11067 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!
I feel like the high rated tactics trainer problems have become way too heavily biased towards studies. Sure solving a pretty study every now and then is fun, but currently it feels like half of the problems are studies and they are coming out of my ears by now
Besides, some researchers of chess improvement propose that solving studies is of very limited use (i.e. http://www.saladehistoria.com/fotoblog/Training_in_chess.pdf , pg.15).
I hope their amount would be reduced and the problems would be more focused on what tactics training should be about: positions akin to tournament chess games.
Yes, this a great idea which I believe should be enforced in the tactics trainer. I would definitely vote for this- a tactics trainer which contains puzzles which will be more relevant to otb tournament games. For example, chess.com should make some of their tactical puzzles based off of certain openings. For example, they could make a tactic which can be widely found in the sicilian grand prix for black.
I'm fairly new to tactics training. What is meant by a study problem? How is this different from a tactics problem? Can someone provide an example? Thank you.
Most important characteristic of a study is that it isn't a position taken from an actual game but rather has been made up by someone (the composer). More accurately studies are subtype of composed chess problems. Wikipedia offers the following explanation.
(A study is) "an orthodox problem in which the stipulation is that white to play must win or draw. Almost all studies are endgame positions. Studies are composed chess problems, but because their stipulation is open-ended (the win or draw does not have to be achieved within any particular number of moves) they are usually thought of as distinct from problems and as a form of composition that is closer to the puzzles of interest to over-the-board players. Indeed, composed studies have often extended our knowledge of endgame theory. But again, there is no clear dividing line between the two kinds of positions."
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_problem for further details.
studies help calculation, if you don't guess your way through, and hope that the "correct" icon shows up. Unfortunately, that is what most of the time I do.
1/27/2015 - Boris Spassky vs Arnulf Westermeier, Germany, 1982
by wtr49p 4 minutes ago
I finally learned how to study tactics right and finally improved my rating
by hicetnunc 4 minutes ago
by Jason3000 10 minutes ago
pieces not working
by muso512 13 minutes ago
Your opening against carlsen
by Chicken_Monster 15 minutes ago
Am I a jerk?
by notmtwain 15 minutes ago
Practical differences between 1. e4 and 1. d4 ?
by iLoooveMyROOKS 24 minutes ago
am i a prodigy?
by tkbunny 27 minutes ago
How much money can GMs earn?
by astronomer999 29 minutes ago
by December_TwentyNine 38 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!