method to take in a position where there are possible tactics
Sort:
The tactics trainer here at chess.com gives you a time you should be expected to solve it. I could also look at the average time to solve a puzzle. Or I can read posts how players go through puzzle books on Chessable limiting themselves to 10sec per puzzle. My high on puzzle rush is only 21, and I watch other players easily get into the 30’s.
Thanks for responding. My concern is all the time in the world won’t help me improve. There are endless posts of discouraged players claiming they never improve with time, and experts claiming they are practicing wrong.
David Pruess has a YouTube video saying that good players have thousands of stored patterns that pop out to them. He gives a method for learning patterns. But you have to notice the tactical elements or signals when you take in a position. (Pin, alignment, undefended pieces, king safety, etc.). No stored pattern will pop out at you until you notice the key signals. I’m looking for a method to do this. Good players will do that in a few seconds and I don’t know how they acquired that skill. There’s more to it than doing thousands of tactics. The secret is still out there.
there is a book on chessable “chess tactics antennae”
i have the print version but i grabbed the chessable version as soon as they got it
there is also a youtube series by im squarology on the book as well which is good
the book is more about adopting a thinking process centered on the recognition of the signals and as the signals start to compound then the calculation of possible tactics
many of the positions/puzzles are tough but they are well worth the effort
as it is a chess book and not “tactics trainer” i would have no problem setting up a position on a board and just leave it up for a few days- occasionally taking it in and then, when i felt ready, tackling it head on
making notes and doing as thorough an annotation as i could; then go over the position as the book reveals the solution
one needs some grasp of the fundamental tactical motifs but studying this book not only helps with the tactics but also the effort put forth to study this material is beneficial as any study of a good chessbook
——-
fwiw i have always felt tactics trainer to be a tester and not a trainer
one of the reasons are all of the “gotcha” problems and some problems that arent really tactical at all and some which are just terrible
and up until recently the app version has no way of going over previous problems (now that it does the tactics trainer is better than it was)
i just feel that working through puzzles which have been carefully selected for study offer more bang for the buck
i have the print version but i grabbed the chessable version as soon as they got it
there is also a youtube series by im squarology on the book as well which is good
the book is more about adopting a thinking process centered on the recognition of the signals and as the signals start to compound then the calculation of possible tactics
many of the positions/puzzles are tough but they are well worth the effort
as it is a chess book and not “tactics trainer” i would have no problem setting up a position on a board and just leave it up for a few days- occasionally taking it in and then, when i felt ready, tackling it head on
making notes and doing as thorough an annotation as i could; then go over the position as the book reveals the solution
one needs some grasp of the fundamental tactical motifs but studying this book not only helps with the tactics but also the effort put forth to study this material is beneficial as any study of a good chessbook
——-
fwiw i have always felt tactics trainer to be a tester and not a trainer
one of the reasons are all of the “gotcha” problems and some problems that arent really tactical at all and some which are just terrible
and up until recently the app version has no way of going over previous problems (now that it does the tactics trainer is better than it was)
i just feel that working through puzzles which have been carefully selected for study offer more bang for the buck
What IMBacon said about forcing moves is spot on! Checks, captures, and threats! The only thing I would add is always be on the lookout for unprotected pieces! It's surprising how often there is some piece that is either unprotected or inadequately protected. Once you spot it, you can often come up with a tactic to take advantage
One more thing: Even in this computerized age, sometime the best solution is to read a book! One book that I found quite useful for learning tactical patterns is "Chess Tactics for Champions" by Susan Polgar. She explains each tactical pattern, shows how it works, and gives you a bunch of exercises, ranging from easy to quit difficult, to make sure you really understand it
Sorry, Mantini! I didn't mean to slight your contribution, I just failed to read every post. Obviously, none of us have anything really original to say on this topic, but the basics bear repeating
Yes, he does have that formatting thing nailed!
#8 and #9 by Manatini were outstanding suggestions. As well as the comments suggesting to read a book.
Thank you all for taking the time to offer your advice. You all may be the closest thing beginners like myself can get to private coaches so We really rely on your time and suggestions. I really appreciate it. I have a lot to take in from this thread, and I look forward to making some good progress.
ghost_of_pushwood wrote:
tennbad wrote:
David Pruess has a YouTube video saying that good players have thousands of stored patterns that pop out to them. He gives a method for learning patterns. But you have to notice the tactical elements or signals when you take in a position. (Pin, alignment, undefended pieces, king safety, etc.). No stored pattern will pop out at you until you notice the key signals.
Just sounds like doubletalk to me...
Would you expand on your thoughts please? David P is an IM (should have put that in there earlier), but another titled players opinion is very welcome.
ghost_of_pushwood wrote:
Yes, I know David is an IM (I've played him). But what is this saying really? In order to learn the patterns you have to learn to see the tactical signals...which is (arguably) just another term for the patterns.
This is my interpretation. if it doesn’t make sense it’s my fault.
Let me attempt to express what I’m talking about better. When I’m solving a tactics problem it’s been suggested by David that if you don’t see the solution in 30sec you may not know the pattern. Sometimes I key in on the wrong signal, and spend over a minute trying to make it work. So I look for something else and see the right signal which triggers the right idea and pattern quickly. It’s not that I didn’t know the pattern (at least that is my hypothesis). I have an inability to take in the entire position in a few seconds and focus only what matters first. If there are multiple signals, how do you identify the right one instantly. While I wast time on something else. I’ve seen players solve these in less than 10sec each problem. I also know that players can spend years and years on 10K problems and never improve. So it’s got to be more than experience. I’m trying to figure out any path that leads to improvement. I wish I had a method to “take in a position” and focus on what’s important better. Any ideas?
Manatini wrote:
That's what I mean. We have a million people solving thousands of puzzles. Some people solve puzzles every day... but Morphy probably solved none. There were some primitive books back then, and tournament games were passed around... but obviously his vision for combinations didn't come from solving puzzles.
That's not to say that solving puzzles is bad, of course, and I'm sure Morphy would have been even better had he had access to today's stuff. I'm just saying there's something more to the learning process. Obviously he picked up ideas and principals (or whatever you want to call them) from other sources.
This sounds depressing. It sounds like you guys are saying you are born with ability or your not. if you are no one really knows how to develop it. Working hard may not amount to anything. After all no one knows what exactly to work on. it loses all meaning if you don’t know what to do. If your lucky and born with ability things will magically come together no matter how you work at it.
can someone help me , i was realy sad because i've been training for 9 years to become a strong player in chess, but untill this day i still can't 
. i don't why... i had the desire to become an athelete in my country but untill now i still not qualify. can someone give me some tips how can i be a good chess player?
Timed tactics are worthless for doing what tactics are suppose to do: teach new patterns.
Pattern tactics is what I do.
Software designed to teach you tactics. Take a new tactical problem, using as few pieces on the board as possible, and has you solve it.
Then take the same tactic with more and more pieces on the board, all coming from real life chess games.
After solving dozens of the pattern, how long do you think it will take your brain to spot the pattern in a timed test?
You don't solve 3 to 10 second tactics, you just have to recognize the pattern.
PM me if your curious as to what I use for pattern tactics.
Manatini wrote:
tennbad wrote:
Manatini wrote:
That's what I mean. We have a million people solving thousands of puzzles. Some people solve puzzles every day... but Morphy probably solved none. There were some primitive books back then, and tournament games were passed around... but obviously his vision for combinations didn't come from solving puzzles.
That's not to say that solving puzzles is bad, of course, and I'm sure Morphy would have been even better had he had access to today's stuff. I'm just saying there's something more to the learning process. Obviously he picked up ideas and principals (or whatever you want to call them) from other sources.
This sounds depressing. It sounds like you guys are saying you are born with ability or your not. if you are no one really knows how to develop it. Working hard may not amount to anything. After all no one knows what exactly to work on. it loses all meaning if you don’t know what to do. If your lucky and born with ability things will magically come together no matter how you work at it.
I wouldn't go that far. Everyone works for their skill. Everyone starts as an awful beginner who plays lots of mistakes. It's just that for some people work pays off faster than others, and no one can really explain why that is. It's not that the training is secret, it's just something about how people process and relate and learn information.
The good news is that chess is fun no matter your rating, and that even a somewhat below average person, if they work really hard, could probably be in the top 1% of players.
And try to stay motivated... because no one improves constantly. Everyone has a few months, or a year, where even if they're studying every day they don't seem to be improving... but eventually you break through and start improving again. It's just that while players like you and me get stuck at 1600 for a while, players like Carlsen get stuck at 2600 for a while
So it's somewhere in the middle. You'll probably never be a professional player, and that was probably determined at birth, but you probably can be a lot better than you think you can, and be better than almost everyone on the planet.
I'm skeptical that the training is not a secret in some sense. I think its more likely that most of the information out there is probably bad. The training that many people are doing is probably hurting them. Especially if a forum is where they get their advice, but may be no other option. you can't ask a book a question. For the lucky few kids who get private coaching, they will get some good stuff, but it will be generic coaching. The information is probably nothing that you can't read in a book, but it has the advantage of a clear plan. As opposed to a jumbled up bunch of training methods that are as uncoordinated as the pieces in my game. The really good stuff is passed from Master to a single student that the master selects. Outside of this I probably agree with what you are saying which is why it bothered me more than it should.
Though tactics stump me to, try to focus on part of the board where most of the pieces are located. Usually, this is a major tactical area. After all, where many pieced are placed, the are most likely placed like that for a reason. If pieces are evenly spread out around the board, try to focus on areas with the strongest pieces. Good luck!
Manatini wrote:
tennbad wrote:
The really good stuff is passed from Master to a single student that the master selects.
IMO that's pretty far fetched.
Sure, good coaches can fast track your progress, but they can't turn a turd into gold
And on the other side of it, if someone has the potential to be world champion, they don't need any special secret advice. Just look at Fischer. The Botvinnik School of Chess was famous, and the Russians were so far ahead of everyone that they'd organize Russia vs the rest of the word matches. Not only did Fischer not have any Russian coaches, but there weren't many good chess books in English, so he had to learn Russian just to read what any Russian child could.
A little far fetched maybe. I’m not defining “gold” to be world champion. Or even a titled player. A reasonable coach could probably turn anyone dedicated into an expert. Without that special coaching, most of the same dedicated people will never get there and never know why. A few could. Now, someone with special ability that has GOAT potential ...and also discovered the game... also must have special connections that will help them develop it to its fullest. he/she will not get run of the mill coaching. Fischer was an obvious exception and we have to go back 50yrs to come up with it. This is more of a philosophy discussion now but it’s fun. 🙂. To tie this in with my original thread. I’m still searching for a method to improve on tactics. I really don’t have any idea how to proceed. Maybe, I should hire a coach for an hour. I’ll give them whatever info I have to show them where I’m at. They lay out a plan that I go forth and follow. At least I wouldn’t get conflicting info. I wonder if that would be worth it?🧐
I think pattern tactics + combinations is extremely effective.
Take a pattern, and solve it bunch of times, taken from different OTB games. After the umpteenth time, you'll easily recognize the pattern in your games.
Combinations are far more difficult. Perhaps there are patterns in there, but mostly you have to look at the entire board, trying to find a defensible weakness, in order to create a weakness on another part of the board. the opponent can't both prevent the first weakness, without creating the 2nd weakness. sometimes, the person can defend the 2nd weakness, but that ends any hope of trying to defend the first weakness.
Is there a better method to take in the position? How to do this faster?