Originally posted by Eladarwhat i was saying is do whatever suits you. do i think i would learn more and be a better player if i did tactics and maybe read a couple of decent books? maybe, but i don't want to. that's why i started by last part with 'personally' but the first point still stands.
Trev,
If you want to compare ratings, then as wormwood what one should do, study books or tactics. There's always a bigger fish in the pond, trying to validate opion through ratings is a joke.
If you want to try an all in one that I have, then pick up The search for chess perfection II. I think it is still in print.
I never said that tactics are everything in chess. I simply stated that if you want to get better, then tactics are the way to go. I'm relying on the advice that I've read multiple times by players much better than me for this opinion. Even Purdy himself made the comment about how tactics are superior to positional play. It had to do with a comment about a player who won an Australian championship because he was a great tactician and that if he had been a great positional player but weak tactician, he never would have won the title.
Originally posted by AutomatonGame 5829711
It was either you are that trev33 guy and he is way too strong.
😳