emrald.net I like because the tactics are similar to the ones you find in a real game, many aren't spectacular, some you just have to get your piece out of the way to the best square. My only problem with the tactics server is the time element it introduces, which forces you to find a likely move fast instead of the best move taking a little more time. Other than that, i like the setup and, of course, the fact that it's free.
Originally posted by Ramnedto me, that's plain wrong. (I must say, I don't believe you anyway. but even if you have never studied tactics or strategy or anything and got to 1700, you either have played a very high number of games or you're just an exception.)
just play. I don't do any reading or puzzles. I just play and learn as I go.
I think one should play occasionally and devote the remaining "chess time" to studying.
and to answer the thread, try (in decreasing order for my suggestion)CT-Art or Personal Chess Trainer or some similar program, or just the emrald.net.
Originally posted by diskamylplaying loads of blitz is what many GMs recommend for improving tactical skills.
to me, that's plain wrong. (I must say, I don't believe you anyway. but even if you have never studied tactics or strategy or anything and got to 1700, you either have played a very high number of games or you're just an exception.)
At my chess club half the guys have never seen a chess book. Some are quite good tactically and can see well ahead. The reason i beat them most of the time is in the opening. They don't know any opening theory. When they see a gambit, like the Evans, they just take the pawn, figuring i made a mistake. They get into a lousy position at the beginning and spend their time unravelling their pieces or are caught in well-known traps. If you go into the middle game without any advantage, you'll have to struggle against them. So, in this case, studying opening theory helps me a lot. I would say the upper half of the club members have studied books on chess.
Originally posted by diskamylWell, I must be an exception then, because I have never read a chess book and only 10 minutes ago did I go to that website and do tactics. Then only thing I have done is simply play 90 games here (and play them all to best as I can) and I used to do 1 minute blitz but quit because it is a waste of time. Heck I got a 2000 rating playing it so it must be pointless.
to me, that's plain wrong. (I must say, I don't believe you anyway. but even if you have never studied tactics or strategy or anything and got to 1700, you either have played a very high number of games or you're just an exception.)
I think one should play occasionally and devote the remaining "chess time" to studying.
and to answer the thread, try ( ...[text shortened]... uggestion)CT-Art or Personal Chess Trainer or some similar program, or just the emrald.net.
I may be rated 1700 with cc, but that's because of the time I can spend on thinking. My OTB suffers around 1500 because I am inexperienced with knowledge of openings and endgame, and probably because I am not used to sitting down through a whole game.
Originally posted by kid187There's no magic bullet. You just have to solve lots of problems and understand the "vocabulary" of tactics. Once you understand the mechanisms involved in typical tactics, you will be able to spot them in advance and avoid any deviousity by your opponent. I'd highly recommend the following books on tactics. They're short, inexpensive and can be easily acquired on Amazon.com:
do you solve a bunch of puzzles out of books? is there another less painstaking way to get good? it seems that just playing im not making much progress and i can only spot the easiest tactics in games most players can dodge. i have chessmaster 10 and did the tactical lessons. should i play the computer at a level of skill below mine and try to spot tactics and maybe just move up after a while? i dont know what to do.
The Basis of Combination in Chess by Julius Dumont
The Art of Checkmate by Georges and Kahn, Victor Renaud
The Art of Chess Combination by Eugene Znosko-Borovsky
Art of Attack in Chess by Vladimir Vukovic
Chess Tactics for Advanced Players by Yuri Averbakh
The Tactics of End-Games by Jeno Ban
Originally posted by pawntorook4Playing blitz games as your only means of improvement sounds like a bad idea to me because you'll be making the same bad moves, only faster. That doesn't mean there's no place for blitz chess. I recommend playing blitz games for entertainment or to become familiar with the middle-game plans associated with a particular opening. For example, if you wanted to learn typical middle games or endgames resulting from the Caro-Kann, or you wanted to add a new opening or defense to your repertoire, then you and a partner or computer can play many games using this opening system in just one afternoon or evening.
Really? I thought it was the opposite.
1 edit
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritterexactly. they recommend it for tactics + opening training, not as the only means of training.
Playing blitz games as your only means of improvement sounds like a bad idea to me because you'll be making the same bad moves, only faster. That doesn't mean there's no place for blitz chess. I recommend playing blitz games for entertainment or to become familiar with the middle-game plans associated with a particular opening. For example, if yo ...[text shortened]... r or computer can play many games using this opening system in just one afternoon or evening.