Best Way to study tactics?

Originally posted by CCNoob
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 ...[text shortened]... motifs, or memorise fancy names. Some people are trying to turn chess into rocket science.

No, people will notice that there might be the possibility for a particular motif in a position (if they know the motifs, and the best and quickest way to learn these is by solving tactics problems), and so they begin to analyse in more depth. In general, most chessplayers I've seen do not go through a mental checklist of every tactical motif on each move as you seem to be suggesting.

A knowledge of the names of the tactics actually helps you in learning other ones - and surely it's not much effort to learn up to 30 words for tactics? It makes the experience more enjoyable to be able to name them, and helps your understanding of what's often written in chess books, thereby making them more accessible. (After all, it is virtually impossible to glean maximum benefit from a book that refers to 'overloading', 'forks', 'pins', 'zugzwang' etc. if you don't know what they mean!)

Trust me, if you solve enough tactics puzzles regularly enough, you WILL be able to apply what you know to your games - how is it possible not to?

Chess is an analytical game, so the argument that people get 'too analytical' doesn't really make much sense.

Put it this way: if you solve an array of tactics problems regularly and look at the solutions after (whether you got it right or not), after a short time you will almost certainly see a large improvement in your game. You will not drop pieces and be able to stop 2- and 3-move combinations with ease compared to before. For me, it makes more sense (and is more enjoyable) to work my way through 50 tactics problems than read a book on the theory of how to set up certain tactics (although some of these books, such as Understanding Chess Tactics I found very useful).

If you study no tactics whatsoever, you are limiting your potential to become a good player (I wonder how good one could become if one knows very little tactics, but has, say, an Expert-level knowledge of opening theory?)

I don't know the academics much beyond the basics but I see the value in learning them
combined with practice.

CTS rating is 1072. 82.5% success rating from 1950 tries...spread out over a few years.

On the occasions when I visit CTS I'm more interested in solving the puzzles accurately than
quickly. Due to the way the site works with short timeout my rating won't progress unless I'm
quick. But I think it was wormwood who advised me not to be concerned about the rating to
start with.

If I were able to visit more I'd progress more.

I also like to contrast the CTS experience with tougher puzzles, from real games that often
have more subtle outcomes. I find these in books and at improveyourchess.com (subscription site).

But as a pastime I have to accept the limited improvement that comes with limited
time commitment. But it's still enjoyable...I'm an adult learner who took it up a few years ago
to play with my kids...so world champ was never going to be on my chart...

For those of you who play on CTS give us your rating there Thread 113714. Maybe knowing the different motifs and so on could add up to actual tactical strength.

I've got a few books of pure mate problems (White to play and mate in either 2, 3 or 4 moves). I wonder...how valuable are these in terms of general tactics training? What proportion of your 'puzzle-solving' time is taken up with mate puzzles, and what proportion is taken up with normal regular tactical puzzles?

If it's composed mates then they won't really help with OTB play.

They are good fun to solve and won't doing any harm, it's OTB
benefit is it will get you used to looking over all the 64 squares.

If it's mates from actual games, then solving these is a necessity.

A composed Mate in two: R.A. Tappenden, 1919
White to play and mate in two.



Reveal Hidden Content

And from an actual game. Ivanka - Lazarevic, 1972
Black to play and mate (Black missed it).

Reveal Hidden Content

wRd6->d5 I suppose

Originally posted by heinzkat
wRd6->d5 I suppose

Apparently.
Although from the position given 1....,Rg8+ 2.Rg6,Rxg6+ 3.Qxg6,Qe3+ wins as well.

Yeah sorry - bit clumsy of me.

(actually a possble bust to the 2 mover 'popped' into my skull - was
concentrating on that in preview, it's OK it's Not cooked.)

White Rook in game from actual play (2nd position) is on d5.

Does anyone here own "Sharpen Your Tactics" by Anatoly Lein?

Any thoughts on it? Is it a good book for an intermediate player? Are the solutions computer-checked and complete? 🙂 Does the book just contain puzzles from real games, or are there studies too?

Thanks!