to be able to do that.
You're only going to be able toaccess that at the tournament.
It's going to be a much higherlevel of intensity and then it's
also going to give yousomething.
You're going to be much moremotivated to review those games
(33:59):
because you put a lot more intothem.
Um, so I I do like I do believeyou know these are probably
really good for improvement fora lot of people.
I just think we could do itwith 60 plus 30 or 30 plus 30.
Like we could have all thosebenefits actually probably like
more so of those benefits andthey just wouldn't be so
(34:20):
miserable.
Daniel (34:22):
Yeah, yeah, I agree, I would like to see tournaments
themselves improve and not justfind, you know, like online
alternatives, for example, asthe solution.
And if we could just talk alittle bit about this, because I
think this is a fascinatingsubject within OTB events, you
know, why are they so helpful toyour point, nate, about it not
just being the length of thegame itself.
(34:44):
There's a critical factor thatI've always found, because a
component to these events that Ifound really helps my
improvement.
I noticed this when I submit mygames to my coaches.
The classical OTB games that Isubmit to a coach are by far OTB
games that I submit to a coachare by far my best performances,
(35:05):
and I think one of the bigreasons why is the stakes, and
there's two parts to that.
One is a rating, a USCF officialrating or whatever your country
rating is, and I think peoplevalue that highly, so they're
going to give their best for agame that has that at stake.
And the other is just whatwe're talking about all the
money you invest, all the timeand energy you invest, you don't
want to give a half-heartedperformance.
(35:25):
You're going to give your bestbecause of how much you put in
to be there, and I think whenyou raise the stakes in those
two ways, you really elevateyour performance.
And so I guess my point insaying that is one is to further
what you're saying, that it'snot just about the length of the
games, and then, two, toemphasize why it would be great
if we could just make theseevents a little better, because
(35:45):
they do offer so much.
Your thoughts on that.
Nate (35:48):
Yeah, I think the stakes absolutely.
I agree 100%.
One other thing that brought tomind is the post-mortem right,
this tradition in OTB chesswhere you analyze the game
afterwards with your opponent.
I think it's a great tradition,I think it's really great for
improvement to get thatperspective.
Unfortunately, I feel like itseems to be dying out somewhat.
I don't really see people dothat as much as they used to and
(36:09):
I think, again, it's the theschedule is a big part of it,
right, like if that next roundis coming up, you got to think
about, you know, hydrating, likeeating something, relaxing a
little bit, yeah, and I thinkit's also.
People have also told me it's alittle bit.
You know, they feel like it'stougher with kids because, like,
if your opponent's an adult,you might offer to analyze the
(36:31):
game, but with kids often theysort of run off and then you're
like am I really gonna like walkup to this kid and their
parents and be like hey, likewant to analyze the game?
So think that's.
That's another great traditionthat maybe we could sort of
bring back, if there's like alittle bit more breathing room
between these games.
Daniel (36:48):
Yeah, yeah, great points .
So a question that I had foryou is given your own distaste
or displeasure with tournamentslately OTB tournaments do you
think you will still recommendthem to your students for
improvement?
Or, you know, does your own,your own experiences affect what
you recommend for coaching?
Nate (37:08):
yeah, you know I was sort of thinking about that and kind
of um uncomfortable with it,because it is something like I
have told my students for a longtime like this is a great way
to improve.
But I've, you know, I've gottenso frustrated with the
experience of these tournaments.
I do think I think likesomething like that, like a
local, once a week rated game,is probably the ideal for a lot
(37:32):
of like amateur sort of clublevel players.
So I think that's great, Ithink.
And then I think, like for the,the tournaments that are bigger
commitment like, like likeweekend tournaments, I mean I
would still say like, try it.
Like, if you've never playedone, like try it just to
experience it.
And some people do love them.
You know, it's sort of likesome people run like super
(37:52):
marathon, some people like avery intense, grueling
experience.
So, like you know, if you'reone of those people, obviously
you know, do the thing that youlove, why not?
But I would also say, butprobably for the people who
don't like them, I would notpressure them to to play in
these, because I mean there isan enormous cost in these, like
not not so much in in money,although I mean when you factor
(38:15):
in, like air travel and hotels,it can be pretty expensive, but
but even more so in time andenergy.
Daniel (38:21):
Right, I think.
One last question I have foryou on the subject of OTB
tournaments and their value andhow we can make them better is
you know we talked about somepotential solutions that
organizers could do to make theexperience better, to make the
games themselves better too, ourexperience in that as well.
While I think it's interestingto talk about it and think about
(38:42):
it and helpful to think aboutit, I'm wondering if there's any
practical step that we couldtake as chess enthusiasts, adult
club players, whatever you wantto call yourself, to maybe
nudge at least tournaments to goin the directions that we're
talking about.
I mean, do we reach out toorganizers?
Is there anything we can do topush things in that direction?
Nate (39:02):
Yeah, maybe you know, if you would prefer a shorter time
control, I think you could get.
Yeah, maybe, maybe you couldtalk to, like, the organizers or
whoever runs your local chessclubs, because I have I've heard
sort of anecdotally fromorganizers that that they hear
from players who want longertime controls.
So you know, so, you know, so Iknow their preferences go both
(39:24):
ways.
I do like, I do kind of havethe feeling that like, maybe the
people who like the, the longertime controls, tend to be a bit
more vocal and like these theseare, you know, often, not
always, but this sort of moreold school chat.
You know people have beenplaying a long time.
They might be a little bit morelike gatekeeper-y when it old
school chat.
You know people have beenplaying a long time.
They might be a little bit morelike gatekeeper-y when it comes
to that, you know.
(39:45):
So if you, if you would prefer adifferent kind of tournament,
you know, maybe you should letthat be known.
Yeah, yeah, I think I I guess Ialready mentioned like
utilizing buys strategically.
I think you can sort of youknow journey craft, your own
experience, to be something thatworks for you.
I think you can sort of youknow, ernie, craft your own
experience to be something thatworks for you.
I think you know within therules, Right.
Daniel (40:05):
You know, on that point I've had like a competitive
mental block against that.
Because you know if there'sfive games at an event for a
weekend event and you take a buy, you know you get the half
point and there's no chance nowthat you can get that full point
and you drastically reduce,even with just one buy.
And there's no chance now thatyou can get that full point and
you drastically reduce, evenwith just one buy, your chances
of placing high in your section,maybe competitively.
I just shouldn't care.
(40:26):
But I mean, I also felt like ifI wasn't competitive I wouldn't
be doing chess.
Nate (40:30):
Your thoughts on that.
Yeah, I mean, I actually Ithink it's from a competitive
perspective.
Maybe this should not even likeit's a little bit weird that
this is even allowed.
But but for me currently, like,if the, if the choices are
either I'm not going to play thetournament because I just know
(40:51):
I'm going to be too miserable,or I can take a buy and play the
tournament and have like a goodexperience.
Right then that's preferable.
But much you.
But I would much prefer toeither that the tournament would
just be designed in a way thatI could play all the rounds and
not hate my life.
Daniel (41:08):
Right, right, yeah, exactly, great point.
So, nate, I just want to spenda little time talking about what
you're up to these days.
Now I know that basicallycloses that part of our
conversation for OTB tournaments.
I think we covered a lot ofgood stuff.
Oh, I want to recommend topeople, before I dive into what
you're up to, to read your twoarticles.
We'll have links in the shownotes to both of your two
articles on this subject.
(41:29):
I know you did a follow-up onerecently on what would make
chess tournaments fun, which isalso an excellent read, and I
encourage people to check thatout.
So just a quick reminder forpeople to do that.
But that actually is a goodsegue into what I do want to
discuss, which is what you areup to these days as a coach, as
a content creator.
I know obviously you have yournewsletter that's why we're
talking about this subject todaybut I just kind of want to know
(41:52):
where's your time and energygoing these days in chess.
Nate (41:56):
Yeah for sure.
Well, I'm finishing my nextChessable course, which this one
has really taken a long time,but it is almost done.
I basically just have to recordthe videos.
One e4, and it's based on thesemi slav, so this will combine
(42:24):
with my, my two existing courses.
So I've got one for white,which is the with the ready one
night f3.
I've got black versus e4 withthe nimzovich sicilian.
So then this one black versuseverything but e4.
The three together would be alike a full repertoire for both
colors.
I so, and they all follow asimilar philosophy, and they're
these 100 repertoires, whichmeans 100 lines total, which is
(42:48):
much shorter, right, than a lotof courses, and that's by design
, it's to make them manageableand practical.
So, anyways, that's supposed tobe out in May, so that'll be
awesome.
And then, yeah, yeah, I'm alsodoing, I'm doing one-on-one
coaching, I'm doing.
I just wrapped up, I sort oftried an experiment, this time
with this semi-slot that I'mworking on, but I also did did
(43:12):
it as a live kind ofcohort-based class where we had
like a weekly zoom call, okay.
So that was pretty interesting,because what I, what I found, is
that I, I've developed aprocess for learning, an opening
that works for me, you know,and I kind of try to like with
my one-on-one students.
Obviously we don't only doopenings, we do a lot of
(43:33):
different things but I help somepeople with their openings.
But I thought, you know, maybeI can sort of try to lead people
through the process of how Iwould learn an opening, because
I think it's really.
It can be a lot simpler andfaster than people think it is.
You don't to prepare an openingto the level that you can
(43:53):
succeed with it, even up to amaster level.
It doesn't take a huge amount oftime if you have a good process
what I found is when it comesto the opening, most players are
the way they're doing.
Daniel (44:08):
It just isn't really working interesting, so you
teach a process for learning anopening more efficiently,
basically, yeah, that was theconcept of this live course, so
that just wrapped.
Nate (44:19):
Yeah, it was the first time I did, it was quite
experimental, but I mean I thinkit went pretty well.
People seem to like it.
So you know, I might do andI'll probably do another cohort,
you know, perhaps with adifferent opening even, but but
a similar idea.
Daniel (44:33):
Was that direct through you, or was it through Chessable
?
Nate (44:35):
That was, that was through me, you know.
I told Chessable like, hey, I'mlike I have this idea, and
they're like, oh, you can justgo ahead and do it.
So, but it was just.
I just, you know, set up a, setup a page and did it.
Daniel (44:45):
Oh, that's awesome.
I'm sorry I missed that.
That sounds fascinating.
Nate (44:57):
Is that still available?
In some like do you sell therecorded version of?
But do keep an eye out because,like you know, I might run
another cohort based on the semislav, or maybe you know I was
thinking of other openings.
I think actually the the londonwould be a great fit for this
format, because I know this isan opening many people hate,
although it's one I kind of love, although I mean I I played a
(45:20):
lot of different openings butone.
So so just to you know, to say,my approach to learning the
opening like in a singlesentence, would be learned by
playing like.
I really want to lay thegroundwork as quickly as
possible and then get in thereand play, you know, not not
necessarily over the boardclassical games, but you know,
(45:42):
not necessarily over-the-boardclassical games, but faster
online games to get experience.
And the problem with thatapproach for a black opening
versus D4 is that well, blackpieces, that's 50% of your games
, and then white players at mostlevels play E4 in more than 50%
of games.
So if you're trying to practice, just by firing up a random
(46:02):
game online, you're looking atless than 25 that you'll be able
to use it and then and ofcourse I'm sure everyone has had
the experience of like.
As soon as you learn an opening, then your next 20 games online
, like no one ever plays into itright, yeah, so that's.
That is there's a little bit ofa challenge.
So the reason I think um thelondon would be a good fit is
(46:23):
because, well, you can play d4every game that you have white,
and then you can play the londonagainst most things black can
do.
So you're in a little bit morecontrol of like getting to
practice this consistently anduse that learn by playing
approach I see.
Daniel (46:40):
Well, going back to the workshop or like I don't know if
you call it that, but the like,the live course that you did on
how to approach an opening,that sounds similar, at least in
format, to what you did forhaving a study plan, right, like
creating a study plan foryourself.
Am I right in that that thosewere kind of like similar format
offerings for you?
Nate (47:01):
yeah, well, I mean, they were both like live zoom events.
The study plan was was aone-off session that I did.
You know, I did it around thenew year because I figured
people would be like sort oftrying to revamp their chest and
that.
So that was just a one-off, itwas totally free.
The the semi-solve was was aseries like a six-week series
(47:22):
that included like weekly calls.
There is also a discord groupand some other elements to it
okay okay, but yes, they wereboth live zoom event okay, the
the chess study plan event.
Daniel (47:34):
is that something you plan on doing again in the
future, because I know that wasa live event that's already
passed now?
Nate (47:46):
You know what I probably should like?
Something that I do that isvery stupid as a business person
is I create these things and Ionly use them once.
So for that study plan workshop, I even created a slide deck.
So I should do it.
Yeah, maybe.
I don't know if I'll.
I guess I could do it likequarterly or annually.
I definitely should do it again.
I'm still kind of experimentingwith, like how I can create a
(48:07):
study plan that people willactually use.
Because, like, I do believehaving a specific daily plan if
you're serious about chessimprovement is something you
should do.
It's like in my experience,chess players are pretty
resistant to this, but it's it'sa little odd to me because you
(48:29):
know, if you're trying to get inshape, like physically right,
you know you would certainlyhave a plan that was like
specific, down to days andworkouts.
You know, if you're gonna run amarathon, you're to have a
specific plan.
So I think the same logicapplies for chess.
Like it makes sense to have aplan.
It doesn't necessarily have tobe, you know, it's not about
(48:51):
necessarily doing more or beingmore intense.
It might actually be about likedoing less, but maybe with more
intentionality and purpose.
You know, if can, yeah, takesome of that time, like that
mindless bullet time and put ittowards something that that
might be, you know, both moreeducational and more enjoyable.
(49:11):
Right, it's, it's just a.
You know, to me, a plan is it'sjust a way to like really get
clear on what you want to do andthen follow through on it.
So, yeah, I think I thinkpeople who are trying to get
better at chess could benefitfrom having a specific plan.
Still, sort of tinkering with,like what is the format, how do
I convey that so that peoplewill actually stick to it that's
(49:33):
the tough part.
Daniel (49:34):
Right.
Well, for what it's worth.
I think the study plan you know, live workshop that you had is
a great idea.
Once again, I've been a littlein and out of touch with things
on social media so I didn't getthe news on that when I should
have, but I would love to be apart of that for what it's worth
, and I think a lot of otherclub players and listeners of
the show would too.
So if that's something you wantto do again, I'm all for it.
(49:57):
I'll be a part of it andencourage others to join as well
.
I think it's a fantastic idea,one that just seems like is
evergreen in its usefulness forpeople.
Nate (50:06):
Yeah, I should definitely do that again.
And I yeah, I've got a slidedeck, I've got a video.
Daniel (50:23):
I have.
I have like a Google doc studyplan sort of template, so I did
create a lot of materials aroundthat that I still think are
helpful.
And then the last thing, nate,that you're up to, that I want
to talk about a little bit.
We, in a certain way, we didthis entire episode by talking
about your articles relating toOTB chess events, but more
broadly, as part of yourSubstack newsletter.
Can you just tell people alittle bit about you know what
that is, what it offers.
Nate (50:38):
Yeah, absolutely.
So.
I mean, mean, this is reallythe thing that I've done the
longest in terms of chesscontent.
That's probably what I'm mostknown for.
So it's it's a weeklynewsletter, I mean, which is
it's essentially a blog thatgets emailed out.
So it's called zwischenzug,which, of course, I mean most
readers will know that this is a, this is an in-between move, so
you know, sort of the conceptwith that name is that it's a
(51:01):
little bit unexpected or adifferent perspective.
You know, perhaps perhaps itwasn't the best choice, since it
is hard to spell, but I thinkI'm stuck with it now.
But yeah, people can sign upfor that.
There it's.
You know, there there is a paidlevel, but but it, you know,
the, the standard weekly post iscompletely free.
Daniel (51:23):
So you know, if people just want to get that like
delivered weekly to their, theirmail, you can just sign up and
the weekly post is always freeperspective is to, you know,
have positions or ideas that aremaybe unexpected or less less
(51:49):
commonly heard, which is exactlywhy I wanted to invite you on
the podcast for this episode,because I haven't heard anyone
talk about what are thedrawbacks to OTB events and you
know how do we manage them ordeal with them.
So, yeah, just love that.
You're thinking, you know, inways that maybe we haven't heard
a lot of in the community,because I think we need that,
because a lot of the things, alot of like certain like ideas
and concepts just keep gettingrepeated over and over and we
think like we have they must betrue.
(52:09):
But I love when peoplechallenge them sometimes and ask
you know, is this the best way?
Is this worthwhile?
So I appreciate you doing thatin your newsletter too, you
doing that in your newslettertoo.
Nate (52:17):
Yeah, I mean, I think realistically there's not much
we know for sure about chessimprovement.
There's a lot of passed downwisdom and traditions.
Probably some of them are right, some of them are wrong.
Daniel (52:36):
There's still a lot of room to experiment.
Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
Well, definitely encouragepeople to check out your
newsletter.
I'll have a link for that, aswell as the specific articles
that we talked about today inthe show notes.
And, yeah, it's my highestrecommendation to check out
Nate's newsletter, because Ithink it's fantastic Lots of
great ideas and things that willhelp you think differently
about chess as well as improveyour chess.
So, nate, I really enjoyed ourconversation today.
(52:56):
I want to say thank you fordoing this.
I didn't know if it wasredundant for you, because I
know you already wrote about it,but I wanted to have this
conversation because I've beenthinking that and feeling that
and I wanted to talk about itwith someone else who shared
those feelings and also had somereally good ideas about how we
(53:17):
can move forward with it.
So I just want to say thank youso much for talking about it
with me today.
Nate (53:21):
No, thank you.
I think it's great to discussit and, yeah, I'm excited to see
where the discussion goes fromhere, because I would love I
mean to hear what more peoplethink and hopefully, just at the
end of the day, maketournaments better, more
enjoyable and more accessible toa lot more people.
Daniel (53:39):
Yeah, absolutely that's the idea, and I appreciate your
perspectives on that.
I agree with all of them thatwe need to.
We need to make someimprovements, so that way
they're desirable, basically.
So, yeah, thanks, nate,appreciate your time today and
thank you for being on the show.
Nate (53:53):
All right, thanks, daniel.
Daniel (53:57):
Thanks for listening.
This has been a production ofmy business, adult Chess Academy
, and that has a website withthe same name.
If you want to look for it, youcan also find me being way too
active on Twitter by searchingmy username, lona underscore
chess See you next week.
Hey, welcome to the chess experience On this show.
It's all about helping adultimprovers.
I want to make learning chesseasier for you to navigate and I
also want you to have a morefun experience along the way.
I'm your host, daniel Lona, afellow chess amateur.
Let's get to it.
This show is sponsored bychesscom, the world's largest
(00:29):
chess community.
Chesscom recently launched a newway to learn from your games
with a feature called insights.
If you visit chesscom slashinsights, you can get detailed
stats and analysis in any of thetime controls you've played and
across any time period.
What kind of things can youlearn?
(00:50):
Well, you can learn.
What time of day do you playyour best morning, afternoon or
night?
What part of the game are youstrongest or weakest?
Opening, middle game or endgame?
Are you making more or lessmistakes than opponents at your
level?
You can find out all this greatinfo and much more at chesscom
slash insights.
Welcome to this week's episode.
Have you ever been to an OTBclassical tournament, but the
(01:11):
experience didn't live up toyour expectations?
Or perhaps you've yet to attendone of these events, but
haven't because of the cost ortime needed for them?
Well, in this chat, I discusswith FIDE master, nate Solan,
some of the problems with OTBclassical tournaments, at the
very least those in the US,though some of these issues may
be present in other countriestoo.
(01:32):
In this chat, we explore whyOTB classical events may not be
as great of an experience as wewant them to be.
Some reasons for this that wetalk about include the number of
games played in one weekendthat's a big one the energy and
time required to attend an event, as well as the playing
(01:53):
conditions.
Now, this episode may offersome therapeutic grieving over
these challenges, both for Nateand I talking about it as well
as you, but we do also spendsome time considering possible
solutions to this problem.
Specifically, we discuss somechanges that we'd love
tournament organizers to make,as well as some alternatives you
could consider for getting yourimprovement benefits without
(02:14):
having to play a full weekendtournament.
Finally, you may be familiarwith Nate Solan as he's been a
guest on this show two timespreviously, but if you're not,
nate is a FIDE master, he is acoach and he's published several
opening courses on Chessable.
He also regularly publishes apopular weekly chess newsletter
called Zwischenzug, and links tothat newsletter, as well as his
(02:37):
Chessable courses, are in theshow notes.
So I hope you enjoyed thisepisode.
It's a little bit of adifferent style than my typical
episodes.
In this one we're going to justdive all in on this discussion
on this topic.
So here's our discussion on OTBclassical tournaments, some of
the big challenges that we havewith them, as well as, hopefully
, some solutions we could seefor it in the future.
(02:59):
Hi Nate, I'm excited to haveyou back on the show.
Great to be here with you today.
How are you doing?
I'm great.
Glad to be back.
Yeah, it's great to have youhere.
I'm really excited that you'rehere to talk about OTB
tournaments as a littlebackground for people listening
and or watching.
A couple weeks ago, you wrotean article expressing your lack
(03:22):
of interest these days in goingto OTB classical tournaments and
I found it refreshing because Ithink and I'm a little bit
guilty of this myself actuallyall you hear in the community is
just go to OTB classical events, go to OTB classical events and
of course, there are greatreasons to go.
But in your article youhighlighted a lot of the
(03:44):
drawbacks, which I don't thinkare discussed enough if we want
to be honest about what thatexperience is like, especially
for adults.
So do you want to talk a littlebit about that, nate, just sort
of like set it up for us, likewhat have you been doing with
OTB tournaments in the pastcouple of years, and then what
led to this decision to write anarticle about what you were not
enjoying about them?
Nate (04:05):
Yeah for sure.
So I've been.
I don't have a lot of time fortournaments these days.
I've got two kids, one who'salmost three, one who's almost
one, so I'm just not able toplay that many.
But I have been trying to playa few per year because I am a
coach and I think it's importantto keep that experience of
(04:27):
playing in tournaments of right.
When you don't play for a longtime, it all starts to seem
pretty simple.
You're sort of like you know,hey, what's the big deal?
You just play good moves, butthen, right when you go to the
tournament, you realize it'svery, very difficult and it's
maybe not even the chess side ofit, that's.
But.
But emotions, fatigue, like allthose things you experience at
a tournament and it's, it's alot harder than you would think
(04:49):
it would be.
So I'm so I try to play themsomewhat consistently to stay in
touch with that experience.
But I guess what, yeah, what,what, what drove me to, drove me
to write this blog post, andwas that like I don't really
look forward to playing in thesetournaments, like, like, if
anything, it's like I want to goand experience this pain so I
can sort of empathize with mystudents, you know and be a
(05:11):
better coach, but at the sametime, I'm like, well, hey, I
like I love chess.
Chess is a huge part of my life.
Like I wish we had sometournaments that I looked
forward to playing, as opposedto like I got to really like
psych myself up and grit myteeth to to drag myself to this
(05:34):
thing, you know.
Daniel (05:34):
So that was kind of the the background of it.
Was there a particular event ormoment that led you to say,
okay, this is kind of reachedthe breaking point for me.
I don't know if this is worthit anymore.
Nate (05:43):
Yeah Well, I wrote it specifically about after this
tournament, us Amateur Team East, which is a really popular
tournament I've gone to the lastfew years.
It's always one I'm really onthe fence about because I play
on a team with one of mystudents, with some friends, and
there are a lot of friends Ihave in the chess community who,
like this tournament is likethe only time I see them
(06:05):
throughout the year.
So in that way it's great.
I love the team format.
I think that's that's a greattwist.
I wish there were more teamtournaments so in a way it's
like really close to this greatexperience that I want.
But it also has these featuresthat that a lot of tournaments
have.
But but I think this thistournament has them like
(06:26):
especially.
So one is really really slow.
Time control it's a little bitweird.
It's not 90 plus 30, it's likemore of it slower than the
initial time and there's also anadditional time control and
move 40.
So I'm not remembering theexact time control, but
essentially it's like it's quiteslow.
The rounds are very long, whichto me is really weird for a
team tournament where you thinkthe focus, like the whole point
of the tournament to me is tolike see friends and catch up
(06:48):
with people, but you reallycan't.
There's no time to do thatbecause you're either playing or
you know you're desperatelytrying to get a meal in or maybe
a nap in, just so you can kindof survive the tournament yeah,
yeah for sure.
Daniel (06:59):
before we dive into, like, all the pros and cons of
ot events and I want to do thatand some possible solutions, I
want to just dive into a greatcomment.
You wrote in the article asentence that stuck with me.
You said that because we likechess, we feel we should like
chess tournaments and I thoughtthat was a fascinating insight
(07:21):
and really well said.
That was a fascinating insightand really well said, and I
think my opinion is that thatbrings up the topic of identity,
the notion that if you're anavid chess player, you play in
OTB classical events.
Do you think that that is apart of it, that, as an element
of what you said, that we shouldlike chess tournaments, that
there's an identity involved inthis?
Nate (07:40):
Yeah, I think that's where a lot of the pressure comes
from is.
Yeah, there's this thing thatif you're a chess player, you
should be going to thesetournaments.
I mean, some people even wouldgo as far as to say, like OTB,
classical chess is the only realchess and nothing else even
counts.
So there is that idea.
But I think, like also in thearticle, that the analogy I used
(08:00):
was it's like if the only icecream shop in town had a four
hour wait and you're justcrammed in shoulder to shoulder
and it's like so you, so youdon't go, and people are like oh
, like, oh, you don't like icecream.
It's like, no, I like ice cream, but it's like there's a limit
to what I'll put up with.
You know, this is too much,right, and that's that's kind of
how I feel about over the boardtournaments, but I also feel
(08:23):
like it's it's quite unnecessary, like we could keep a lot of
the good aspects of thesetournaments and reduce or
eliminate the parts of them thatare just incredibly unpleasant
and uncomfortable.
Daniel (08:37):
I mean that's that's definitely something I want to
get into in a little bit whichis, like, what can we do to
improve them?
I'd like to spend a little timetalking about like what, what
isn't good about them, Because,I mean, all we hear about are
the advantages and there aredefinitely, I think I think you
would agree right Like there'sdefinite advantages to going to
OTB tournaments, particularly onthe improvement side of things,
(08:57):
Right, but I don't think we'vethere's been anywhere that did
like an honest airing ofgrievances, the issues that we
have with them, and you did someof that in your article, which
is great.
Do you want to like highlightwhat you think are maybe some of
the top drawbacks that make itdifficult to enjoy OTB classical
?
Nate (09:15):
Yeah for sure.
So I think I guess I would saysort of three categories.
One unreasonable schedules.
So that includes, you know,extremely long round times of
two or even three very longclassical games per day.
You know, rounds startingreally early in the morning or
(09:35):
going really late at night, orrounds scheduled over typical
meal times.
So that'd be one.
Two would be disruption ofsleeping and eating.
Right, so at these terms, simplylike it's very difficult, if
not impossible, to to just sleepand eat in a healthy way, like
you know, very often for roundsto be scheduled that could go to
(09:55):
like 11 or midnight.
You're probably going to bekind of amped up after that, you
know.
So you're going to be.
You're up quite late, maybeplaying around the next morning.
Often there there's not reallylike like a healthy food option.
You know, if it's at a hotel orat some sort of playing venue,
it might be quite hard to gethealthy food like at or near the
venue.
So it's often quite anunhealthy.
(10:17):
You know, when you combine thatwith like stress, you know it's
it, it it's, it's prettyunhealthy.
And then finally, I would say,playing conditions, so things
like being crammed into a smallroom.
Maybe poor ventilation, maybebathrooms are not accessible or
clean.
A lot of people show up tothese tournaments sick.
(10:39):
You can hear them coughing andsneezing in this really cramped
room.
So yeah, for me, those are thethree categories I would put
them in.
Daniel (10:47):
Yeah, those are.
I mean, those are definitelysome of the big issues with them
.
There's another one I wanted tojust talk about a bit and see
if you find this to be an issueas well, or maybe it's just my
own thing.
You know, we think of an OTBclassical event and the time and
energy it's going to take fromus to do the event itself, and
that's definitely true.
But I think there's another bigfactor, which is the time and
(11:08):
energy it takes from you fromthe next week, because they're
typically on weekends.
So I'm talking about the MondayTuesday following.
You've burned through so muchenergy that you end up doing
less, and so I feel like you endup doing less, maybe
productively, on the Monday orTuesday following and therefore
kind of is taking your time eveninto the next week.
(11:28):
Do you find that as well, or amI just like a low energy person
?
Nate (11:58):
no-transcript.
Yeah, it really took me a longtime to recover in terms of
being healthy, getting my energyback.
Daniel (12:05):
So, yeah, I totally agree, that's a huge part of it
as well investments, but ratherthan just be frustrated with the
downsides of the OTB classicalevents and, like I said, I know
(12:29):
there's a lot of greatadvantages to them too but I
want to talk about how we canmaybe make the situation a
little bit better, and to methere's two broad buckets of
doing that.
One is how we could actuallymake the tournaments themselves
better, and the other is, froman improvement standpoint, how
you could maybe find some waysto still get the benefits of
these tournaments without doinga whole weekend event.
So let's start with how we canmake the tournaments themselves
better, something you alreadytouched on.
(12:50):
What would you say are some ofyour top things that you would
like to see organizers dorealistically to make the
experience better?
Nate (12:58):
Well, so my biggest thing in here, you know, I think so
far we've mostly agreed.
Maybe, maybe this is going tobe one where we disagree.
Okay, I think the round shouldbe shorter.
Like for most tournaments, Ithink they should be way shorter
.
Well, example, well, so, okay.
So, you know, 90 plus 30 is kindof this, this international
standard so I would say 90 plus30, I would say is like an
(13:27):
absolute top end, like that,that's the slowest time control
that I would even consider closeto reasonable.
For me, like you know, it'slike.
That's like.
That's like the most seriousinternational competitions.
So if you're having atournament with amateurs, it
really doesn't need to be anyslower than that.
But I would even say mosttournaments can and should be be
a lot faster, because then whenyou, when you try to put two of
those games, or sometimes eventhree, in a single day, it's
(13:48):
just totally crazy.
You're playing like 8, 12 hoursof chess in a day.
I think it's just way too muchand I think we could get.
You know, I do, I do appreciatelike that part of the appeal
and the benefit of chess is likeslowing down and experiencing
that focus over a period of time.
Right, like that's somethingthat's like kind of magical
about chess and that is real andyou know I believe in that.
(14:10):
But I think we could get thatmaybe even more so with, you
know, 60 plus 30, even 30 plus30.
One great point actually mywife made this point is that
when the rounds are too long, itactually takes away from that
(14:31):
quality of focus, because thenthe time between the rounds
becomes so compressed andfrantic yeah.
Like the overall tournamentexperience is so chaotic, even
though the rounds themselves areso long.
So, and I would also say thatyou know, so let's say, to go
from 90 plus 30 to 60 plus 30, Ithink we can have like the
decrease in the quality of play,in my opinion, would be
extremely minimal.
(14:52):
But then that frees up anadditional hour per round.
That just makes it possible tohave like such a more humane
schedule, more humane schedule,and it also makes the you know
from the tournament organizer,like that's something talking
about, like what's realisticfrom the tournament organizers
point of view.
That makes your job easier,because now, right, there's a
(15:12):
shorter round that you know hasto be essentially proctored.
You have more time, you have alot more wiggle room to create a
schedule, to get the pairingsdone and all of that.
So it it's.
You know, just by taking alittle time off, the time
control, you really make yourlife a lot easier.
Daniel (15:27):
Yeah, no, actually I agree with you, Nate, and I
think those are great ideas.
So the standard that I'veexperienced is typically either
is two games that are at least90-30 a day Well, I guess Friday
has typically been one game,but then Saturday, Sunday,
they're two, each for the 90-30.
And I do feel like that's toomuch.
As far as making the gameshorter, I'd be for that.
(15:48):
Actually, I mean to a point.
You know me, I think that's whyyou said that I prefer my long
games.
But I think 60-30 is totallyreasonable.
In fact, that's typically thelength that I do for my practice
games online at home.
So it's like, if that's whatI'm doing at home, 60, 30, why
wouldn't that be good enough fora tournament?
So, yeah, I absolutely think so.
My alternative, I'm sorry, goahead.
Nate (16:07):
I was just going to say.
I actually think that goingfrom 90, 30 to 60, 30, or even
30, 30 might, sort ofparadoxically, help the people
who struggle the most with timepressure.
Because if you're using allyour time in 90 plus 30, like
you probably have a timemanagement issue.
(16:27):
You know, like my, myexperience from from playing in
these tournaments, from workingwith students, is like very,
very few people use that muchtime effectively, like it's
actually very difficult to usethat much time efficiently.
But you have to be.
You know, alexander grischuklike can think for an hour on a
move and at the end of that hourhe understands a lot more than
(16:50):
he did after 10 minutes.
But to be able to do that youactually have to be incredibly
strong, like in visualizationand calculus, calculation and
being able to organize yourthoughts.
So when I'm at that, you know,when I'm sitting across someone,
you can kind of tell whatthey're thinking, and when they
are thinking for 30 or 45minutes I can tell like they're
not figuring out more about theposition.
(17:12):
And likewise yeah, when I, whenI work with students, you know
we and we, if we analyze aposition where I know they spent
half an hour, I mean, if theywere really using that time
efficiently, right, they shouldbe able to tell me so much about
the position.
But it, you know, usually it'sjust they've only looked at a
couple lines.
It's almost always strugglingwith something like, emotionally
(17:32):
or psychologically, element ofknowledge that you really
probably won't be able to figureout during the game.
So, all in all, it's like Idon't think having this huge
amount of time is really helpinganybody.
It's just encouraging people toreally spin their wheels and
(17:53):
get stressed out, and if you'rethe kind of person who always
gets into time pressure, wellyou know you're sort of going to
be in the same boat as youropponents a lot faster.
With a faster time control.
You're not going to have thistemptation to spend a huge
amount of time up front and thenput yourself at a disadvantage.
Daniel (18:10):
Yeah, yeah, totally agree with everything you said,
nate, and I mean frankly, asmuch as I like my longer games,
I would gladly give a littleextra time and do a 60-30 to
have lunch.
Yeah, exactly time and do a60-30 to have lunch.
I think this brings up a goodpoint, even if there was some
significant advantage to havinga 90-30 for your extra time over
(18:31):
60-30 as a club player and itsounds like, nate, you're even
saying maybe it's not evennecessarily true beyond club
player.
Even if that were true, I feellike it's lost in this setting
because of the cost on your timeneeded to eat, to recover, to
sleep, and so whatever you gainin that, I feel like you lose in
those other areas maybe, ifwe're talking about like one
(18:52):
game a day, 90 plus 30 is morereasonable that I could do, but
if we're doing two games a day.
It's really really tough, rightright, so time control was one
big bucket that you said youwould like to see altered.
Is there anything else elsethat you think they could do to
help the situation?
Nate (19:19):
I would say right now, for the most part, we like the
experience at chess tournamentsranges from terrible to
tolerable, but there's not a lotof great experiences Like the
things that count for luxury atchess tournaments are like
coffee is provided, like thereare clean bathrooms.
But you know, imagine if youtold someone like oh, I went to
(19:39):
this conference, it was soluxurious, and you're like, wow,
like what did they have?
It's like, oh, there was coffeethere.
It's like our standards arevery low and we could do a lot
of other things.
You know, simuls, classes,lectures, there's a lot of stuff
we could do.
I was actually I actually wasjust looking at this.
(20:00):
There's this company that I'mgoing to write an upcoming post
about what is called dnd in acastle.
So it it's what it sounds like.
It's a company that does thesevacations that are dungeons and
dragons, like literally in anactual castle.
So you go to this castle.
It's like all-inclusive.
You play these games of, I mean, dungeons and dragons is not
(20:22):
really my thing, but apparentlythey have like amazing dungeon
masters and stuff.
So this is for a four dayvacation.
This is like over $3,000 andthey sell them out.
And for comparison I was justlooking at the world open, right
, like a four day chesstournament, that's like $300.
So, like you know, I'm notsaying your tournament has to be
(20:42):
in a castle, although I'm thatwould be quite on theme for
chess I'd like, right, I thinkit would be cool, or, like you
know, you don't have to chargethree thousand dollars, you
don't have to try to.
Like, you know, like sometournament organizers want to
make money, some just want toprovide a service to the chess
community.
So it's like, depending on whatyou, what you want to do, but
I'm just saying like there isroom to be a lot more creative
(21:03):
with the experience and I thinkthere's a huge community of
chess players out there who arekind of invisible to tournament
organizers because they're notplaying in tournaments right now
.
Yeah, but that community isprobably much bigger than
current tournament players, thancurrent tournament players,
because if you think of, if youcompare online chess to over the
(21:23):
board chess, like US chess,just recently, somewhat recently
, crossed 100,000 members.
Chesscom had over, I think,like 200 million members, like
several years ago, and it'sgotten much bigger since then.
Now you know, some of those arelike duplicates or non-active
accounts or whatever, but, likeyou could certainly say there
(21:43):
are many, many, many times moreonline chess players than over
the board chess players.
So from an organizerperspective, I think, like you
know, how can you like thedetermines we have right now?
I think we're like we sort ofhave a blind spot too because,
like, if you've grown up playingchess, this is what you're
accustomed to.
But if you kind of step back andyou just think about the whole
(22:03):
experience of the average chesstournament in the United States,
it's like wait a second, likethis sucks, like I don't want to
be here, you know, but it couldbe, it could be a lot better.
And if it was like if you cancreate an experience that's
radically better, then all betsare off in terms of like how
many people you can attract,kind of people you can attract,
(22:23):
and like you can potentiallycharge like 10 times as much,
because it's a completelydifferent experience yeah, yeah
for sure.
Daniel (22:31):
Just a clarifying question.
So the comparison between thenumbers of us chess and the
numbers of chesscom is the pointthere that there's still like
99, 98 percent of a large chesspool that they're not tapping
into, you know, like they'rejust getting a tiny fraction
they could attract a lot more.
Nate (22:47):
Is that exactly?
Yeah, like that's what I'msaying.
There's a huge number of peoplewho are interested in chess,
are passionate about chess, butare not going to show up at a
tournament if it's enormouslyinconvenient and intimidating
and grueling and, you know, justat the end of the day, like not
really a lot of fun.
Daniel (23:06):
Right, right Outside of like the castle, which I'm for,
a couple of like easy things youfeel like they could do to make
the experience better, or, youknow, whether just from a
quality perspective or a funperspective.
I think you hinted at a coupleof things like symbols.
Right, I just wanted to kind oflike dive into that part a bit
a couple things like symbols,right.
Nate (23:25):
I just wanted to kind of like dive into that part a bit.
Yeah, I think, like I thinkthere are some little perks and
quality of life things like youknow you should, you should
definitely provide water, youshould provide coffee, like
obviously, that you know itshould be clean.
I think another one that'sthat's very low cost but is a
nice touch is to provide theboards, because I mean, if you,
you, you know, tournament chesssets are not expensive.
It's like if you buy them inbulk I don't know 10, maybe $15
(23:48):
per set, and then obviously youcould, if you're an organizer,
you can reuse those.
I think that's a nice touch topeople, especially if people are
traveling by air they don'thave to pack a chess set.
I actually one thing I found outafter writing this was a lot of
the stuff I'm talking aboutturns out to be pretty unique to
the United States.
I heard from readers not onlyin Europe but also South America
(24:11):
, australia, japan, that theywere horrified not only by the
two classical games per day,which I knew was like mostly an
American thing, right, but alsojust the overall conditions that
boards were not provided, youknow, things like pens weren't
provided.
So it seems like in the UnitedStates we have really a uniquely
(24:33):
low standard for the conditionsof tournament chess.
So I'm not entirely sure whythat is, but it does appear to
be pretty unique to the UnitedStates.
Daniel (24:43):
Yeah, have you been to a European tournament?
Nate (24:47):
I actually you know that's a great question I never have I
wish.
I really regret.
So I live in Omaha, Nebraskanow, so I'm like exactly in the
middle of the United States.
I wish I had gone to theReykjavik Open when I lived in
Boston, which is a very easyflight, but no, I don't think I
ever actually have played atournament in Europe.
Daniel (25:08):
Okay, okay, yeah, on the to-do list then, right, yeah.
So the other part of what Iwanted to talk about related to
quote unquote.
Solving this issue is until orunless OTB tournaments improve
in the US at least.
I want to think of how peoplecould still get some of the
improvement benefits of themeven without going to one,
(25:28):
because I think that is probablythe primary driver for most
people going is to improve theirchess.
So what would you recommend toget some of those benefits
outside of an OTB classicalevent?
Nate (25:41):
Yeah, I do think they're good for improvement, but I
don't think that the reason isprimarily how slow they are.
I think it's more so focus andintensity that you can access in
that environment and alsocommunity that you're going to
meet other people who arepassionate about chess, right.
So I would say you know somethings you can do.
(26:03):
A lot of local clubs run atournament where it's one round
per week.
You know, often, like oneevening per week, the same day,
you go and play one game.
I think that's a great option.
I have a lot of students who dothat and I think you know that
that's really a nice rhythm forimprovement, because then it
sort of gives you this, thisbullet point in your week.
(26:24):
You know you're sort of you'retraining, you're kind of leading
up to that, and then you havesomething to review.
So it's very consistent, but atthe same time you're not going
to not to be overwhelmed at anypoint, right?
So I think that's great.
I think you know if, if yourclub has, or you can convince
them to have faster time, youknow like 60 plus 30 we were
(26:45):
talking about, I think even 30plus 30, or even you know even
like 15 plus 10.
I don't see a ton oftournaments like that, but like
I think those can all be greatfor improvement.
Like I was saying, I think alot of the benefit it's like
it's not like oh, like once youplay like a four hour game that
suddenly unlocks improvement, Ithink that's like that's really
(27:06):
excessive for most people.
Probably even more so, actually, if you know something I've
heard from a lot of people whenthey're like thinking about
playing their first tournamentis like like, what do you even
do with all that time?
Like like what are you supposedto be thinking about?
Daniel (27:18):
so, yeah, I think right for most players, playing more
faster games, yeah, wouldactually be more beneficial I
think anything game that goesbeyond three hours, I start to
get a little punchy in mythinking afterwards.
Nate (27:33):
It's, it's not diminishing return after about three hours
for me one other thing I wouldsuggest just to add one more is
like yeah, you know, a lot oftournaments allow you to request
buys in advance, so I thinkthat's something you should
consider taking advantage of.
Like, I've created somepersonal rules for myself just
to try to make sure, like Ienjoy the experience.
(27:54):
So, for me, I don't playanything slower than 90 plus 30
and I don't play anything slowerthan 90 plus 30.
And I don't play more than twoclassical games per day.
So if there's three classicalgames in a day either, if I
could request a buy for one ofthose in advance, I'll consider
that, but if not, that'sprobably not the tournament for
(28:15):
me.
Daniel (28:16):
Right.
How do you feel about onlineclassical tournaments?
I know things like Chess Dojodoes that.
There's some leagues like a45-45 league online.
How do you feel about that as away to get in your classical
for improvement?
Nate (28:43):
for three hours playing one game, like it's just not
going to happen.
So for me, you know, if I'musing online chess for
improvement, I I might beplaying like 10 plus 5 or like
15 plus 10 or something likethat.
I it just sounds really toughto me to to sit in front of my
computer and play one game forthat long.
Daniel (28:54):
But you know if it works for you, sure yeah, I, I think
I and many others set up a, setup a board.
You you know if it's going tobe a long classical game.
So that way, yeah, staring at ascreen that long is definitely
not terribly enticing.
There's just one thing I wantto touch back on and get your
opinion that you mentioned.
You said another reason peoplego to these OTB events is for
(29:16):
community, to meet people, toconnect with people.
I don't know about you, but Ifound that difficult at these
events and it goes to everythingthat we've already talked about
.
There's so little time outsideof the games to do anything that
I find it makes the socializingjust not what I would hope it
would be.
There's people I say, well,yeah, let's meet up there at the
(29:37):
event and we just never dobecause, like, oh my, you know
my game went long or whatever.
The games just get in the way.
Have you found that to be trueas well?
Nate (29:47):
Yeah, that you know.
That's a good point.
Now that you say it, I probablyit's more so seeing people I
already know than making newconnections, yeah, no-transcript
(30:26):
.
And like I think that's thewrong way to think about it Like
you should have downtime at thetournament, so shorter rounds
would help.
Then, you know, in addition tothings like simuls or classes,
you know you could have like acocktail hour or more social
type events.
You know, maybe a blitztournament, maybe a bug house
(30:46):
tournament, that also.
You know that that also kind ofgets the issue of like kids at
tournaments, cause obviously youknow kids should not be at like
a cocktail hour but, I, thinkif you want the tournament to be
more social and more aboutcommunity, then you know I also
wish there were more adults-onlytournaments.
There's a few there's Alto atCharlotte and some other chess
(31:09):
clubs but yeah, if it's purelyabout competition, obviously I
understand there's a lot of kidswho are amazing at chess and
you know they should be allowedto compete.
But if it's more aboutcommunity and the experience, I
think we should also have moretournaments that are only for
(31:29):
adults and it's like you know weunderstand this is more about
making connections and having agreat experience.
It's not just all outcompetition.
Daniel (31:39):
Right, yeah, I mean, ideally I would like to have a
social component to it as well,which is made almost impossible
to me if the game schedule justputs such a severe time crunch
on everything that it doesn'thappen.
I wanted to ask your opinion onsomething regarding classical
events like the ones we'retalking about and improvement,
which is I've heard from severalcoaches slash title players
(32:01):
that the best way to improve, orone of the best ways to improve
, rather to be fair to them, isto go to these events.
That it'll do as much for yourimprovement as almost anything
else can.
I wonder, do you think that toomuch emphasis is placed on that
for improvement, either just ingeneral, or that these
(32:25):
classical games need to be in a,you know, otb setting?
Nate (32:31):
I think it.
I think they do tend to behelpful.
I mean, you know, it's it'salways like really hard to sort
of tease out cause and effectwith improvement.
Yeah, because we really, youknow, there's nothing like a
randomized controlled trial, soit's all just kind of still back
in the envelope, but I mean itdoes.
(32:53):
I would say it seems likethere's a pattern of people who
play OTB consistently tend toget better, of people who play
OTB consistently tend to getbetter.
I mean, again, you can go backto the cause and effect of it's
like is it they're gettingbetter because they're playing
OTB or is this a?
You know, have you selected asample of, like highly motivated
and engaged players?
Right, still, I would say, youknow, I do believe that it's
(33:16):
good for improvement, but butagain, I think it's it's good
for improvement, but but again Ithink it's it's probably less
to do with, like insanely slowchess is good for improvement
and probably more to do withit's going to create a lot of
motivation for you to trainharder before the event.
It's going to create anenvironment where you're able to
access more focus and intensitythan you could at home, just
(33:37):
because you know when you are ina room and it's quiet and it's
filled with other chess players,right, sure, in a perfect world
would be great to like turn onthat, that mentality, like a
light switch at home.
But realistically, you're notgoing to be able to do that.
You're only going to be able toaccess that at the tournament.
It's going to be a much higherlevel of intensity and then it's
also going to give yousomething.
You're going to be much moremotivated to review those games
(33:59):
because you put a lot more intothem.
Um, so I I do like I do believeyou know these are probably
really good for improvement fora lot of people.
I just think we could do itwith 60 plus 30 or 30 plus 30.
Like we could have all thosebenefits actually probably like
more so of those benefits andthey just wouldn't be so
(34:20):
miserable.
Daniel (34:22):
Yeah, yeah, I agree, I would like to see tournaments
themselves improve and not justfind, you know, like online
alternatives, for example, asthe solution.
And if we could just talk alittle bit about this, because I
think this is a fascinatingsubject within OTB events, you
know, why are they so helpful toyour point, nate, about it not
just being the length of thegame itself.
(34:44):
There's a critical factor thatI've always found, because a
component to these events that Ifound really helps my
improvement.
I noticed this when I submit mygames to my coaches.
The classical OTB games that Isubmit to a coach are by far OTB
games that I submit to a coachare by far my best performances,
(35:05):
and I think one of the bigreasons why is the stakes, and
there's two parts to that.
One is a rating, a USCF officialrating or whatever your country
rating is, and I think peoplevalue that highly, so they're
going to give their best for agame that has that at stake.
And the other is just whatwe're talking about all the
money you invest, all the timeand energy you invest, you don't
want to give a half-heartedperformance.
(35:25):
You're going to give your bestbecause of how much you put in
to be there, and I think whenyou raise the stakes in those
two ways, you really elevateyour performance.
And so I guess my point insaying that is one is to further
what you're saying, that it'snot just about the length of the
games, and then, two, toemphasize why it would be great
if we could just make theseevents a little better, because
(35:45):
they do offer so much.
Your thoughts on that.
Nate (35:48):
Yeah, I think the stakes absolutely.
I agree 100%.
One other thing that brought tomind is the post-mortem right,
this tradition in OTB chesswhere you analyze the game
afterwards with your opponent.
I think it's a great tradition,I think it's really great for
improvement to get thatperspective.
Unfortunately, I feel like itseems to be dying out somewhat.
I don't really see people dothat as much as they used to and
(36:09):
I think, again, it's the theschedule is a big part of it,
right, like if that next roundis coming up, you got to think
about, you know, hydrating, likeeating something, relaxing a
little bit, yeah, and I thinkit's also.
People have also told me it's alittle bit.
You know, they feel like it'stougher with kids because, like,
if your opponent's an adult,you might offer to analyze the
(36:31):
game, but with kids often theysort of run off and then you're
like am I really gonna like walkup to this kid and their
parents and be like hey, likewant to analyze the game?
So think that's.
That's another great traditionthat maybe we could sort of
bring back, if there's like alittle bit more breathing room
between these games.
Daniel (36:48):
Yeah, yeah, great points .
So a question that I had foryou is given your own distaste
or displeasure with tournamentslately OTB tournaments do you
think you will still recommendthem to your students for
improvement?
Or, you know, does your own,your own experiences affect what
you recommend for coaching?
Nate (37:08):
yeah, you know I was sort of thinking about that and kind
of um uncomfortable with it,because it is something like I
have told my students for a longtime like this is a great way
to improve.
But I've, you know, I've gottenso frustrated with the
experience of these tournaments.
I do think I think likesomething like that, like a
local, once a week rated game,is probably the ideal for a lot
(37:32):
of like amateur sort of clublevel players.
So I think that's great, Ithink.
And then I think, like for the,the tournaments that are bigger
commitment like, like likeweekend tournaments, I mean I
would still say like, try it.
Like, if you've never playedone, like try it just to
experience it.
And some people do love them.
You know, it's sort of likesome people run like super
(37:52):
marathon, some people like avery intense, grueling
experience.
So, like you know, if you'reone of those people, obviously
you know, do the thing that youlove, why not?
But I would also say, butprobably for the people who
don't like them, I would notpressure them to to play in
these, because I mean there isan enormous cost in these, like
not not so much in in money,although I mean when you factor
(38:15):
in, like air travel and hotels,it can be pretty expensive, but
but even more so in time andenergy.
Daniel (38:21):
Right, I think.
One last question I have foryou on the subject of OTB
tournaments and their value andhow we can make them better is
you know we talked about somepotential solutions that
organizers could do to make theexperience better, to make the
games themselves better too, ourexperience in that as well.
While I think it's interestingto talk about it and think about
(38:42):
it and helpful to think aboutit, I'm wondering if there's any
practical step that we couldtake as chess enthusiasts, adult
club players, whatever you wantto call yourself, to maybe
nudge at least tournaments to goin the directions that we're
talking about.
I mean, do we reach out toorganizers?
Is there anything we can do topush things in that direction?
Nate (39:02):
Yeah, maybe you know, if you would prefer a shorter time
control, I think you could get.
Yeah, maybe, maybe you couldtalk to, like, the organizers or
whoever runs your local chessclubs, because I have I've heard
sort of anecdotally fromorganizers that that they hear
from players who want longertime controls.
So you know, so, you know, so Iknow their preferences go both
(39:24):
ways.
I do like, I do kind of havethe feeling that like, maybe the
people who like the, the longertime controls, tend to be a bit
more vocal and like these theseare, you know, often, not
always, but this sort of moreold school chat.
You know people have beenplaying a long time.
They might be a little bit morelike gatekeeper-y when it old
school chat.
You know people have beenplaying a long time.
They might be a little bit morelike gatekeeper-y when it comes
to that, you know.
(39:45):
So if you, if you would prefer adifferent kind of tournament,
you know, maybe you should letthat be known.
Yeah, yeah, I think I I guess Ialready mentioned like
utilizing buys strategically.
I think you can sort of youknow journey craft, your own
experience, to be something thatworks for you.
I think you can sort of youknow, ernie, craft your own
experience to be something thatworks for you.
I think you know within therules, Right.
Daniel (40:05):
You know, on that point I've had like a competitive
mental block against that.
Because you know if there'sfive games at an event for a
weekend event and you take a buy, you know you get the half
point and there's no chance nowthat you can get that full point
and you drastically reduce,even with just one buy.
And there's no chance now thatyou can get that full point and
you drastically reduce, evenwith just one buy, your chances
of placing high in your section,maybe competitively.
I just shouldn't care.
(40:26):
But I mean, I also felt like ifI wasn't competitive I wouldn't
be doing chess.
Nate (40:30):
Your thoughts on that.
Yeah, I mean, I actually Ithink it's from a competitive
perspective.
Maybe this should not even likeit's a little bit weird that
this is even allowed.
But but for me currently, like,if the, if the choices are
either I'm not going to play thetournament because I just know
(40:51):
I'm going to be too miserable,or I can take a buy and play the
tournament and have like a goodexperience.
Right then that's preferable.
But much you.
But I would much prefer toeither that the tournament would
just be designed in a way thatI could play all the rounds and
not hate my life.
Daniel (41:08):
Right, right, yeah, exactly, great point.
So, nate, I just want to spenda little time talking about what
you're up to these days.
Now I know that basicallycloses that part of our
conversation for OTB tournaments.
I think we covered a lot ofgood stuff.
Oh, I want to recommend topeople, before I dive into what
you're up to, to read your twoarticles.
We'll have links in the shownotes to both of your two
articles on this subject.
(41:29):
I know you did a follow-up onerecently on what would make
chess tournaments fun, which isalso an excellent read, and I
encourage people to check thatout.
So just a quick reminder forpeople to do that.
But that actually is a goodsegue into what I do want to
discuss, which is what you areup to these days as a coach, as
a content creator.
I know obviously you have yournewsletter that's why we're
talking about this subject todaybut I just kind of want to know
(41:52):
where's your time and energygoing these days in chess.
Nate (41:56):
Yeah for sure.
Well, I'm finishing my nextChessable course, which this one
has really taken a long time,but it is almost done.
I basically just have to recordthe videos.
One e4, and it's based on thesemi slav, so this will combine
(42:24):
with my, my two existing courses.
So I've got one for white,which is the with the ready one
night f3.
I've got black versus e4 withthe nimzovich sicilian.
So then this one black versuseverything but e4.
The three together would be alike a full repertoire for both
colors.
I so, and they all follow asimilar philosophy, and they're
these 100 repertoires, whichmeans 100 lines total, which is
(42:48):
much shorter, right, than a lotof courses, and that's by design
, it's to make them manageableand practical.
So, anyways, that's supposed tobe out in May, so that'll be
awesome.
And then, yeah, yeah, I'm alsodoing, I'm doing one-on-one
coaching, I'm doing.
I just wrapped up, I sort oftried an experiment, this time
with this semi-slot that I'mworking on, but I also did did
(43:12):
it as a live kind ofcohort-based class where we had
like a weekly zoom call, okay.
So that was pretty interesting,because what I, what I found, is
that I, I've developed aprocess for learning, an opening
that works for me, you know,and I kind of try to like with
my one-on-one students.
Obviously we don't only doopenings, we do a lot of
(43:33):
different things but I help somepeople with their openings.
But I thought, you know, maybeI can sort of try to lead people
through the process of how Iwould learn an opening, because
I think it's really.
It can be a lot simpler andfaster than people think it is.
You don't to prepare an openingto the level that you can
(43:53):
succeed with it, even up to amaster level.
It doesn't take a huge amount oftime if you have a good process
what I found is when it comesto the opening, most players are
the way they're doing.
Daniel (44:08):
It just isn't really working interesting, so you
teach a process for learning anopening more efficiently,
basically, yeah, that was theconcept of this live course, so
that just wrapped.
Nate (44:19):
Yeah, it was the first time I did, it was quite
experimental, but I mean I thinkit went pretty well.
People seem to like it.
So you know, I might do andI'll probably do another cohort,
you know, perhaps with adifferent opening even, but but
a similar idea.
Daniel (44:33):
Was that direct through you, or was it through Chessable
?
Nate (44:35):
That was, that was through me, you know.
I told Chessable like, hey, I'mlike I have this idea, and
they're like, oh, you can justgo ahead and do it.
So, but it was just.
I just, you know, set up a, setup a page and did it.
Daniel (44:45):
Oh, that's awesome.
I'm sorry I missed that.
That sounds fascinating.
Nate (44:57):
Is that still available?
In some like do you sell therecorded version of?
But do keep an eye out because,like you know, I might run
another cohort based on the semislav, or maybe you know I was
thinking of other openings.
I think actually the the londonwould be a great fit for this
format, because I know this isan opening many people hate,
although it's one I kind of love, although I mean I I played a
(45:20):
lot of different openings butone.
So so just to you know, to say,my approach to learning the
opening like in a singlesentence, would be learned by
playing like.
I really want to lay thegroundwork as quickly as
possible and then get in thereand play, you know, not not
necessarily over the boardclassical games, but you know,
(45:42):
not necessarily over-the-boardclassical games, but faster
online games to get experience.
And the problem with thatapproach for a black opening
versus D4 is that well, blackpieces, that's 50% of your games
, and then white players at mostlevels play E4 in more than 50%
of games.
So if you're trying to practice, just by firing up a random
(46:02):
game online, you're looking atless than 25 that you'll be able
to use it and then and ofcourse I'm sure everyone has had
the experience of like.
As soon as you learn an opening, then your next 20 games online
, like no one ever plays into itright, yeah, so that's.
That is there's a little bit ofa challenge.
So the reason I think um thelondon would be a good fit is
(46:23):
because, well, you can play d4every game that you have white,
and then you can play the londonagainst most things black can
do.
So you're in a little bit morecontrol of like getting to
practice this consistently anduse that learn by playing
approach I see.
Daniel (46:40):
Well, going back to the workshop or like I don't know if
you call it that, but the like,the live course that you did on
how to approach an opening,that sounds similar, at least in
format, to what you did forhaving a study plan, right, like
creating a study plan foryourself.
Am I right in that that thosewere kind of like similar format
offerings for you?
Nate (47:01):
yeah, well, I mean, they were both like live zoom events.
The study plan was was aone-off session that I did.
You know, I did it around thenew year because I figured
people would be like sort oftrying to revamp their chest and
that.
So that was just a one-off, itwas totally free.
The the semi-solve was was aseries like a six-week series
(47:22):
that included like weekly calls.
There is also a discord groupand some other elements to it
okay okay, but yes, they wereboth live zoom event okay, the
the chess study plan event.
Daniel (47:34):
is that something you plan on doing again in the
future, because I know that wasa live event that's already
passed now?
Nate (47:46):
You know what I probably should like?
Something that I do that isvery stupid as a business person
is I create these things and Ionly use them once.
So for that study plan workshop, I even created a slide deck.
So I should do it.
Yeah, maybe.
I don't know if I'll.
I guess I could do it likequarterly or annually.
I definitely should do it again.
I'm still kind of experimentingwith, like how I can create a
(48:07):
study plan that people willactually use.
Because, like, I do believehaving a specific daily plan if
you're serious about chessimprovement is something you
should do.
It's like in my experience,chess players are pretty
resistant to this, but it's it'sa little odd to me because you
(48:29):
know, if you're trying to get inshape, like physically right,
you know you would certainlyhave a plan that was like
specific, down to days andworkouts.
You know, if you're gonna run amarathon, you're to have a
specific plan.
So I think the same logicapplies for chess.
Like it makes sense to have aplan.
It doesn't necessarily have tobe, you know, it's not about
(48:51):
necessarily doing more or beingmore intense.
It might actually be about likedoing less, but maybe with more
intentionality and purpose.
You know, if can, yeah, takesome of that time, like that
mindless bullet time and put ittowards something that that
might be, you know, both moreeducational and more enjoyable.
(49:11):
Right, it's, it's just a.
You know, to me, a plan is it'sjust a way to like really get
clear on what you want to do andthen follow through on it.
So, yeah, I think I thinkpeople who are trying to get
better at chess could benefitfrom having a specific plan.
Still, sort of tinkering with,like what is the format, how do
I convey that so that peoplewill actually stick to it that's
(49:33):
the tough part.
Daniel (49:34):
Right.
Well, for what it's worth.
I think the study plan you know, live workshop that you had is
a great idea.
Once again, I've been a littlein and out of touch with things
on social media so I didn't getthe news on that when I should
have, but I would love to be apart of that for what it's worth
, and I think a lot of otherclub players and listeners of
the show would too.
So if that's something you wantto do again, I'm all for it.
(49:57):
I'll be a part of it andencourage others to join as well
.
I think it's a fantastic idea,one that just seems like is
evergreen in its usefulness forpeople.
Nate (50:06):
Yeah, I should definitely do that again.
And I yeah, I've got a slidedeck, I've got a video.
Daniel (50:23):
I have.
I have like a Google doc studyplan sort of template, so I did
create a lot of materials aroundthat that I still think are
helpful.
And then the last thing, nate,that you're up to, that I want
to talk about a little bit.
We, in a certain way, we didthis entire episode by talking
about your articles relating toOTB chess events, but more
broadly, as part of yourSubstack newsletter.
Can you just tell people alittle bit about you know what
that is, what it offers.
Nate (50:38):
Yeah, absolutely.
So.
I mean, mean, this is reallythe thing that I've done the
longest in terms of chesscontent.
That's probably what I'm mostknown for.
So it's it's a weeklynewsletter, I mean, which is
it's essentially a blog thatgets emailed out.
So it's called zwischenzug,which, of course, I mean most
readers will know that this is a, this is an in-between move, so
you know, sort of the conceptwith that name is that it's a
(51:01):
little bit unexpected or adifferent perspective.
You know, perhaps perhaps itwasn't the best choice, since it
is hard to spell, but I thinkI'm stuck with it now.
But yeah, people can sign upfor that.
There it's.
You know, there there is a paidlevel, but but it, you know,
the, the standard weekly post iscompletely free.
Daniel (51:23):
So you know, if people just want to get that like
delivered weekly to their, theirmail, you can just sign up and
the weekly post is always freeperspective is to, you know,
have positions or ideas that aremaybe unexpected or less less
(51:49):
commonly heard, which is exactlywhy I wanted to invite you on
the podcast for this episode,because I haven't heard anyone
talk about what are thedrawbacks to OTB events and you
know how do we manage them ordeal with them.
So, yeah, just love that.
You're thinking, you know, inways that maybe we haven't heard
a lot of in the community,because I think we need that,
because a lot of the things, alot of like certain like ideas
and concepts just keep gettingrepeated over and over and we
think like we have they must betrue.
(52:09):
But I love when peoplechallenge them sometimes and ask
you know, is this the best way?
Is this worthwhile?
So I appreciate you doing thatin your newsletter too, you
doing that in your newslettertoo.
Nate (52:17):
Yeah, I mean, I think realistically there's not much
we know for sure about chessimprovement.
There's a lot of passed downwisdom and traditions.
Probably some of them are right, some of them are wrong.
Daniel (52:36):
There's still a lot of room to experiment.
Yeah, yeah, absolutely.
Well, definitely encouragepeople to check out your
newsletter.
I'll have a link for that, aswell as the specific articles
that we talked about today inthe show notes.
And, yeah, it's my highestrecommendation to check out
Nate's newsletter, because Ithink it's fantastic Lots of
great ideas and things that willhelp you think differently
about chess as well as improveyour chess.
So, nate, I really enjoyed ourconversation today.
(52:56):
I want to say thank you fordoing this.
I didn't know if it wasredundant for you, because I
know you already wrote about it,but I wanted to have this
conversation because I've beenthinking that and feeling that
and I wanted to talk about itwith someone else who shared
those feelings and also had somereally good ideas about how we
(53:17):
can move forward with it.
So I just want to say thank youso much for talking about it
with me today.
Nate (53:21):
No, thank you.
I think it's great to discussit and, yeah, I'm excited to see
where the discussion goes fromhere, because I would love I
mean to hear what more peoplethink and hopefully, just at the
end of the day, maketournaments better, more
enjoyable and more accessible toa lot more people.
Daniel (53:39):
Yeah, absolutely that's the idea, and I appreciate your
perspectives on that.
I agree with all of them thatwe need to.
We need to make someimprovements, so that way
they're desirable, basically.
So, yeah, thanks, nate,appreciate your time today and
thank you for being on the show.
Nate (53:53):
All right, thanks, daniel.
Daniel (53:57):
Thanks for listening.
This has been a production ofmy business, adult Chess Academy
, and that has a website withthe same name.
If you want to look for it, youcan also find me being way too
active on Twitter by searchingmy username, lona underscore
chess See you next week.
Popular Podcasts
Cold Case Files: Miami
Joyce Sapp, 76; Bryan Herrera, 16; and Laurance Webb, 32—three Miami residents whose lives were stolen in brutal, unsolved homicides. Cold Case Files: Miami follows award‑winning radio host and City of Miami Police reserve officer Enrique Santos as he partners with the department’s Cold Case Homicide Unit, determined family members, and the advocates who spend their lives fighting for justice for the victims who can no longer fight for themselves.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.