cool what is or was the new feature

posterity :)

oh. then why this um...group still exist??

this IS computer workout ;)

what's the difference between this and computer workout?

I'll join right after this comment, but if possible, it would be nice to include positions from chess.com games as the representatives.  In any case, it's a great idea and I look forward to helping out.  I'll probably learn at the same time, so what could be better?

Every position has certain aspects, and winning a position requires different skills. Endgames can be rook endgames, queen endgames, minor piece endgames or just pawn endgames, and you could need calculation skills, intuition, assessing a position, ability to make up a winning plan, finding good squares for pieces etc.... Dividing this all up in categories would be very hard.

I'd suggest that if you insist on making categories, you should try defining the categories based on the skills needed to win or draw, rather than the aspects of the position. That way it's easier for the user to see which skills he needs to train. It's better to see that you're not good at finding a winning plan in a quiet position, than to see that you mostly make mistakes in the strategy and endgames sections. So instead of picking the type of position you want to train, I'd say one should choose the skill he wants to train.

*Moved the rest of the message to the appropriate topic*

i have a good book at home for this, i will dig some stuff out tomorrow (im at work at the mo). But can i suggest 2 titles?

1. The Classic Bishop x h7 sacrifice.
2. The smothered mate.

This feature might also be used to train tactics where at some point in the solution the winning side has more than one winning move. For example, I recall a recent Tactics Trainer solution where, after several moves, either 5. Qxc6+ followed by 6. Rf3, or 5. Rf3 followed by 6. Qxc6+ won. Tactics Trainer could not continue with the solution because it accepts only one line.

Some kinds of endgames are radically different than other kinds of endgames. For example, with opposite colored bishops passed pawns are much more important than an extra pawn or two. Pawn-only endings are very important because it is good to know whether they are winning, to decide whether to trade down. Queen and pawn endings are tricky relative to perpetual check; there is a huge difference between "lots of checks" and "perpetual check".

Similarly for Kingside attacks. The Bxh7+ is a classic one that every good player should know.

Maybe have a hierarchy categorization schema.

Another need that may or may not fit with this new feature is the strategic considerations for certain kinds of positions, such as isolated d-pawn, or the c4-d4-e4-f3 closed pawn configuration.

here are some resources:

http://www.chessopolis.com/tutorials.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_endgame

http://www.chesshouse.com/Chess_Training_Pocket_Book_II_Alburt_p/1108.htm (we can't take all of these diagrams as-is, but good ideas in there)