8847 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
@ClavierCavalier: Presented as a puzzle, but actually a situation that was once a position in a game. May be the word 'challenge' should have been used instead of puzzle. If it is a puzzle, I agree with you.
@wafflemaster: I agree, but I would disagree that a move like Qf2:+ would be part of the combination in a game. If someone would tell me this move after a game, I would ask him 'are you serious?' It is like saying 'check' to your opponent. You don't, do you? I would count it though in the combination of a study.
@browni1341: No, it is a mate in four, because at page 5 there were four people reacting on my post.
@eddysallin: mate in 6, 7 or 8?
1 was difficult; took me a few minutes, but 2 was simple and only took a few seconds.
In fact this leads me to another question.
Why can I solve puzzles harder than people with a rating higher than mine and still can't improve my own rating? I guess I lose in other moments of the game.
Your current highest tactics rating on this site is under 1300, so I don't know if your statement is true. But let's presume it is true.
This has been called the "Maza effect" elsewhere because Michael de la Maza recommended tactics training as the best way to learn to improve in his rather awful book, Rapid Chess Improvement. If it's true that you are excellent at solving problems but still have a very low rating, it's most likely because you have not learned how to incorporate your tactics skill into a real chess setting.
To help fix that, start studying complete games with excellent annotations. One of the first places to start is Alexander Alekhine's My Best Games of Chess, 1908-1937. I choose that book because Alekhine excelled at setting up the positions where tactical shots become common. Learn from him!
Thanks SmyslovFan for your comments and for pointing me a direction to improve my rating. I will try to figure out what 'incorporate my tactics skill into my games' really means.
first one isn't mate i 4 either. Black isn't forced to take on g6 and has the zwischenzug with Qxf2 making it a mate in 5.
25. Nf5+, Kh8, 26. Qxg6, Qxf2 27. Kxf2, Rf7 28. Qxf7, X 29. Qg7#
I loked at the players for the first one and played the least likely move that I would play, and it was correct 3 times in a row. Second one was well played by you, show off!
Easy problems. The first one is a good problem... I had already solved it earlier.
Ah, right on time! Good job.
What's the Best Move? (A Classic Capablanca brilliancy)
by shoopi a few minutes ago
Is it possible that there are psychic chess masters
by reflectivist a few minutes ago
A Nice Alapins Game for Me
by Master_Valek 3 minutes ago
Fischer's "My 60 Memorable Games" Is Now Better!
by batgirl 3 minutes ago
1-0 or 1/2-1/2
by shoopi 5 minutes ago
Which is better Stockfish or Critter?
by Oecleus 5 minutes ago
the one law stands alone?
by EricFleet 5 minutes ago
Play for a Draw, but Don't Accept Draw Offers.
by Elubas 6 minutes ago
Is there any chance that a 1300 rated player can beat a 2700 rated player?
by bean_Fischer 7 minutes ago
Concerned about trolling, again
by corrijean 7 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com