If he can he's a real magician. Why working as a coach then?

A coach can't give an assessment of the potential. Think about it.

Since some years I have lessons from the same trainer.

What do I expect?
- Getting a better understanding at chess.
- Getting hints where to work on.
- Getting stronger.
- A respectful personal relationsship.

Getting stronger is hindered by health problems. As I need an O2 concentrator since two weeks I will have to adapt to the new circumstances and see if there's still a way to perform better in otb games.

What did I get?
- A better look at the importance of every single tempo.
- A better look of strength and weaknesses of the pieces and some pawn structures.
- A personal insight in the thinking process of a stronger GM.
- Feedback of my weaknesses.
- A lot of fun and motivation to work on my chess.

The method of my trainer was starting with the thinking process, telling me to work with Blokh's book, analyzing my latest otb games. 

As I do this for four years now I sometimes thought about taking some lessons from another trainer. But I always rejected this, mainly because he gives me enough input to work on it. I cannot judge if this is the most effective way. But as it is fun and steadily at the frontier of my comfort zone it feels more than just o.k.

I am offering online lessons myself, so I have some experience on the subject. Every teacher has their own take on the approach I guess. I tend to focus my lessons a lot on matters where human input from an experienced player/teacher is the most helpful. I do a lot of middlegame/endgame strategy for example. Doing tactically focused things is helpful for the student, but can also be done without the help of the teacher in the actual lesson. I give out as much homework as the student feels realistic to manage until the next meeting. I also advise all students to do daily tactics, completely on their own. I can't provide much additional benefit there so I don't do it in the lessons.

I think one importantant thing is chemestry between student/teacher and inspiration as Tony said above. Some Coach might be good with one student and not as good with another. Just trying out different ones is probably a good idea and see who you like.

Back to the original question, I've tried a couple of chess coaches myself, and I find it difficult to find the perfect match. However, as you're paying for a service, and as there are plenty of coahces available, I think it's your right (and consumer duty !) to quickly drop a coach if you feel he is missing something important.

I think TonyRo and ErictheRed have already said a lot of important things. I would add that feeling emotionally comfortable with the coach is probably important too, but it depends on your personality, obviously.

The coach should definitely provide some personalized feedback that 'talk to you' in some way. If they don't, you're probably better served with a book 

Edit : there are also some mixed formulas, such as GM Nigel Davies' offering on his website Tigerchess. He offers a detailed study plan for a modest subscription fee, and short game analysis are included in the price too. If you wish, you can also book individual lessons as a supplement. I find his material has good value for people in the intermediate range.

Returning to the discussion at hand, I do have a few more things to say about online coaching, and what makes a good coach:

1. They should show up prepared - if you want to analyze your games that's totally cool, and I think it's very helpful, but if not, I think a good coach will show up ready with enough prepared material to fill the lesson, and hopefully that material will be related to some skill in which you're lacking.

2. Related to the above, that coach should try his best to ascertain your current level, and strong and weak points. Whether that be through games against each other, perusing your tournament games, testing out your abilities in some kind of an assessment, or just figuring it out over the course of a few lessons. I have tried out quite a few online coaches, and I get the sense that some regurgitate the same lessons to all of their students, regardless of rating levels or specific skills.

3. They should be assigning meaningful homework. After all, you're only together for 1-4 hours on month on average - providing more work is only upside!

4. It's helpful if that coach has experience or analysis on a wide variety of opening systems. Being able to quickly get students into openings that suit their play or help them improve is important, and again, being able to provide material that students can use in their own time is HUGE.

brabo wrote on 07/26/15 at 17:32:14:


Well, his FIDE rating is from like 25 years ago, so it probably doesn't equate with 2300 strength of today. It's not like he has stopped for 2-3 years only.

Anyway, I had one lesson with him and I don't think he is a good coach. The fact that he analyzes with an engine is already a big no-no. I would expect a good coach to share his thought process so that the student can pick relevant human patterns/ideas.

I believe a recent article from the famous coach Silman: http://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-lessons-exposed-part-one
is relevant for this thread.

Click on his name to find many more interesting articles from him.