| Week | Blitz rating |Rapid rating | Blitz win/loss | Rapid win/loss |
|------|--------------|-------------|----------------|----------------|
-| 1 | N/A | 429 | 4-1 | 3-1 |
-| 2 | 686 | 508 | 0-0 | 3-1 |
-</tbody>
-</table>
+| 1 | N/A | 429 | 3-1 | 4-1 |
+| 2 | 686 | 508 | 6-6 | 0-0 |
+| 3 | 725 | 508 | 1-3 | 2-0 |
+| 4 | 694 | 535 | 3-9 | 0-0 |
+| 5 | 615 | 535 | 2-2 (0-4) | 2-0 (0-3) |
+| 6 | 588 | 628 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
Notes:
rather than chess.com, so improvements from week 1 to week 2 may just
be my having improved since when I had last been playing on
chess.com.
+* In week 5, I took part in some tournaments on chess.com.
+ I've listed those separately in parentheses in the win/loss columns,
+ as they were mostly against significantly higher-rated players (and
+ in the rapid case, were at a 10+0 time control instead of my usual
+ 15+10).
## Status report
[daily game versus TPTCOAT]:
https://www.chess.com/game/daily/561280087
+### Week 2
+
+From this week on, the study plan decreases the games played a little
+to make room for studying the games from _Logical Chess Move by Move_.
+Which is a fun book!
+It's a bit of an old book, so some of the analyses are by now
+demonstrably erroneous due to further developments in the understanding
+of chess (and the advent of chess engines), but it's interesting.
+It goes through a bunch of historical master-level games and explains
+the ideas behind (and sometimes flaws in) each move.
+
+Yesterday I also got to get started on _Winning Chess Openings_ (okay,
+that's a lie, i've been doing a bit of extracurricular reading on it
+already. but i did more yesterday).
+Which is also a great book.
+I've reached the section of the book where it's basically giving a
+whirlwind tour of every classical king's pawn opening (which is to say,
+ones beginning 1. e4 e5, with both players moving the pawn in front of
+their king two squares).
+Next it's gonna do the same for classical queen's pawn openings (1. d4
+d5), and then for modern king's/queen's pawn openings (where the second
+player doesn't mirror the first's move, intending to contest or attack
+their position in the center in some other way).
+
+The games this week were all blitz games.
+I went 6-6, (3-1, 2-2, and 1-3 across the different days I played
+them).
+Looking back I notice I went 6-1 with the white pieces and 0-5 with the
+black pieces.
+Huh.
+(And the black games were all in the Caro-Kann, which is how I respond
+to 1. e4.)
+Gonna need to work on that I guess, hehe.
+
+I won my daily game that was going really excitingly.
+Played another game against the same person as well as starting a new
+game.
+The rematch went in my favor again, and now we're doing another (now
+unrated) game.
+The new daily game I got a bit reckless and tried a Qa5+ tactic (this
+is moving your queen to check the opponent's king with the intention of
+then capturing a different piece with the queen when they have to move
+to defend; awkwardly I failed to notice that they could both block the
+check and defend the piece I was going after by moving their queen)
+that hasn't panned out so I had to spend several moves getting my queen
+to safety.
+I've managed to stabilize the situation so we'll see how that works
+out. :)
+
+## Week 3
+
+Blitz games didn't go so hot this week.
+My big weakness there was not thinking quickly enough and getting short
+on time.
+Week 4 will be all blitz games so hopefully that'll help me work on
+that.
+The rapid games went well, though. :)
+Daily games remain fun but have slowed down a bit.
+
+I finished up the Classical King's Pawn Openings chapter in the
+openings book. And part 1 of the endgames book!
+Next week will be Classical Queen's Pawn Openings time, plus some less
+noob-level endgame study.
+
+Outside the study plan per se, I've been working some on my opening
+repertoire.
+I ended up watching some videos from a chess coach who advocates an
+approach based on going deep on a main line (both in the sense of going
+all the way into the middlegame, and also in the sense of thoroughly
+analyzing the line so as to develop a strong understanding of the plans
+and motivations of both sides throughout), then working backwards and
+analyzing in similar depth any branches where the opponent might make a
+different move.
+It's an intriguing approach, and I want to give it a try.
+I've gone deep on one main line in the Ruy Lopez (which is what I aim
+to play with the white pieces), though I haven't done the branching
+out yet.
+I haven't really done similarly on other openings yet either.
+I kinda need to decide what defense I want to use against 1. d4.
+I've gone back and forth on it (I have played very few games against it
+lately tbh), but I think at this point I'm deciding between the
+Grünfeld Defense and an approach based on the Nimzo-Indian and either
+Queen's Indian or Bogo-Indian.
+I might also consider trying to switch from the Caro-Kann against 1. e4
+to a Sicilian Defense.
+I like the Caro-Kann, but it's hard to find a good source on the
+theory, and it doesn't seem too successful or popular at the top-level
+lately so I can't look at those games for ideas either.
+In contrast the Sicilian is the most common response to 1. e4, and I've
+found some great books and such on it.
+Anyway, interesting stuff. ^^
+
+That's been week 3.
+
+## Week 4
+
+Once again I've done poorly in blitz, alas (0-4, 1-3, and 2-2 on the
+three days I played blitz games).
+My big weak points in those games were:
+
+1. Opening unfamiliarity, which isn't necessarily a big deal at my
+ level in slower time controls, but in blitz it means I have to spend
+ a lot of time thinking about it early on and I suffer from time
+ pressure later.
+2. Time management (contributed to by the preceding and contributing to
+ the following).
+3. Blundering my pieces. >.>
+
+I did have some quite effective attacking play in the wins, including
+one where I used it to recover from a mistake into a win.
+I think I really need to work on thinking faster, though.
+Which probably means I should do more tactics puzzles, possibly in a
+more structured way.
+That won't necessarily help me actually think faster, but it'll train
+my ability to recognize important tactical patterns faster anyway.
+So that would mean I don't need to expend as much explicit thinking on
+that sort of thing.
+
+My daily games have gone well.
+Both my rated game and my unrated game against TPTCOAT started out with
+me on the back foot a bit, but then I managed to outplay my opponent
+and start gradually closing out the game.
+After winning both of those, I started another rated game and another
+unrated game, and have won the latter already with a somewhat early
+checkmate.
+The rated game is about to end in my favor.
+I experimented with the Sicilian Defense there, though my opponent went
+for the Closed Sicilian, which I haven't looked into at all.
+I ended up pulling off a [windmill][windmills] that took four of their
+pawns for free.
+Later I realized that I had gained the ability to checkmate them about
+halfway through that, but eh, no harm in grabbing the material just in
+case I miscalculated the mate.
+
+My opening study and preparation is getting more thorough now.
+I've studied the main lines of the Grünfeld (my defense against 1. d4)
+and prepared my preferred response against the Caro-Kann and the
+trickier variant of the Scandinavian Defense as white.
+I've also studied the main lines of the Najdorf Sicilian (my main
+defense against 1. e4, although I'll need to do a bit more studying to
+know how to handle a couple of different ways White can play instead of
+going into open Sicilian positions).
+
+This week is back to some rapid games, so I think those will go better
+for me. :)
+
+## Week 5
+
+Hey, I was right.
+This week's rapid games did go better for me!
+I also went 2-2 in my blitz games (not counting the tournament where
+most of my opponents were much higher-rated than me).
+My blitz rating fell quite a bit because of blundering mate-in-1
+against the one lower-rated player I played in the tournament, but I'm
+satisfied with my performance, especially after noticing that that one
+lower-rated player is much higher rated than me in slower time
+controls.
+
+I'm getting stronger in aggressive play in rapid and daily games!
+Also in blitz games but I still struggle with time pressure at times.
+
+I've begun playing the Sicilian as my response to 1. e4!
+It's been fun, and it's been well-suited to playing aggressively.
+
+I did two chess.com tournaments for people rated under 1200 in 5+5
+blitz and 10+0 rapid[^time controls].
+I lost all my games in both but I'm pretty satisfied with the
+experience, especially in the rapid tournament.
+The 10+0 time control was rough, though, but a 15+10 tournament would
+take something like 3 hours, so... tradeoffs.
+
+In the openings book, I still need next week to finish reading about
+the Queen's Gambit Declined.
+In my endgame study I finished reading the second part of Silman's
+Endgame Course.
+Next week I'll do the tests for part 2.
+
+In extracurricular studies, I've tried studying from the series of
+comprehensive chess training books from Artur Yusupov.
+They're really tough, but the first chapter on Mating Motifs
+immediately helped out when I won games using the Arabian mate, and
+began noticing the threat of it and other common mates in a lot of my
+games as things to defend against.
+I achieved a "Good" scored (12/16) on the exercises, which were very
+tough.
+Chapter 2 is not sticking with me as well so maybe I should re-read
+it...
+
+Anyway, week 6 will be a blitz week, so...
+it'll be a challenge but hopefully it'll help me get better at thinking
+more quickly.
+
[^daily explanation]:
"Daily" is just what chess.com calls games with such a time control.
Chess.com is very popular (and according to the data gathered by that
https://chessgoals.com
[lichess practice]:
https://lichess.org/practice
+[windmills]:
+ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windmill_(chess)
Lady’s Gitweb / Wiki / blobdiff