Originally posted by Macpommm, i think that you can study it as per motif, you know
I am not sure studying tactics is so useful... Can it even be studied? I never did so... don't you just get it with practicing? as mentioned above, even most tactics "training" is actually only practice. Wouldn't positional stuff be more useful to learn? As said in a another thread, what stronger players see is not so much tactical things, but first of all obvious positional mistakes...
* Advanced Pawn
* Attraction
* Back Rank Mate
* Blocking
* Capturing Defender
* Clearance
* Discovered Attack
* Distraction
* Exposed King
* Fork/Double Attack
* Hanging Piece
* Interference
* Overloading
* Pin
* Sacrifice
* Simplification
* Skewer
* Smother
* Trapped Piece
* Weak Back Rank
* X-Ray Attack
* Zugzwang
* Zwischenzug
however, i must agree with you Macpo, that when we examine the games of the masters, they without a doubt play positionally, and when a tactic does arise, its usually quite simple, and springs from a positionally superior game. the great advantage in doing tactical problems is that our vision is enhanced as we are forced to concentrate and visualize and recognize the combination and their motifs.
I am not saying you can't study them... I am just wondering how useful it is. I always thought it was pretty useless, but maybe I am wrong!
1. Of course, presenting and having in mind the motives you mention is very useful, but to what extent are we talking about tactics? to me, a passed pawn, an X ray position, a simplification are strategic elements constituting a position, not tactics. Of course, it can give place to some tactical operations, but as such it is not.
2. Most of the time, studying "tactics" actually means studying how to do tricks. I don't agree with this! strategical reflexion defines the ends; tactical reflexion the means; and the problem of means is much more than that of tricks! of course when learning tricks, you increase the range of your means... but you can also find many situations when there is no spectacular tricks, but tactical movements can be complex!
all this to say that i am not sure doing dozens of small tricks everyday helps much more than playing real games... of course there are a few patterns like Philidor's mate, or the Bxh7 - Ng5+ - Qh4 movement. but these tactical patterns are not so many, are they? so it's good to learn them, it will take you a couple of hours, and it's over...
when strategy/position/opening taste will take you for ages...
Originally posted by RamnedI noticed you didn't mention actual OTB games. I think this is the most important. There's no point learning all that but not putting it to good use by destroying som1 OTB. Real good study plan though, very well orchestrated. I have about 10 chessbooks but read them on and off. I havent actually completed one. I want to try put in at least 2hrs a day.
[
MAXIMUM TOTAL TIME: 6.25 hours / day.
TOTAL INVESTMENT: 100$ for the summer and ~500 hours of the summer
Finally, typically on weekends, I'll play a few games on the internet chess club.
================================================
If you wish to find out more about a chess.com membership, or more specifics about my study plan, PM me. My OT ...[text shortened]... apt some of the ideas though. My endgame and tactics have already made significant improvement.[/b]
I think I'll recommend Play for Mate by David Hooper & Cafferty. I'm surprised I hadn't heard of it till I saw it and bought it from a 2nd hand stall a few days ago. It has about 200 positions most of them from actual play. The problems are grouped under simple mating patterns e.g Back rank, Smothered, Bishop and Rook, etc. It's pretty decent, although I dont have anything to compare it with, though.
Is it better, in your opinion, to study the same puzzle positions over and over again to 'cement' the ideas and motifs in your brain?
For example, if I've got 200 puzzles to solve, would it better to study them through 5 times, or to spend that amount of time studying 1000 different puzzles?
Any thoughts?
Thanks for the great advice so far!
Macpo,
an example of the usefulness of tactics training.
I was watching a video on youtube on tactical patterns.This position came up.I saw the best move instantly.
White to move
Why did I see it instantly?Because,from previous training,I'm familiar with this pattern:
Of course,playing a lot of games,and analysing them,will help develop tactical vision.In a way it is a tactical training.But I think solving puzzles helps more and faster.
I don't know about your tactical skills but if it's at a high level without ever doing specific tactics training,then I think you're more gifted than most of us.
Too the op's original questions. Work your way up in difficulty. Many complicated patterns will just be a combination of a bunch of simple patterns. If you do not know the simple pattersn the difficult ones will be....Well difficult. As to actually playing them otb. I would say don't. If you can't visualize it in your head then you can't play it in a game. Of course if you don't understand the answer just by playing through in your head then by all means pull your board out.
As too the tactics book. I give another vote to the tactics trainer on chess.com. As to books- BY FAR the best tactics book I have ever seen was forcing chess moves by charles hertan. Pick it up you will not be dissapointed
Skins, it's a good idea to complete all of the puzzles in a book (Sharpen Your Tactics! does the job well) and then go through the book a second or maybe even a third time to see how much better you are. Spend 5 mins / puzzle and mark those that you missed. When you go back see if they came more easily to you.
Originally posted by MacpoI don't use websites.I tried chesstempo and another one often advocated here,forgot the name,but I don't like it much.I do it old school,with books.And an occasional youtube video although that's more out of curiosity,to see what people have created.
Ok romanticus, that's convincing... It's only that I tried to do tactics on tactics websites, and it seemed very useless to me, especially as it did not focus on underlying patterns. But if there are intelligent websites, fine!
Goshen,
I find 'tricks' has such a negative ring to it.But if you want to call it that,sure,why not.
It's these 'tricks' that win the game.
Originally posted by RomanticusI agree completely.
I don't use websites.I tried chesstempo and another one often advocated here,forgot the name,but I don't like it much.I do it old school,with books.And an occasional youtube video although that's more out of curiosity,to see what people have created.
Goshen,
I find 'tricks' has such a negative ring to it.But if you want to call it that,sure,why not.
It's these 'tricks' that win the game.
The study of tactics is recommended by virtually all strong players as one of the 'best' ways to improve one's game - because more often than not at the amateur level (in fact I would guess the vast majority of games below about 2100 level) are decided not by slow Karpov-like improvements in one's position, but by tactical errors/blunders/mistakes (call them what you will). Note, I'm not simply referring to overlooking 1-move mates or queen blunders - often a win of a pawn or two is sufficient (in my experience).
Therefore, it makes sense (to me anyway) to study tactics: after all, if this is indeed the reason the majority of losses at my level, then improving my tactical ability will surely reduce the number of such oversights and tactical mistakes.
Of course, there ARE other areas of the game that need studying (you can't become an IM or GM by solving a few tactics puzzles!), but surely by solving lots and lots of puzzles, one will make fast progress in what has surely got to be one of the most important parts of chess.
Anyway, it seems to me that studying tactics is the best ad quickest way to get me back up to my previous level (around 1600 Elo).
Any thoughts on this?
Chess is tactics.
Being a good positional player without the killer touch is like watching
a football team play without a striker. 80% possesion, no goal.
A good player will be polished in both positional and tactical play.
The perfect game should be a blend of the two.
Get a plus from the opening then using tactical threats force a weakness.
Gang up on weakness to tie down opponents pieces, create another
weakness with another tactical threat. Then when opponent is sorting
out his defence Bang!
Solving tactcial puzzles helps you spot these critical moments when
it's time to change hats.
Here is one game I never forgot when I was studying the game in earnest.
Karpov v Hubner, Montreal 1979.
A really good game by Karpov. The build up play was superb.
Then this position arose, White (Karpov) to play.
Alas he missed missed it and the game was drawn.
Tactical clue: Unprotected Rook on b6
Playing over well annotated games helps tremendoulsy. You pick
up a positional sense and see all the unplayed tactics in the notes.
Ideas and patterns, it's all about ideas and patterns.
Studies too have their part to play.
This one is wonderful by A.Maximovskih, 1984.
It's White to play and win.
(give it a try before you click on 'play' - well worth the moment
if you see the idea.)
This one is really amazing!
I was saying a few things I have in mind on tactics, just like this, no firm assumption... One remains though: How useful doing tactical exercises is? like "find mate in two". and doing dozens, and hundreds of them...
is that useful? I still have doubts ... it's like doing blitz for hours and learning nothing...
Originally posted by Macpoyes it is, because if you can't find a mate in two you can't win the game...
This one is really amazing!
I was saying a few things I have in mind on tactics, just like this, no firm assumption... One remains though: How useful doing tactical exercises is? like "find mate in two". and doing dozens, and hundreds of them...
is that useful? I still have doubts ...
personally I can say that since I started doing tactic puzzles my rating on RHP move from 1200s to 1500