THE WORK WE KEEP AVOIDING There is usually one part of our chess that we know needs work, but we just cannot find it in ourselves to do it. For me, it was calculation. By 2012 I had my 3 GMs norm for 5 (!) years already, but I still had not crossed 2500. I knew what the core of the problem was, but I was lazy to admit it to myself, because I knew the amount of hard work it would require. It was simple, really: my calculation was not good enough. I was not seeing variations with the clarity required at GM level. After a good, hard look at myself, I realised that if I don’t do the work I needed to do, I may as well never become a Grandmaster, a recurring nightmare in those 5 years after my final norm. I resolved to do something about it and I started solving endgame studies for one hour every day. I used Kasparian’s Domination in 2,545 Endgame Studies, which I carried on a Kindle so I could work wherever I was. I did it during tournaments, as part of my pre-game preparation, on bad days, on tired days, even on days when I was hungover after partying all night. I always liked the theme of domination, so the material mattered, but the standard to which I decided to hold myself, mattered more. To speed up my progress, I resolved to solve the studies blindfold. In the beginning, the work was miserable. I couldn’t visualise the positions and was frustrated to the maximum. The mind hates to calculate when it has become used to something easier. And I was taking it easy in my games, if I am being honest. In my work, after a while, concentration would fade away. The position would get blurred. I would become overwhelmingly sleepy. It was truly awful. Often I would spend the full hour without solving a single study. However, I discovered that it did not make the work useless. I discovered that the effort was doing something. I noticed small incremental improvements. The next week, the position was a bit clearer. The variations became slightly more precise. Gradually (very gradually!), calculation became faster, visualisation improved and I started feeling better. Less than a year and a half later of this work, I became a Grandmaster. The main lesson is not that everybody should solve Kasparian studies. They worked for me, but any material can work. The important part is the start - the moment you stop avoiding the truth of your main shortcoming. It may be calculation. In fact, very often it is. It may also be analysing games without immediately switching on the engine. It may be theoretical or practical endgames, addictive online play or discipline of one’s thinking. The next important part is what we do after acknowledging it. If you really want to be tough with yourself, try writing it down. One sentence is enough. “My calculation is vague after 2 moves,” or “I cannot see the position clearly in my head,” are examples. And then the third important thing, do something about it. You can do one hour of proper calculation as I did. You can do something else that works for you. What matters is that discipline removes the “negotiation” you do with yourself. You no longer need to decide whether you feel like doing the work. You just do it. (They recommend this for people who have hard time going to the gym. This is the same.) This is the idea behind The Method (alexcolovic.com/TheMethod). It came into existence from three problems I had to solve in my own chess: stagnation in my chess understanding, weakness in my calculation and loss of control in online play. The common thread was learning to work honestly. Yes, it is hard, but it's the only way to do it.

Just the fact that you need 5 (!) wins to neutralise a draw vs. a lower-rated opponent (over 400 points) is insane.

Did Leko lose on time?

The real advantage of a good training system is that it shortens the learning curve. You spend the time doing work that works. If you want to waste less time finding your way, The Method is for you.

Football is a game where all teams compete, but Germany wins. Chess Olympiad is where all teams play chess, but Germany won only in 1939. However, Germany leads in Samarkand with 3 rounds to go, together with the hosts, having beaten them in the direct duel. Plus they have Gustafsson, who knows everything.

My short stay in Samarkand came to an end and I will watch the final rounds of the Olympiad from home. Hectic few days, but for me it is always energising to spend time in the chess world.

An idea from a lively conversation at the Bermuda party. At Olympiads, there should be more parties. Not necessarily as massive as the Bermuda, but they should be there. The teams fighting for medals don't come anyway, while the rest enjoy them immensely.

Bermuda party rocked as usual. #chessolympiad #bermudaparty

With the one and only @sagarchess1 of @ChessbaseIndia and Riste, the owner of the best chess cafe in Bangkok. #chessunitesus #chessolympiad

Made it to the Olympiad.

Chess improvement gets expensive when you keep paying for new material but never fix the way you use it. The Method is designed to improve that process. If you want more from the work you already do, the guide is for you.

In my latest post, I describe my working routine when I was at "at the top of my game". gmalexcolovic.substack.com/p…

"In matters of grave importance, style, not sincerity, is the vital thing." - from The Importance of Being Earnest by Oscar Wilde. (any resemblance to the current state of the chess world is purely coincidental)

Reaching a new level usually requires more than learning new ideas. It requires a better way of working with uncertainty and decision-making. The Method is built around that deeper layer of training. If you are serious about moving beyond your current level, the guide is for you.

A wobbly start can be overcome if the players play themselves into shape as the tournament progresses. But that's a big if.

What we can already see and what will inevitable witness in the remainder of the Olympiad, is that EVERYBODY messes up.

The best improvement tools solve more than one problem. They change how you approach problems in general. The Method is meant to do that for chess study: better analysis, cleaner calculation and more disciplined play. If you want a system that keeps working across your training, the guide is for you.

When staring with a loss in round 1 to a lower-rated opponent (like Arjun Erigaisi yesterday), it becomes psychologically problematic as you start the event with a big rating minus and then you fight for the whole tournament to get to a small minus or a zero. It feels like you play catch up the whole time, instead of moving forward, and this drags you down psychologically.

Petrosian had some underwhelming results after his title defence in 1966, but he was still board 1 in Lugano in 1968, nobody would have dreamed of not putting him on board 1. My point is, without ratings, would Gukesh have been board 4 in Samarkand? I don't think so.

Private coaching is valuable because it brings structure, standards and immediate corrective action. The Method was written to give you more of that within your own training, so you can work better even when alone. If that independence matters to you, the guide is for you.

Has there been a case in history where the reigning World Champion has not played on board 1 for their country? #ChessOlympiad