Originally posted by ShinidokiThis is what I'm worried about. If they play enough games, they should figure out how to open a game and reach a tactical position. If they don't then all that training is worthless. The one thing to remember is once you hit 1400+ people often resign when down a piece, but with just tactical training, can the figure out how to convert that extra piece into a win?
If they learnt nothing but tactics I'd imagine they would be pretty weak.
Tactics flow from good positions -- and without that positional knoweldge he/she is unlikley to get into a good tactical position.
- Joined
- 03 Sep 03
- Moves
- 89331
1 edit
Originally posted by wormwoodThat sounds almost the complete opposite of me.
that sounded almost like me, so 1778. 🙂 and I still almost never get to endgame.
I've never done tactical puzzles as I find them completely boring. I much prefer the storyline of a game; instead of just reading a random paragraph. And I win a lot (if not the majority) of my games IN the endgame.
1 edit
Originally posted by tmetzleryou seem to still do okay with tactics, as you'd probably never survive to the endgame otherwise. - I do realize my crappy endgame is a big problem, and if a 1500 survives until the endgame, he has good chances. but they seldom do. it will all change during this winter though, no more easy endgame wins against me! 🙂
I've never done tactical puzzles as I find them completely boring. I much prefer the storyline of a game; instead of just reading a random paragraph. And I win a lot (if not the majority) of my games IN the endgame.
as for learning to finish a game a piece up, it only took one drawn game to teach that lesson. after that, no problems. snatching pawns with superior material is about tactics too.
before anybody jumps in to preach about the importance of balance in training, I'll note that I do agree with that. but for a beginner, training tactics is very straightforward and gives the greatest improvement for your efforts. it will leave big holes which need to be taken care of at some point, but there's only so much you can do in a certain period of time. you can't have everything at once.
- Joined
- 03 Sep 03
- Moves
- 89331
I would think that tactics would matter less here, where you have the ability to play lines out on analyze board. Which is probably why I do ok.
But, my style of play (positional non tactical) perhaps leads to a much higher number of draws.
Completely unscientific statistical example:
tmetzler: 176drawn/1585total = 0.111
wormwood: 11drawn/204total = 0.054
zebano: 143drawn/1552total = 0.092
That's a really interesting question... I taught my friend how to play and that's all we did for about 2 weeks.. by the end, he could pull off a queen trap better than me, but he was still throwing away pieces but putting them in front of pawns... totally baffled me... i guess he just remembered similarities between puzzles and real games. Neat test to try on a large scale though.
Originally posted by tmetzlerInteresting statistics but probably meaningless. I do play rather positionally (english and french are my preferred openings).
I would think that tactics would matter less here, where you have the ability to play lines out on analyze board. Which is probably why I do ok.
But, my style of play (positional non tactical) perhaps leads to a much higher number of draws.
Completely unscientific statistical example:
tmetzler: 176drawn/1585total = 0.111
wormwood: 11drawn/204total = 0.054
zebano: 143drawn/1552total = 0.092
Originally posted by RahimKI would guess that a strong tactician with little strategy would be in the 1600s. But this is hard to really test.
If there was a brand new beginner and you taught him how the pieces moved, and the rules so he knows how to play chess.
After that, you drill him with tactics, he has to puzzles everyday say 20 at least but more is better and then he can play some slow chess, 20min each or more, slow is better.
How strong do you think he would be?
You do not teach hi ...[text shortened]... yed, and tactics then he can play and learn that way.
What rating do you think he would have?
If this person has some basic talent, and plays carefully, and cares whether he wins or loses, he will discover some strategies on his own. Same with tactics really. It would be hard to gain lots of tactical experience in real games and be kept in the dark over some meaningful strategy.
1 edit
Originally posted by giantrobotLessons and price what??
Your opponents dropping pieces I should hope you would win. $10 CDN for lessons ~ $8.50 US. Sounds about right. Stay in school.
Next time a customer asks us to run fatigue tests as part of a capability study I'm going to tell them we don't have to. Why? Because if the component's going to fail it will fail long before the 'endgame'. Yeah, that wo won the game for you. Not their blunders but your tactical 'vision'. Otherwise fail.
I see what you are saying.
But I'm telling you if you want to improve quickly and easily, tactics are the way to go.
Polgars. Ct-art 3.0 is used by masters + to get to FM and IM. I've read articles about it, they still train tactically at that level.
Yes you will lose some games but you will win a whole lot of games if you know your tactics.
And calculation to me is the same as tactics. That's why I prefer doing tactics slowly not those 2 second ones. Slowly builds calculation.
edit: and who are you anyways? You seem out to get me or something. Clearly you are a newbie here. Show some respect 🙂
O and also check out my threads. They will help you a great deal!
Originally posted by RahimKSorry RahinK. I was cranky last night. We have a huge product rollout that is wayyyy behind.
Lessons and price what??
I see what you are saying.
But I'm telling you if you want to improve quickly and easily, tactics are the way to go.
Polgars. Ct-art 3.0 is used by masters + to get to FM and IM. I've read articles about it, they still train tactically at that level.
Yes you will lose some games but you will win a whole lot of games if ...[text shortened]... re. Show some respect 🙂
O and also check out my threads. They will help you a great deal!
I still disagree that what worked for you will work for anyone. Wholly disregarding openings, strategy, planning, and endgames seems to me a silly and somewhat boring way to play the game of chess.
1 edit
Originally posted by giantrobotTactics worked for me but I did learn about all those other things.
Sorry RahinK. I was cranky last night. We have a huge product rollout that is wayyyy behind.
I still disagree that what worked for you will work for anyone. Wholly disregarding openings, strategy, planning, and endgames seems to me a silly and somewhat boring way to play the game of chess.
I was just saying that I think a person could get a decent rating with just tactics, and playing the game.
Anywho best of luck, and back to risk for me. Man that game is fun!
