10948 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!
Problem ID: 0072471
what are nearly half the players play to get this wrong?
I was thinking: what's the clever point here? And there isn't one. Is that the point of having this puzzle? That sometimes people just blunder?
Shame on me .i should be more pragmatic than poetic.
I suspect 1. ... Qxf2+? is popular. It gains material and it's check. Tactics Trainer encourages people to move without thinking. People just play the odds that with the White king so exposed there will be a good follow up move available if needed.
More often than not this approach works and the solver scores 100% or close to it. In the long run they get more points than most people who actually take the time to closely examine 1. ... fxe6, 1. ... Qxf2+, and other moves and pick the best one. Because very few people are good enough to do a thorough job on all the candidate moves in just a few seconds.
The fact that an easy problem like this can have a rating > 2000 and yet only have 57% correct solutions proves my point. If this position arose in a real game it would be uncommon for a 1500-rated player not to take the knight. At expert level Black would virtually never make the wrong move.
The real issue is whether the bad habits learned in TT will translate back to real games. I suspect they frequently will and many who use TT to improve are actually hurting themselves. "You play like you practice" is a well-known principle in sports.
darkphobos, you have swerved into part of the reason why you should not consider your TT rating apart from your success rate. If you achieve 2100 at 50% success rate that isn't as good as 2100 at 75%.
Your rating will take a random walk in a range. So will the problems. The way these problems are scored, the range of a solver could have a width around 400 points. I think it's less for the problems. This is complicated by problems that have difficulty far beyond the rating level they reside in. I mean, you have several problems with very low pass rates lurking in the 1600-1800 range. It's probably an indication that there's a problem with partial credit awards.
There are other issues in the mathematical basis of how things are handled here. For example, I believe Glicko formulas are applied to rating adjustments with assumption of normal distribution of ratings. Unfortunately the distribution of problem ratings is multimodal, so we have likely misapplication of formula.
I maintain a success rate just under 75% and my rating drifts between 1600 and 2000. If I maintained a success rate of let's say 50%, my rating range would be higher. This would be true, mathematical issues notwithstanding.
DarkPhobos makes a good point. I try to spend 3/4's of my TT time solving the problems in "unrated" mode. That way, I can ignore the timer and not worry about the effect on my "score".
The good points made above operate under the specious assumption that Tactics Trainer forces one to move quickly. It does not. I reluctantly agree that it "encourages" one to move without thinking, but I prefer to say that it tempts one to do so. If we wish to improve our chess, we must fight the temptation and play the best move, however long it takes.
If we play the wrong move quickly (in TT or a real game), we'll just lose quickly. Which is more important, speed or accuracy? The answer should be clear.
Another temptation that arises in TT is to look for the active move that defies the opponent's threats and moves entirely. This is what I think may cause the majority of people to fail this problem. The f2-Pawn is hanging with check, and 1. ... Qxf2+ is an active, daring move that ignores the e6-Knight. But it's simply refuted by 2. Re2.
I think the key to mastering TT is maintaining poise under fire. If one can do that, he'll see the refutation and play the only reasonable move, 1. ... fxe6.
The good points made above operate under the credible assumption that an exercise which rewards the correct decision - only when made quickly - encourages quick decisions.
Interesting discussion, BUT I don't agree completely.
"If we wish to improve our chess, we must fight the temptation and play the best move, however long it takes."
Kasparov said that the difference between a GM an a medium player is not the time thinking, but that GM can recognize the position because it is a position well known.
So in other word GM take 5 sec because recognizes the position and GM knows what is the best move, MP need time to evaluate the position .
So, more low it is your level more time you need .
A good time should be for me.
lower 1900 120 seclower 2100 100lower 2200 80 and so on.
OR may be the option TRY LIKE A GM where you have 40 secs for each problem , and so on
While using extra time to think will increase one's playing quality, it will increase only so much. Grandmasters understand more positions better. Still, in order for ordinary players to improve our quality, we must take the time to understand these positions better. As we grow familiar with more types of positions, we'll understand faster and move faster, but we must first be patient and invest the time.
Qxf2+ first is better wins a pawn
@D0dle: Incorrect. 1. ... Qxf2+ is refuted by 2. Re2, as given above. According to the Analysis, the simple 1. ... fxe6 gives Black a winning advantage (-5.06), while greedily capturing the Pawn on f2 results in White gaining a small but significant advantage (+1.04).
If you think a TT problem is flawed, I encourage you to look first at the Analysis and examine the lines given; then analyze it yourself for other possibilities. If you still think the problem is flawed, you can report it to the Support Staff.
an 1850 problem this was one of the easier ones
Is there someone who could help me understand my play... My best Live chess Blitz was 1551 , My live chess Standard was 1577 , and my best tactics trainer level was 2199 ... i just don't get it why there is such a difference . 1) Or i am way better at the tactical aspect of the game or i am a poor dummy in the strategical way of the game . Please don't tell me it is because i'm a girl ... lol ... there are many puzzles i do get the feel the " how to " under the 10 sec ... and have to admit that the others ... %**& :&**% ... sorry this is my hot temper ... that i just don't know where to start from ... it is beyond my chess abilities . i thank you in advance ... Metlux .
Lol wow!! I had a bad internet connection when I did this problem and several pieces didn't load for me. I'm reading through the comments about everyone saying how easy it is completely baffled until I figured that out
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 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!