I haven't played much over the last few months...needless to say I've plateaued or taken a bit of a drop (Hmmm...I suppose I can't get better without playing much- go figure!).
So I'm trying to sort of start over right now; back to basics, back to the books, more slow OTB (I really have to kick an OTB blitz addiction that I think is seriously creating/reinforcing bad habits).
I'm also back to tactics, playing on CTS and CT-ART 3.0.
So, speed vs. accuracy?
CT-ART gives no points for speed, so I tend to go into the deep think if I have to, not moving until I'm relatively positive I see it.
CTS seems to encourage me to rush due to their value placed on time- definitely causing me to make stupid mistakes on the level of those you'd find in one of my blitz games.
I suspect that at my level I'd see greater payoff from striving towards accuracy, not moving until I see it- especially if my focus is increasing my slow OTB abilities, not blitz.
Any thoughts on this?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 07
- Moves
- 27653
Repetition may be the key. You need to see enough positions to recognize when a particular sort of tactic is likely to occur. So if you're spending 1/2 hour per puzzle, that's no good.
Having said that, I don't think hurrying is a good idea. I think you'd be better off getting it right without hurrying. If it takes too long (say more than about 5 minutes a puzzle), you're probably studying things that are too hard.
Originally posted by xnomanxcheck out the book "rapid chess improvement" its a bit controversial, but all it really says is a few easy things so maybe not worth buying.
I haven't played much over the last few months...needless to say I've plateaued or taken a bit of a drop (Hmmm...I suppose I can't get better without playing much- go figure!).
So I'm trying to sort of start over right now; back to basics, back to the books, more slow OTB (I really have to kick an OTB blitz addiction that I think is seriously creating/reinf ...[text shortened]... lly if my focus is increasing my slow OTB abilities, not blitz.
Any thoughts on this?
but it recommends a mix of learning with pattern recognition
Originally posted by xnomanxi have CT-art and like it a lot. the thing you have to remember with that is their problems are more explosive and fancy/ uncommon. i think it will increase imagination and big calc. , but you miss out on the simple stuff, which is important.
I suppose continuing to bounce around between CT-ART and CTS would be good...working for speed on one and accuracy on the other.
i was doing way better than ever, then i kindve burned out and tried to quicken up my steps a little bit but i didnt have the bread and butter tactical study to back it up and i mentally collapsed.
so yeah both will be good for you id say
Originally posted by Erekose5 minutes? are you kidding? my average for CT-Art in the 30 level difficulty problems is probably 10 minutes, which means there are plenty of 3-5 minutes, and a bunch of at least 30 minutes.
Repetition may be the key. You need to see enough positions to recognize when a particular sort of tactic is likely to occur. So if you're spending 1/2 hour per puzzle, that's no good.
Having said that, I don't think hurrying is a good idea. I think you'd be better off getting it right without hurrying. If it takes too long (say more than about 5 minutes a puzzle), you're probably studying things that are too hard.
I respect your experience, but I have to disagree with the 5 minutes approach. My most pleasant moments in chess were the ones I totally calculated all the lines of a problem that I at first found hopeless and solved it correctly, even if it takes a very long time.
Diving deep in difficult problems, say for 20, 30 minutes really is beautiful, and it makes you understand there's always a lot, and I mean a lot in almost every chess position, even if it seems dull and there's "nothing to do." It will open up many mental doors.
I've been watching GM games online for a while, and the amount of time they spend even for "easy" exchanges is amazing.
My advice would be giving yourself a 30 minute limit on CT-Art, and just try to calculate, even if it's painful and boring, and after you get deep and understand what the position is all about, you'll see it's worth it.
I quit CTS simply for it's "speedy" nature, it was having a bad effect on my play, because almost all the time the first or second idea that you come up with "works" perfectly there, and this gives you a bad habit of underestimating defensive resources of your opponent. But if you want to stick with it, my approach was trying to never fall below 90% accuracy there, although it results in slow rating improvement, but a steady one.
By the way, a last note, Kotov in his book "think like a grandmaster" advises to find a complicated position (which are plenty in CT-Art) and try to calculate variations for 30 minutes, writing down all of your lines systematically, and with time, reducing the time to 20, then trying 10 etc. Probably this is the best way to go, but I cannot encourage myself for that kind of dedication and patience.
Now this is another question: how is it possible for someone to improve their Chess Tactics Server performance? I have used their site regularly but the results are a bit unsatisfying, and I never seem to be able to improve the numbers corresponding to my lousy performance.
I like to go to the site to see if I can quickly "absorb" positions and filter out the right ideas ánd consequently make the right move quickly, but many times I find myself finding the correct finesses but the incorrect move order, or in other words the correct possibilities to investigate but then I choose a completely wrong move - one would be ashamed of such moves even if they were played in an Internet lightning game. I've allowed more free mate-in-ones and backrank mates on the Chess Tactics Server than anywhere else. That's the main drawback of the CTS - there is no time to verify your thoughts. If your opponent messes up and you get in a tactical situation in a normal game, you naturally take some time to verify if the intended moves really work. There is no time for that on the CTS. You get a position, in which you have six seconds to figure out how the virtual opponent's move will allow a tactical shot and then three seconds to play it. Maybe an example:
So you're playing Black here. The first six seconds, what are you looking at? Right, the Knight on e2 and if there is a way to take profit of it. Perhaps a Rook-check. Perhaps add pressure with the Knight. Something as described went through my head. What does White play? 1. Rxa6. Well, how to add pressure now? I played 1. ... Nc3 (achieving nothing) and the problem was solved incorrectly. But what was the solution then? 1. ... Nc7, forking the Rooks. Now, I would not even have thought of missing such a thing in a normal game.
I must say their position set is pretty good and well thought-out; in most positions there are a lot of tries that are more or less "right", but for all except one that means that they are more or less "totally wrong". But now the initial question: how can somebody get better at it?
Originally posted by diskamylI agree CTS is a kind of a speed lottery. I simply log on as a guest and solve most of the problems. E.g
I quit CTS simply for it's "speedy" nature, it was having a bad effect on my play, because almost all the time the first or second idea that you come up with "works" perfectly there, and this gives you a bad habit of underestimating defensive resources of your opponent. But if you want to stick with it, my approach was trying to never fall below 90% accuracy there, although it results in slow rating improvement, but a steady one.
black on CTS goes Rc6?? Resulting in the solution that CTS gives
Originally posted by heinzkatI think the only way to get better at it is to put yourself an accuracy limit. Only then you can force yourself not to gamble too much.
Now this is another question: how is it possible for someone to improve their Chess Tactics Server performance? I have used their site regularly but the results are a bit unsatisfying, and I never seem to be able to improve the numbers corresponding to my lousy performance.
I like to go to the site to see if I can quickly "absorb" positions and filter o ...[text shortened]... less "totally wrong". But now the initial question: how can somebody get better at it?
when I had begun there, I thought I would be stuck at 1200s forever, it continued like this for a few weeks! But then it slowly but surely got up and up, but I then I hit another wall, I don't remember exactly, but probably 1400ish something. Then I quit, mainly focusing on CT-Art and that 1001 book by Reinfeld.
I've read about that accuracy thing, but most of the people boasting about having such a high solving accuracy have an "extremely" low rating, which means they only get (very) basic positions to solve. That's not my aim - "everyone" can solve a lot of those problems when taking a minute for each and every one of them! The problems are designed and sorted on rating based on the difficulty of being solved in the three seconds time span - anything longer and most problems are trivial.
I want to "get served" interesting positions with a lot of possibilities, which means I have to maintain my rating above a certain level.
What I've noticed too is that the lower rated problems (say, sub-1600) most of the time are just the plain execution of a tactic - the higher rated problems are quite often about weaving tricks in the position that are not possible to defend by the other side.
The question still stands: what do you have to do to improve your performance?
Originally posted by diskamylHere's an example on why you shouldn't limit yourself with a very short time like 5 minutes on CT-Art:
5 minutes? are you kidding? my average for CT-Art in the 30 level difficulty problems is probably 10 minutes, which means there are plenty of 3-5 minutes, and a bunch of at least 30 minutes.
I respect your experience, but I have to disagree with the 5 minutes approach. My most pleasant moments in chess were the ones I totally calculated all the lines of to go, but I cannot encourage myself for that kind of dedication and patience.
if it were about just finding the first two moves of a combination, then it would take me only 5-6 seconds, because this is simply a tactical problem and there has to be some kind of sacrifice around the king's pawn shelter. so, I immediately began looking at 1.Nxh7 Kxh7 2.Qh5+ Kg8, (without making the moves). So in my calculation, I was already at this position from the first minute.
But then what? Then I tried go deeper, and thought of 3.Bxg6!, which comes with mating threats. Black has several defences. You have to calculate them out. if 3...Rd8, you have 4.Bg5, with skewer, and black cannot play 4...Qf8 because of 5.Qh7 mate. So 3...Rf7 is the correct move.
and then, I began having trouble with the position. I simply couldn't figure out what to do next. I thought of 4.Bh6 of course, but couldn't analyse any further, what was my immediate threat? what if black simplifies with 4...Bxh6, etc.
So it took me more than 15 minutes simply staring at the first position, and I couldn't even solve it. It turns out later after 4.Bh6, the threat is 5.Qh7+, and after 5...Kf8, the threat of 6.Qh8# is too much for black, so either 4...Ne5 (locking the rook's way) or 4...Bxh6, after which white either picks up the queen or mates with 5.Qxh6+ (if black blocks with the queen, 6.Re8+ picks up the queen, if he escapes with 5...Kg8, then again 6.Re8+ Nf8 [...Rf8 fails to Qh7 mate], 7.Rxf8 Rxf8 9.Qh7🙄.
Even the position after 4...Bxh6 is almost itself a worth being a puzzle.
If you tell me you can see all the way to capturing the queen or mating in 5 minutes, than I have to believe you are an exception. I myself am sorry I couldn't have the patience of struggling with this position for another 15 minutes and having the pleasure of calculating all these lines out myself.
and by the way, this problem is from the 30 level difficulty, I cannot even imagine the 80 level yet.
Originally posted by heinzkatwith performance, if you mean having the highest rating at CTS, I don't know to be honest. but to combine accuracy and tactical improvement, we have a very fine example of Wormwood in our forums, who both managed to move up to the tricky problems you mention, and preserve a decent accuracy level. And as for tactical improvement, his rating improvement in a considerably short amount of time (if I remember correctly, 2 years or something) speaks for itself I think.
I've read about that accuracy thing, but most of the people boasting about having such a high solving accuracy have an "extremely" low rating, which means they only get (very) basic positions to solve. That's not my aim - "everyone" can solve a lot of those problems when taking a minute for each and every one of them! The problems are designed and sorted on side.
The question still stands: what do you have to do to improve your performance?