mikailum

I recently read Wil Shipley’s passionately written piece, “Quit School and Set Things On Fire,” and while his tone is far from eloquent, his bluntness at the very least makes for an interesting read. He has the kind of in-your-face, beat-you-over-the-head-because-i’m-great directness that makes it impossible to miss his point or misconstrue his words. The article can be summed up with the quote:

In the REAL world, if you have to put up with being bored for someone, YOU GET PAID FOR IT. Also, you get “real-world” experience, which as well all know from watching reality TV trumps “book smurts” every time.

In a sense, I disagree. There’s definitely a place for education, and definitely a need for better education in our country. But his point is well-taken. Without experience, all the books in the world can’t possibly qualify you to do much of anything. Whatever your endeavor is, whatever your ambition is - it’s only by diving in and experiencing something new can you come away with the knowledge and dirt on your hands to do it better next time. This really resonates with me both personally and professionally, as I seek the confidence that can only come with knowing who I am and what I stand for.

The metaphor of setting things on fire is particularly potent with respect to computer programming. As I dive back into the field for the second time, it’s really clear to me that there is so much that I don’t know about software development. Of course, there’s a lot that I do know as well - spending a whole year working at Auguri has given me exposure to programming in PHP, Python, Javascript, CSS, PL-SQL, and Ruby. I have an adequate practical foundation to make meaningful contributions and accomplish a lot. But in programming, the greatest danger to productivity is self-delusion - a failure to see the full context of a problem, to adequately understand requirements, or to adequately understand how a solution will be useful to an end-user. In short, the greatest danger is to fail to admit how much you don’t know. To fail to acknowledge all the ways in which your “great” solution actually sucks.

As I re-enter the field for the second time, despite the fact that my arrangement is temporary (passing actuarial exams is still a priority), I’m excited to learn as much as I can about how software works. Not how it works on a blackboard at a university, but how it works for a silicon-valley startup with a small seed to change the face of search. I’m looking forward to setting things on fire, and seeing how they burn. I’m looking forward to getting my hands dirty, and examining things with the perspective of a beginner. I’m looking forward to being humbled, to discovering hidden shortcomings and finding out how to do things better.

Suddenly I’m a kid again. Staring into a vast playground, wondering what it would feel like to build a sand castle.

So the road map for 2010 has finally been created. Nothing is completely unexpected, but then again, nothing was particularly predictable. Graduate school applications are still in the works, but for now, I’ll actually be working as a programmer again for Auguri, the startup company which was my first job after finishing at Berkeley. Meanwhile, I’ll take Calc-III at Ohlone, which will be an important prerequisite for any Masters programs in Actuarial Science. Finally, I’ll continue studying for Exam P, which I’ll take in late March. And on the side, if I have time, I’ll try to teach a class or two for the Berkeley Chess School.

Beginning next week, a lot of these trajectories will be set in motion - I recently found an apartment in Fremont and will begin staying at Reseda Circle on February 1st. Even though I know things will quickly become very busy, I’m looking forward to the change of pace. The past two months, after the completion of Exam FM, I’ve definitely felt a sense of stagnation. Not having work, income, or anything to do during the day definitely takes its toll on your psyche, and it doesn’t take very long. Change has never been so welcome. I’m a little bit nervous about the future, but I’m as confident as ever that I’m on a path that’s right for me.

2009 was a good year. It was a first for many things, the sprouting of new directions, passions, and trajectories which may impact my life for years to come. It was a year that showed me a lot about who I am and who I hope to become. Chess, statistics, actuarial science - these are deep interests which inspire my curiosity and fill me with wonder. Now, it’s only a matter of responding to natural impulses towards learning and growth. It’s about channeling interests into a path which can bring financial, professional and personal fulfillment. These interests don’t define me, of course. I am more than my career or my hobbies. But certainly, they are a substantial component.

Personally and psychologically, I know I still have a lot of growth to do. I’m still learning a lot about who I am, about the values I want to represent. Sometimes in social situations I’ll start feeling anxious or insecure for no reason. Sometimes my mind will wage wars against itself, over decisions as mundane as a cup of coffee, whether to call a friend, or whether to sleep in or get up early. I suppose we all live with our small neuroses, doubts, and fears. It’s all part of the package, all part of what makes us us.

This is one of those new years that seems to pass without much fanfare. Whether as individuals, as friends, as families, or as a country - it seems like there is much work to do. At least for me, now isn’t the time for grandiose “pie-in-the-sky” ideas or revolutions. It’s about change, but … incremental change. What can I do today? What can I do right now? It’s the small decisions that count. It’s the nuances that provide the flavor.

My resolutions for 2010: Be smart. Try to make good decisions. Try to enjoy the changes, emotional highs and lows that are inevitable. And never lose sight of the present moment, because it’s all there really is.

Here’s a recent game I played against Mobile Fritz (2100 strength). It’s one of my prouder games, good preparation for the upcoming Golden State Open, and a nice way to start the new year.

My path to chess improvement has been tough recently. My dedication and interest in the game are high right now, especially since I have some extra time on my hands. Classes at Ohlone are over, and as far as the job search goes, well, you can only fire out so many resumes in one sitting. But the challenge is figuring out, how do I improve? I’ve spent a number of hours on the ICC recently playing rated 5-minute games, but I still seem to be stuck in the same plateau. Getting beyond the 1800-1900 level is proving to be tougher than I thought. The post-mortem “regression” technique I described in an earlier post is a good one, but it feels a little slow. And boring. In my games, I still find myself falling into the same old holes.

After a bit of research on the Chess World forums, I’ve come up with a new regimen for improvement - one which I plan on sticking to for at least a few months, until I can confirm or deny its effectiveness. There are two main components, and both of them involve online resources.

I. Tactics

As I have learned the hard way in my blitz games, there is no excuse for a lack of tactical acumen. I might not be the next Hikaru Nakamura, but I need to be able to recognize major motifs (forks, pins, etc.) as they occur. I need to be able to “seal the deal” in winning positions, and avoid losing pieces to simple combinations. Thus, about 25% of my chess study time will go into simple combinatorial drilling. Luckily, ChessTempo.com is a great online resource for problem solving. It feeds you realistic tactical scenarios, and operates through a really nice Java interface.  Oh, and the best part is, it’s free.

II. Studying Master Games

To some extent, I think chess needs to be learned like a language. At least, that’s my hypothesis. The best resource I’ve found for this is ChessGames.com, which, despite it’s kitschy feel and heavy dose of advertisements, actually delivers exactly what the name promises. It’s a great database of games which you can filter by player, date, opening, and result, among other things. You can also play the games in the browser, which is a major convenience.

Rather than analyze one or two games in excruciating and painstaking detail, my revised plan is to do “quick analysis” of each game - in about 10 minutes, try to play through it and predict moves as well as possible. Over the course of a few hundred such games, my hope is that pattern recognition will start to kick in. This is positional study - looking at major themes and plans, with the goal of emulating (with increasing success) master play. One major advantage to this approach is it will also give me exposure to many different openings. By avoiding excessive detail and getting a quick “feel” for a large number of games, I’m hoping that many opening motifs will become apparent over time.

So in between finding a job, hanging out with friends and family over the holidays, and studying for my next actuarial exam, my game plan for chess improvement is now in place. Time will tell how well it holds up.

The chessgames.com interface

In his famous Last Lecture, Carnegie Mellon professor Randy Pausch notes that difficulties we encounter are tests: “Brick walls are there for a reason. They let us prove how badly we want things.” Despite success on my first actuarial exam, and the fact that I’ve spent the last half of 2009 rebuilding a mathematical foundation for myself, I’ve had a cold realization after firing out nearly 100 resumes over the last week. The truth is, I’m going to need much more training and educational background to become a strong candidate even for entry-level positions. The reason, based on the muted feedback I’ve gotten in the form of rejection letters and automated HR-responses, is simple. I don’t have a formal quantitative background in economics, math, business or statistics. I’m competing against other qualified candidates that do. And in terms of the actuarial exams, it’s only going to get more quantitative from here.

Exam P/1, which I recently began studying for with the intention of sitting in March, requires some understanding of multi-variable calculus, which I haven’t taken yet. Yikes. It’s not that it isn’t possible to self-study and get by (I’m still planning on March), but it’s more an indicator of what’s to come. History has been great, but it probably isn’t going to help me pass P. Or get a job in finance, for that matter.

Nonetheless, I’m still optimistic about 2010 and good things to come. For starters, I’ve decided to apply for graduate school! Temple, Columbia, Boston University, University of Iowa and University of Wisconsin all have fine Masters programs in Actuarial Science, and I think I’d be a strong candidate given my career-changing background and math skills currently in development. Going back to school seems like a good idea right now - it will give me a more formal foundation in principles of economics and financial math, and it will make me a much more marketable candidate for breaking into the industry.

With this realization, the game-plan for 2010 is beginning to materialize.

• Prepare for and take the GRE (February-April)
• Take calculus III as a night-class at community college or elsewhere.
• Find a full-time temp job as an admin, or similar.
• Pass exam P (March/April).
• Apply for grad schools with the intention to begin Fall 2010.

The walls are there to be broken down. Keep working, keep studying, keep sending out resumes. And I’m hoping that the details will all fall into place.

Capablanca - Marshall (1909) - What is White's best continuation?

My recent strategy towards chess improvement is closely related to my relationship with history. Although I tend to think of myself as a more quantitative person by nature, I studied US History in college. In history classes, whether you’re talking about the Vietnam War, the end of slavery, or the politics of race relations, the fundamental difficulty is always the same: How do you isolate variables? When we’re looking at the past, there are an infinite number of lenses you can look through, since lots of things are generally changing at the same time. So if everything is changing together, how do we separate ourselves from the complexity and create a clean, coherent narrative? For example, did the slavery issue cause the Civil War, or was slavery itself just one example of deeper economic and cultural rifts between North and South? Or, in analyzing the rise of Japanese ultra-nationalism in the 1930’s, one could ask, at what point did the path towards aggressive expansion and war become inevitable? Of course, there are no easy answers. One of my college professors once jokingly declared, “show me a one-handed historian!” The point being that all historians have two hands, so they can say, “on the one hand … but on the other hand …”

Recently I realized that this somewhat conflicted relationship with causality is applicable to chess. What causes a side to lose a chess game? Typically it only takes a brief analysis to discover that there are a multitude of reasons … some are short term and tactical - for example, if we consider only the (typically final) sequence of moves that leads to mate or a decisive material advantage, we have one answer to why a game was lost. But at least among stronger players, there is typically a progression that leads up to this decisive breakthrough - a series of small strategic mistakes, for example, will often cause a position to become increasingly “unpleasant” far before the game is actually lost. Perhaps one side underestimated the amount of control that was associated with a particular file, diagonal or square. Just like when we’re looking at history, any event can be traced back to short-term and long-term causes.

What does this mean with respect to improving my chess game? Ultimately, my strategy for reaching the expert level (>2000) will revolve around studying the end of lots of games, and slowly working my way backwards. That is, to first identify the moment at which an advantage becomes immediately and plainly decisive. This is most likely a tactical maneuver which leads to material loss or mate. Then, I’ll work backwards and calculate possible alternatives, most of which are equally unpleasant and losing. The whole point is that by thoroughly examining short-term causes - the small tactics which are the nuts and bolts of a position - I’ll ultimately gain an understanding of the broader positional factors. In chess, positional play is valuable only to the extent to which it can lead to tactical breakthroughs.

Oh, and I forgot to mention one other important part of my training regimen - my silicon partner! Ya, Fritz is the best …

Now that my first actuarial exam is over, I’ve had a bit of extra time on my hands between looking for jobs, polishing the resume, and finishing up my calculus class at Ohlone college. Last Friday I was at McDonalds around 3 pm, hungry after having not eaten anything all day. I devoured a quarter-pounder with fries in about five minutes. And five minutes after that, I had enough of a stomach ache to vow that I would become a vegetarian.

Ya, I wish I could make up some sweet story about the animals and sustainability and an organic future, but really … it was the stomach ache. Recently it had been happening way too often - I would forget about food completely until I was suddenly super-hungry and in a pinch. Then I’d run out for a quick sandwich or burger, and feel really gross afterwards. So, I made the decision - enough of that. Enough of eating processed meats that I don’t know the source of, and probably don’t want to know the source of. Enough of supporting a food industry that doesn’t want you to know where your food comes from. No, I don’t think I’m turning into a left-wing extremist hippie, but I do want to feel better about myself and the choices I make about what to purchase and consume.

This is going to be a battle of self-control and willpower, at least in this interim period when my brain is coming up with a million reasons why it’s a dumb idea. Oh come on. You really think you can give up steak? What about those buffalo wings that just go perfectly with football games? What about when you’re out with friends, and you’re all sharing food? Why would you deny yourself of so much stuff that, frankly, just tastes good!?

My reasoning is telling me that if I’m going to win this war, it’s going to happen gradually. I’m going to need to get used to making shopping lists, to going to the grocery store and committing the time and energy to preparing food ahead of time. I’m going to start by eliminating pork, chicken, and beef, and keep seafood and dairy on the okay list. And I’m going to try to establish a repertoire of recipes that are veggie-centric, simple to make, and leave me feeling good afterwards. I’m going to find go-to snacks that I can reach for when hunger strikes quickly and unexpectedly. And, perhaps most importantly, I’m only going to commit to this regimen for 30 days. Yep, January 7, 2010, if I decide I want to have a 20-ounce hunk of beef, that’s when I’m gonna do it. Of course, I hope this isn’t the case, but … you never know.

I’m starting with 30 days because I believe in keeping promises. And the best way to keep a promise is to not make a declaration that’s too extravagant to be kept.

And one last note, Raja Bell, Jerry Stackhouse and Ricky Williams are my new vegetarian heroes.

Success feels pretty good, especially after waiting for such a long time to get this ball rolling. Today I took my first actuarial exam, Exam FM, and passed. It almost feels a little bit surreal - a lot of doors have suddenly opened up, and I’m looking forward to scoping out entry-level actuarial jobs and (hopefully) finding a good scenario for myself to step into. Where will I be 6 months from now? A year from now? 5 years from now? I don’t know, but this is the first time in my life when I’ve ever felt a real sense of direction, a career path which I’m excited to explore.

Despite my passing grade, the exam felt fairly tough compared to the numerous practice exams I took the past few weeks. For starters, there were 35 questions to answer in 3 hours, which was 5 more than the 30 questions I was expecting. In terms of the material, there was nothing too unexpected, with the exception of one or two questions on Macaulay Duration. The exam basically tests understanding of interest theory, and your ability to calculate present values and future values of bonds, level payments and various cash flows. It also tests a basic understanding of hedging strategies that utilize options and stocks.

Taking the past few months off to study for this exam and take a refresher Calculus course was definitely a good decision. At times, I’ve definitely gotten a bit antsy - it’s not easy when you’re 24, unemployed, and contemplating a career change that will take you in a totally new direction. But at least for now, this definitely feels right. With one exam behind me, my plans are now to find a job and begin my preparation for Exam P (probability), which I plan on sitting for in March 2010. The possibility of entering the workforce has never looked so good.

I’ve been turning towards endgame studies recently for a few reasons: First, I expect that improving my knowledge of endgames will carry benefits for the middlegame, honing my instincts for favorable simplifications. Second, endgames are a great opportunity to improve visualization: indeed, you only need a few pieces on the board to create positions of substantial, sometimes overwhelming complexity.

My workbook is Essential Chess Endings: The Tournament Player’s Guide by Grandmaster James Howell. So far, I’m really impressed by the clarity, accessibility, and depth of the work. It begins with KP endgames and proceeds to positions of greater and greater complication.

This is an awesome example taken from the game Ramos-Costa (1986). White appears to be in serious trouble, as Black threatens simply to play Kc5-b4-a4-b5, etc., and ravage the queenside. White’s reply, however, is strong:

White to move

The correct continuation is 1. f4! Kc5 (Black can’t afford to play exf5, when after gxf5 White will create a passer with the e5 break) 2. g4! The kamikaze attack guarantees a promotion, if we observe the following:

- The immediate threats are the f5 and g5 breaks.
- 2 … hxg4 allows  3. f5! while 2 … exf4 allows 3. g5!
- 2 … Kd4 allows 3. a5! with a decisive breakthrough on the queenside.

The game continued  2 … exf4 3. g5! fxg5 4. e5 Kd5 5. a5 bxa5 6. b6 gxh4 7. b7 8. Kxe5 8. b8Q+ Kf5 9. Kh3 1-0

These past few months have been pretty straightforward for me. I’ve been investing the time in a re-education in math and statistics, taking Calc-II at Ohlone college in Fremont, and studying for the SOA Financial Math Exam. On the side, I’ve been playing chess, hanging out with friends, and regaining some emotional balance after what has been a very interesting year.

Sounds like a good life right now, eh? On the whole, it has been, but with my exam on December 2 rapidly approaching, I feel like the stress and anxiety levels are definitely rising. In the back of my mind, three questions keep bubbling to the surface:

1. Will I pass my first exam?

Based on the study manuals, I have to say that this is unlike any other standardized test I’ve prepared for. The material is rigorous, challenging, and is definitely more intended for Econ/Math majors than U.S. History career changers. Throughout the last 3 months, I’ve been putting in the time consistently, with dedication, every day. I realize that I’ll have to work harder than others with a more quantitative background. And I do think I have what it takes. But after putting 100% into training, there’s always that lingering doubt in the back of my mind.

2. What about Exam P (Probability)?

Assuming the best outcome on December 2, things still get harder, not easier. The next exam will be a serious test to my non-mathy background: probability, discrete and continuous distributions, and their applications to risk management. My original plan was to begin studying for this exam now, with the hope of taking it in early January. But the more I stare at the material, the more I’m starting to think that this might be a recipe for burnout. Pushing things back by two or three months might be okay if I can still begin the job/internship search with one exam passed. It will also allow me to keep more balance, perspective, and freshness in my approach.

3. What about relocation?

The fact of the matter is, entry-level actuarial internships seem to be a really small niche in the current job market. Looking into underwriting jobs might be a more flexible way to get my foot in the door, but I’d ideally like to find a situation where a company would support me in my studying. Given the eccentricity of my background, even with one exam passed, my chances of finding a good employer will definitely be higher if I’m open to relocation.

Having grown up and gone to college in the Bay Area, the idea of moving way out of my comfort zone is a little unsettling. I have friends here, family here, and frankly, it’s pretty darn comfortable. But life only passes once, and relocation might be a blessing in disguise - an opportunity to experience a new environment, meet new people, and try new things. But the idea of being alone in a foreign area is still anxiety-producing. It’s not the kind of thing I want to be distracted by when I’m taking an exam.

All in all, I’m still confident that I’m moving in the right direction and that I’ll find success in my endeavors. But I think it’s important, during times of anxiety and stress, to find ways of refocusing, clearing the head, and retaining balance and perspective. Which is why, the more I think about it, I probably won’t stress out about Exam P just yet. One exam at a time is enough for me. I want to have a life. I want to have friends. And I’m not in a race to get to any particular finish line.

On a brighter note, here’s a win over Fritz (1800 strength) that I recently played on my iPhone. Mobile Fritz is a pretty tough nut to crack, but in this game I managed to establish a really solid center.

Notes:

• Move 11, the strongest move was 11. d5! punishing Black’s ill-timed push on b6. After 11 … Bb4 12. Qd3, I win a pawn immediately.

• 17 … Re7?? is the stumble that sends Black off the cliff. If instead 17 … Rb8, Black’s position is uncomfortable but certainly not immediately losing.

• Move 31, I missed the easiest conversion: 31. Nf6+!! and if 31 … Rxf6 then 32. Rxd7 wins a Rook or Queen on the spot: A queen retreat walks into Rd8+, while Rc7 hangs the rook on f6. The move I played, 31. Rd8? maintains a small edge, which I luckily managed to convert, but makes things much more difficult than necessary.