Yeah there are a lot of bad problems on tactics trainer.
Tactics, anyone?
Sort:
Scottrf wrote:
Yeah there are a lot of bad problems on tactics trainer.
Really , I saw only 1 out of 3000 tactics I played here. ( That one problem is incorrect, agreed by almost everyone that played the puzzle)
Yeah there are loads.
Jan 20, 2019
0
#25
1) Thank you bluemu for your contribution to this thread; you show really good on-level tactics for everyone.
2)Sorry; my games aren’t exactly very interesting or positional, so I would like for some more positional tactics to be posted.
3) When my game with ove finishes, I have some tactics to show....
2)Sorry; my games aren’t exactly very interesting or positional, so I would like for some more positional tactics to be posted.
3) When my game with ove finishes, I have some tactics to show....
Jan 20, 2019
0
#27
AlisonHart wrote:
This is why you shouldn't play the dragon, kids: Checkmated with a knight on b8 and rook on a8? Still theory!
My own favorite example of someone getting a hopelessly lost position before they've left theory is this one:
https://www.chess.com/daily/game/200865884
We didn't leave The Book until move 28 (!) by which time White was already getting mated.
Of course, we all have our personal favorites...
I had one with 15 moves of theory and the first move out of theory dropped a piece...
Scottrf wrote:
Yeah there are loads.
Just show me a few. All tactics are checked by engines.
There is possibility of engine error when the engine analysis is too short, but it is extremely rare.
drmrboss wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
Yeah there are loads.
Just show me a few. All tactics are checked by engines.
There is possibility of engine error when the engine analysis is too short, but it is extremely rare.
I don't remember the problem numbers, surprisingly.
I've literally reported dozens which have been shortened. Believe what you want, but the tactics on this site are a mess.
You can see on the comments for some, moderators have to manually shorten them:
https://www.chess.com/tactics/82346
This I believe is one but I can't repeat them as not premium:
https://www.chess.com/tactics/342697?page=2#comments
https://www.chess.com/tactics/8234
Scottrf wrote:
drmrboss wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
Yeah there are loads.
Just show me a few. All tactics are checked by engines.
There is possibility of engine error when the engine analysis is too short, but it is extremely rare.
I don't remember the problem numbers, surprisingly.
I've literally reported dozens which have been shortened. Believe what you want, but the tactics on this site are a mess.
You can see on the comments for some, moderators have to manually shorten them:
https://www.chess.com/tactics/82346
This I believe is one but I can't repeat them as not premium:
https://www.chess.com/tactics/342697?page=2#comments
Saw both, both are 100% correct. First one was 800 rated problem and people cant answer correctly, so the mods shorten the tactics, it is not problem fault.
Second one is also the same, it is 100% correct.
In tactics, if there is a mate in 6, and if you play mate in 7 or just take piece advantage , you are wrong.
The one that I saw in wrong tactic was rated about 2800 + in which their answer A (their Answer ) leads to + 5 material advantage ( e.g) and the answer B lead to + 3 material advantage . However in longer /deeper calculation that +3 material advantage become + 6 material advantage.
In your tactical rating, you are unlikely to get such complicated tactics.
Jan 20, 2019
0
#34
MagdeburgThePianist wrote:
simple...
That's why it's labelled "For Beginners".
drmrboss wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
drmrboss wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
Yeah there are loads.
Just show me a few. All tactics are checked by engines.
There is possibility of engine error when the engine analysis is too short, but it is extremely rare.
I don't remember the problem numbers, surprisingly.
I've literally reported dozens which have been shortened. Believe what you want, but the tactics on this site are a mess.
You can see on the comments for some, moderators have to manually shorten them:
https://www.chess.com/tactics/82346
This I believe is one but I can't repeat them as not premium:
https://www.chess.com/tactics/342697?page=2#comments
Saw both, both are 100% correct. First one was 800 rated problem and people cant answer correctly, so the mods shorten the tactics, it is not problem fault.
Second one is also the same, it is 100% correct.
In tactics, if there is a mate in 6, and if you play mate in 7 or just take piece advantage , you are wrong.
The one that I saw in wrong tactic was rated about 2800 + in which their answer A (their Answer ) leads to + 5 material advantage ( e.g) and the answer B lead to + 3 material advantage . However in longer /deeper calculation that +3 material advantage become + 6 material advantage.
In your tactical rating, you are unlikely to get such complicated tactics.
You’re wrong, my tactics rating is low because I reset. Going to stop replying because you’re stubborn and your profile pic is creeping me out.
Jan 20, 2019
0
#37
Scottrf wrote:
Also this one, ridiculous problem.
As you probably already know, there is a tactic site that doesn't fail you for playing winning moves that are not the #1 engine pick, it will let you try again.
Yeah and the commentary is a lot better. I do prefer it.
I know I shouldn't ask but please don't let me fall into bad habits and explain your last two selves a bit more
This is why you shouldn't play the dragon, kids: Checkmated with a knight on b8 and rook on a8? Still theory!