Best Way to study tactics?

IMO people are too analytical and should just move. Its like karate where one can start thinking about the various forms when faced with a mugger with a knife. Tackle the mugger and let the "analysts" worry about the motif later.

Macpo,

we're not only talking about "Mate in two" puzzles, or even mating puzzles, but general tactics training that uses puzzles of all categories. If you solve thousands of these puzzles, certainly your ability to spot patterns and notice when tactical opportunities may be present during a game will increase immeasurably.

Also, it will be less likely that you will drop pieces and fall prey to "simple" tactics yourself if you've got a few thousand problems under your belt.

In blitz, people very often learn nothing after spending several hours playing it because they don't analyse the opening or other aspect of the game after (although even this will probably have only limited value for overall chess improvement, since decisions were made at high speed that probably would not have been made under normal time control conditions). Blitz is still good once in a while in my opinion to stay sharp under time pressure 🙂

Originally posted by erikido
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 g er seen was forcing chess moves by charles hertan. Pick it up you will not be dissapointed

quit questioning the efficacy of tactics and just buy the damn hertan book.

I have reached a 2000+rating on chess.com and most of my wins are.....wait for it-won on tactical shots.


Why is it that people that admit they aren't good and are trying to get better question the advice which is unanimous from all the better players?

Originally posted by erikido
quit questioning the efficacy of tactics and just buy the damn hertan book.

I have reached a 2000+rating on chess.com and most of my wins are.....wait for it-won on tactical shots.


Why is it that people that admit they aren't good and are trying to get better question the advice which is unanimous from all the better players?

One has to question things.
But that is another discussion 🙂

Originally posted by CCNoob
IMO people are too analytical and should just move. Its like karate where one can start thinking about the various forms when faced with a mugger with a knife. Tackle the mugger and let the "analysts" worry about the motif later.

It's like Karate where set piece moves are practiced thousands of times until they become
instinctive, so when called upon to fight these moves will happen spontaneously and without
conscious thought.

Just as the Karateka will repeat their blocks, parry's and punches both alone and in set piece
moves with a partner so the chess player, who wishes to improve, must study and practice
tactics. Not the only way to improve but a significant number of experienced players claim it's
the most effective.

I'm reading this book now, Winning Chess by Irving Chernev and Fred Reinfeld. The book is fantastic! It groups the tactics under headings like pins, skewers, removing the defender, dbl attack, dbl check, etc. And best of all is that it uses examples from real games!

It's quite easy to spot the tactical move when you're reading from a book cos it tells u to look for a pin, or a dbl attack or whatever. But how do you now find them in your games? R u sposd to run thru a checklist or somthin?

Originally posted by Mahout
It's like Karate where set piece moves are practiced thousands of times until they become
instinctive, so when called upon to fight these moves will happen spontaneously and without
conscious thought.

Just as the Karateka will repeat their blocks, parry's and punches both alone and in set piece
moves with a partner so the chess player, who wishes to imp ...[text shortened]... ay to improve but a significant number of experienced players claim it's
the most effective.

People can get too analytical and start looking for motifs (posted earlier by someone) :-

* 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

Study and practice are not harmful, if one can apply them. I don't have time to learn 1000 tactical motifs, or memorise fancy names. Some people are trying to turn chess into rocket science.

Originally posted by CCNoob
People can get too analytical and start looking for motifs (posted earlier by someone) :-

[i]* 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 ...[text shortened]... ical motifs, or memorise fancy names. Some people are trying to turn chess into rocket science.

Are there a 1000 tactical motifs that should be learned? No mention of this in my collection of
chess books...and I'm not buying any more.

"Study and practice are not harmful, if one can apply them."
Stating the obvious. Did anyone recommend otherwise?


Fancy names? Or simple descriptions - e.g. back rank mate.

Knowing the name is not important but once out of the very beginner stage being able to spot
a possible back rank mate is a handy skill worth practicing.

"Interference" you could argue is a fancy name but it is one word that describes something that happens on the chess board. But something like interference is to learn after you're
familiar with the basics. With the likes of Zugzwang I think the fancy name actually helps you
to memorise it and has the advantage of being one German word to cover something that
needs a sentence in English.

Chess terminology is nothing if not economic. I don't really get your point unless it is for the joy of polemic.

I agree. Questions are great. But, there is a difference between completely dismissing and questioning.

Bah, I was trying to quote romanticus.

Originally posted by Mahout
It's like Karate where set piece moves are practiced thousands of times until they become
instinctive, so when called upon to fight these moves will happen spontaneously and without
conscious thought.

Just as the Karateka will repeat their blocks, parry's and punches both alone and in set piece
moves with a partner so the chess player, who wishes to imp ...[text shortened]... ay to improve but a significant number of experienced players claim it's
the most effective.

this is very much like what waitzkin talks about in his "art of learning." He is a world champion in thai chi.

Mahout, so because you know the "academics", what is your rank on the Chess Tactics Server? Over 2000?

Hi,

If you want to play proper chess, you at least have to know what can happen in the wide range of possible skirmishes. Chess is ruthless - you have to be prepared to kill.

(And then there's a lot more to it, a.o. opening theory and ideas, overall anticipating maneuvering and endgame technique), no question about that but tactics are important. And the thread starter inquired about that - not about how useful tactics are.

The best way to acquaint tactics, I would say, is not any website or software. It should be a tactical course that leads you from the very basics to more ambitious positions and ideas. The one course I know to be good is the Dutch "Stappenmethode" - it has been translated in several languages - and it does exactly this. It capicatates a total beginner with a range of tactical ideas as well as technique and overall refinement.

=> http://www.stappenmethode.nl/

Also the "Understanding chess tactics" book by Martin Weteschnik should be a good introduction into tactics!

I would say that most important from tactics training is the acquiring of IDEAS. You have to get inspired!

Originally posted by CCNoob
Some people are trying to turn chess into rocket science.

when it comes down to it, chess is probably harder than rocket science. that's why, even after hundreds of years and who knows how many thousands or millions of games, masters can still discover new moves and plans - chess has a wealth of hidden depths, and who knows how deep it really gets?

these tactical motifs are important tools of the chess player's trade - they are the tools you use to accomplish your plans, basic building blocks of strategies. becoming familiar with them is essential, i would think, to becoming a strong player. and the more you train these techniques, the more they'll get buried in your subconscious, and you'll find you start 'seeing' tactical possibilities as you play your games.

Originally posted by Macpo
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...

Thats a good question.

First of all-yes stronger players see obvious positional mistakes. But, they also see obvious tactical mistakes and know endgames which are winning or lost for them.

Of course an increase in positional understanding will also increase your playing strength. But, you can not play positional chess without understanding tactics.

Take for instance this position IN ONE OF MY OTB GAMES
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/more-puzzles/another-one-that-came-from-one-of-my-games

Notice that black is slightly more developed, he also has a big weakness on d6(positional). But, if you don't understand tactics then you don't get the easy win for white. After something natural like n-f3 black wins a pawns with q-b6+( a tacticall shot) and after b-e3 th queen grabs the b pawn. Of course black willl then be getting mated(but white doesn't understand tactics).

So why not work on your tactics and bust out with a shocker like n-h7? It may look like magic. But, it actually is pretty simple if you understand some basic motifs....removal of the guard of the h6 pawn. Pawn on f6 supporting the queen for mate and the b(which is on its original square) coming in to finish it off after they sac the queen for the pawn

How about how this game ended.

http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=21098715I don't know if you know it, but I am almost positionally busted except for the fact that he tries to trade rooks which in fact loses a rook for free. If you look a few moves earlier (On move 27 instead of r-a2)I would have been mated had I grabbed that pawn on e4 with my knight in a few moves.


How about this one?

http://www.chess.com/echess/game.html?id=21098715
Almost anything wins after I played b-b6 won for white(it was just one last thing to try and complicate things). But he played the lemon r-e1 and later even missed the simple back rank mate(He would have still been down 2 exchanges-a queen for a rook and rook for a bishop. But that was a result of his tactical error on r-e1). Without that tactical error his position was dominant.


Those were the 2 highest rated players I have played recently (within the last five games on that site). I think you are beginning to get my point.