What made me much better at tactics when I was around the 1000 to 1500 level was loads and loads of blitz games with people near my own ability. If other people are watching (usually waiting for their turn to play on a "winner stays on" board) then you soon learn that people enjoy watching open, tactical games and you will start to play that way yourself.
Originally posted by stanlohI've heard Fischer and the greats stress that development is key in chess... Develop your pieces, and the tactics flow out of the position. How deeply you see the position's possibilities is merely a reflection of your chess strength. Improve your engame, your tactics, and develop your pieces. The tactics will flow out of the position the deeper your tactical prowess becomes.
I know. Its not like I am going to neglect all positional studies. As I said, my positional understanding will be good, but nothing fantastic. Its like how there was an era of chess where positional players dominated with their silent play and chess was boring, then some combination tactical players like Tal sparked up chess again.
So to sum it up, I want exciting chess rather than boring chess.
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
Originally posted by JusuhBlitz, urghhhh, blitz is basicly trying to see who has the fastest w***ing hand and can play enough second rate moves to last the 5 min goof fest, sure its fun, but if you want to learn tactics get CT Art, a lot of the problems take longer to solve than an entire blitz game, thats tactical training.
yes! you are on the right track.
Originally posted by BedlamI think spending 5 minutes per problem is way too much. If one can not solve a problem in a minute or two then the problem is too hard. When playing OTB you can not afford spending 5 minutes per position to look for tactics. Also, in OTB game, you wont know if there is a forced win. so if you dont find it fast, you wont find it at all...
a lot of the problems take longer to solve than an entire blitz game, thats tactical training.
speed is the key. I solve problems from "1001 Winning chess sacrifices and combinations" by Reinfeld, and I always try to use under 10 seconds per problem...
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
Originally posted by JusuhYou do play OTB right? Players regularly spend more than 20 mins on a single move, its not unheard of for a GM to spend 50 odd mins on a single move. In almost every high level game iv ever watched one of the players has at least spent 10 mins on a move at some point in the game.
I think spending 5 minutes per problem is way too much. If one can not solve a problem in a minute or two then the problem is too hard. When playing OTB you can not afford spending 5 minutes per position to look for tactics. Also, in OTB game, you wont know if there is a forced win. so if you dont find it fast, you wont find it at all...
speed is the key. rifices and combinations" by Reinfeld, and I always try to use under 10 seconds per problem...
The whole idea of doing deep tactical training is so that you can reduce time it takes to work out hard tactics OTB.
Im still in a state of shock that you think more than 5 mins per a move is unacceptable. Astounding.
Originally posted by BedlamI do play OTB. last weekend I played G/90min tournament, five rounds.
You do play OTB right? Players regularly spend more than 20 mins on a move, its not unheard of for a GM to spend 50 odd mins on a move. In almost every high level game iv ever watched one of the players has at least spent 10 mins on a move at some point in the game.
The whole idea of doing deep tactical training is so that you can reduce time it takes to ...[text shortened]... ill in a state of shock that you think more than 5 mins per a move is unacceptable. Astounding.
Only twice I had to think over 10 minutes.
So yes, I think it is much more beneficial to spend 5 minutes to solve 20 easy-moderate problems than to solve one very difficult problem...
And of course, if there is a reason in one's game to think over 20 minutes then it is right to do so. I just find it hard to see what that reason could be
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
Originally posted by JusuhFair to say anyone whos done all of CT Art can crap over you tactically then.
I do play OTB. last weekend I played G/90min tournament, five rounds.
Only twice I had to think over 10 minutes.
So yes, I think it is much more beneficial to spend 5 minutes to solve 20 easy-moderate problems than to solve one very difficult problem...
Traditional chess problems are almost no use whatsoever in improving one's ordinary play. The vast majority of them are far removed from any position you would reach over the board. Personally I don't think that going over grandmaster games helps much either, their level of ability is too far removed from ours.
Having said that, there are books and computer programs that have "over the board" style problems which I think might help a beginner. I bought a chess program for my seven year old son a few weeks ago - "Chess Tactics for Beginners" which consists of hundreds of mating attacks or positions where one side can win material. The same company make other programs for slightly stronger players.
Blitz chess is great for several reasons - first, it's great fun; second you get a really good feel for attacking positions, when a sacrifice is likely to work and when it's better to play safe; third, you can experiment with different openings and playing styles without worrying about your rating or tournament record; fourth, it improves your confidence about coping with little time on your clock in a long play game.
When I say blitz I'm talking about five to ten minutes each on the clock, this one minute chess I see on Yahoo sometimes obviously has very little to do with chess, but five minutes is plenty of time to play a proper game.
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
Originally posted by Fat LadyNice post, gets my rec
Traditional chess problems are almost no use whatsoever in improving one's ordinary play. The vast majority of them are far removed from any position you would reach over the board. Personally I don't think that going over grandmaster games helps much either, their level of ability is too far removed from ours.
Having said that, there are books and compu very little to do with chess, but five minutes is plenty of time to play a proper game.
CT Art has 1200 problems in thermatic order, ie "bad position of pieces", or "weak g file" etc the problems start off easy in each thermatic idea and then get harder, its really a very good program. Was put together by a correspondence GM has it happens, Maxim Blokh.
I admit that playing an opening over and over in blitz is good for learning some of the more random moves and ideas that will be thrown your way.
Originally posted by Bedlamblitz rating is about 70 points higher than slow rating...
And there is a big difference between your slow and rapid ratings? Because sissy light tactics wont get you through a 3 or 4 hour game and since you just said you didnt do deep tactical studies......well you've got my intrest.
I still wonder when should I think over 20 minutes? extremely complicated middle-gaem position is all that comes to my mind. but often I dont get into such positions (as you might remember, I am that "boring as hell" pirc-player...)