I would agree with you.
TACTICAL TRAINING
Sort:
I also agree.
BobM wrote:
This is because a major cause of his tardiness was being new to the problem's position in the first instance, and this was not the player's fault.
Unfortunately, since the target time is set by other players who have solved the problem being just as new to the position as you are, this is never "a major cause of [your] tardiness". The actual cause is that you're just taking twice as long to find the answer as the average person who successfully solves it cold does.
If you want an untimed rated tactics trainer, you can use Chesstempo trainer, in 'standard' mode.
Bob - I would forget about the points. Much better to solve the problem than rush/guess it to get more points. I sometime guess them to try and solve it quickly but you won't learn much this way. Over time your speed will increase. Get them right first then speed will improve naturally over time.
Nice necrobump David
i have made frequent use of Tactical Trainer (T.T. hereaftr) and found
it to be very, very useful and helpful. However, notwithstanding that,
I have one major complaint. That is being penalized--losing points--when I take longer to solve a problem than the program (or its author) thinks I should have taken. In a "real" chess game against a "real" opponent, I have been watching the board from the very first move; when my opponent makes a move, I am able to fit it into a context that I already know. When I begin to work on a T.T. problem,
however, I am being inserted "cold" into the middle of the game. The position into which I am being thrust may be complex. It will take me ignificantly longer to get my bearings than it would if I had been present in the game from its beginning.
THEREFORE: I suggest that the point system in T.T. be modified in such a fashion that points are not subtracted from the player's total points for tardiness, if he still found the right answer. That is, if the total number of points to be gained is 15, for example, and the player takes longer to solve the problem than the author thinks he should have, such that he only gets a score of 50%, although he does still come with the right answer, he would get a zero, I think that's fine. However, if he takes enough longer to solve the problem than the author thinks he should have, such that he only gets a score of 20%, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE POINTS SUBTRACTED THAT HE HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN AWARDED, IF HE DID COME UP WITH THE RIGHT ANSWER, HOWEVER TARDILY.. This is because a major cause of his tardiness was being new to the problem's position in the first instance, and this was not the player's fault.