Nice article Matt. In sports it's easy to measure the physiological cost of the intensity and have a science-guided way to periodise the effort. It's all more murky for brain/chess/esports and such a quantification is the current cutting edge of experimentation
You raise an excellent point about the challenges of quantifying training methods in chess compared to sports. In exercises like weightlifting, there are well-established ways to measure intensity and plan periodized training programs optimized for performance gains. The science is clear on what works physically.
With chess and other mental pursuits like esports, quantifying the effectiveness of different practice techniques is much murkier. There isn't a simple way to measure how much mental energy was exerted or how efficiently time was spent studying. It's a fascinating frontier that top players and coaches are experimenting with, but there are still more questions than definitive answers.
I appreciate you adding that perspective - it's a helpful reality check on my excitement about borrowing concepts like "time under tension" from sports training. There is certainly some analogy there, but it's not an exact science for the brain like it is for muscles. Part of the endless appeal of studying chess is that we get to continually experiment and figure out what study methods work best for us as individuals. Unique learning styles, strengths, and interests mean that optimal training varies from player to player.
If identifying the perfect training regimen was straightforward, everyone would have long ago cracked the code to rapid chess improvement! The complexity you note is part of what makes our journey in the game so enriching and humbling. Even the top minds in chess are constantly tweaking and trying to push their understanding and skills to the next level. I'm inspired that there is always more progress to be made thanks to chess's infinite depth.
Nice article Matt. In sports it's easy to measure the physiological cost of the intensity and have a science-guided way to periodise the effort. It's all more murky for brain/chess/esports and such a quantification is the current cutting edge of experimentation
You raise an excellent point about the challenges of quantifying training methods in chess compared to sports. In exercises like weightlifting, there are well-established ways to measure intensity and plan periodized training programs optimized for performance gains. The science is clear on what works physically.
With chess and other mental pursuits like esports, quantifying the effectiveness of different practice techniques is much murkier. There isn't a simple way to measure how much mental energy was exerted or how efficiently time was spent studying. It's a fascinating frontier that top players and coaches are experimenting with, but there are still more questions than definitive answers.
I appreciate you adding that perspective - it's a helpful reality check on my excitement about borrowing concepts like "time under tension" from sports training. There is certainly some analogy there, but it's not an exact science for the brain like it is for muscles. Part of the endless appeal of studying chess is that we get to continually experiment and figure out what study methods work best for us as individuals. Unique learning styles, strengths, and interests mean that optimal training varies from player to player.
If identifying the perfect training regimen was straightforward, everyone would have long ago cracked the code to rapid chess improvement! The complexity you note is part of what makes our journey in the game so enriching and humbling. Even the top minds in chess are constantly tweaking and trying to push their understanding and skills to the next level. I'm inspired that there is always more progress to be made thanks to chess's infinite depth.