The big thing of the last few years has been advocating tactics study. I know that Michael delaMaza recommends memorizing many puzzles. I'm wondering if there are any other ideas for improving this vital area. The idea that I was kicking around goes something like this. Take your tactics puzzles and try to solve them as usual. Once you find the solution, or look it up, take a hard look at the original position and figure out exactly which elements made the tactic possible to begin with. Any thoughts on whether this additional step should be beneficial, or perhaps another way to approach it would be appreciated.
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
Originally posted by BLReidIv found doing a OTB check on the tactical puzzle always helps, counting king flight squares etc first before trying to find the move. As with most of my study I dont treat tactical training as an attempt to improve solving tactics more an attempted to fine tune my normal thought process. Treat the position as you would any position OTB, if you can't spot or solve the tactic using your normal OTB thought process then you probably aren't benifiting greatly from doing tactical puzzles.
The big thing of the last few years has been advocating tactics study. I know that Michael delaMaza recommends memorizing many puzzles. I'm wondering if there are any other ideas for improving this vital area. The idea that I was kicking around goes something like this. Take your tactics puzzles and try to solve them as usual. Once you find the solution, or l ...[text shortened]... ditional step should be beneficial, or perhaps another way to approach it would be appreciated.
there's at least two different areas to tactics. spotting them, and calculating them correctly. both can be trained separately, and not everything that works on one is going to improve the other. I try to focus on 'seeing' the tactics, not so much calculating them out. but it's not that effective on calculation, and I should probably train more slow tactics. (yes rahim, you don't have to say it 🙂)
I've been thinking about starting visualisation exercises again. I'm not sure how I'm going to do it, but in addition to good old CVT (http://www.janmatthies.info/chess/cvt/cvt.htm), I'm thinking about two other methods. doing really easy but deep tactics, or memorizing old master games so I could play them through in my head. the focus would be on visualizing the moves, not in solving difficult combinations. has anybody tried similar approach? if so, has it had any impact?
I feel I suffer more on the mixing up of mental imagery than not seeing the 'difficult' possibilities..
Originally posted by BLReidDon't waste you time with the La Maza thing. See my blog if you want more info about this.
The big thing of the last few years has been advocating tactics study. I know that Michael delaMaza recommends memorizing many puzzles. I'm wondering if there are any other ideas for improving this vital area. The idea that I was kicking around goes something like this. Take your tactics puzzles and try to solve them as usual. Once you find the solution, or l ...[text shortened]... ditional step should be beneficial, or perhaps another way to approach it would be appreciated.
I recommend doing several puzzles a day.
The La Maza thing is not for memorizing the puzzles but rather imbeding the patterns into your brain so you can spot them easier next time.
For example, the smothered knight mate with the knight and queen. Once you know that pattern you can use it and spot it much easier.
Originally posted by BLReidThe Russian method of studying tactics, is to learn all the easy ones first.
The big thing of the last few years has been advocating tactics study. I know that Michael delaMaza recommends memorizing many puzzles. I'm wondering if there are any other ideas for improving this vital area. The idea that I was kicking around goes something like this. Take your tactics puzzles and try to solve them as usual. Once you find the solution, or l ...[text shortened]... ditional step should be beneficial, or perhaps another way to approach it would be appreciated.
Go over them 3-4 times, until there second nature. Then go on to harder ones.
The key is to start with ones that you can handle, like a one or 2 star rated tactic, or a mate in 1-2 etc. Then graduate to a 3-4 star, mate in 2-3 or more.
Learn combinatins related to openings you play. Like sacs in the grunfeld, french, sicillian, etc. There are themed opening books like that.
The polgar 5000+ tactics book is a good one to read over.
I liked to 600 short games in there, that had a lot of sacs in it.