Can someone please help me? I know this is probably an overasked question, but at least respond please!
Best way to study tactics?
Sort:
I use Chessimo, it is payware, but a pretty good program in my opinion....
Apr 11, 2010
0
#4
Captainbob767 wrote:
I use Chessimo, it is payware, but a pretty good program in my opinion....
It's very good indeed, I agree. I used to use it when it was called Personal Chess Trainer. CT-ART is very good also.
http://chessbase.com/shop/product.asp?pid=66
4000 tactical positions, organized by theme. Worth the money.
Fiveofswords wrote:
well just solving those puzzles is one way. But I would prefer to go theme by theme with tactics, because this is good good tactical players recognize them. For example, the typical bxh7+ followed by ng5+ and Qh5 manouver. examine situations where it both works and does not work. a great tactical player imo simply has stored a massive number of such themes and applies them properly, much like a great endgame player memorizes many important positions and how to win or draw from them.
I can highly recomend Tal's winning chess Combinations - Mikhael Tal and Viktor Khenkin. You might be lucky enough to find a used copy online (I did) although I dont think it's available in algebraic.
It's sorted by chapters of different combinations of pieces, and I found it very helpful
Apr 11, 2010
0
#7
By concepts I mean like rules for strategy that have to be applied in original ways with a thinking process that you can recreate(I have just begun studying strategy with Silman's HTRYC). While tactics are just "memorize this" and each situation is not going to appear again(although there are still motifs).
And thanks for those who have answered so far!
Tactics puzzles are not such unique situations. The same patterns occur over and over, and that's why tactics puzzles are useful.
Also, this is just my opinion, but I would say that Silman really underemphasizes tactics in HTRYC. One could read that book and come away thinking that tactics is an irrelevant detail, but that couldn't be further from the truth. Tactics is vital.
(On a side note, it feels weird saying "tactics is" all the time, but I guess it's correct, in the same way as one would say "politics is my favourite subject".)
I'm not employed by the grammar police force, but I do have a thing about grammar. :)
I love Sharpen Your Tactics, a great tactics puzzle book. You can check it out here. It's quite good, with all positions coming from actual games (which is an important attribute...positions that are created that did not come from games are more unnatural and less likely to help you in real games), and with the positions rated from one to four stars for difficulty.
an_arbitrary_name wrote:
I'm not employed by the grammar police force, but I do have a thing about grammar. :)
Me too....
The first way is to just solve puzzles, but preferably from a book, because they tend to have higher quality puzzles. Something like Tactics Trainer here has simpler puzzles which is good for pattern recognition, but not as much for deep calculation.
The second way is something unique I came up with: creating "fake opening theory". You pick a sharp opening that you don't know much of the theory for, and analyze the position very completely and deeply (maybe to 20 moves), and compare it to the computer/opening books. I think it's outstanding practice for tactical analysis.
Also, studying attacking games is great too.
By the way, I'm with you about studying strategy and openings. Good stuff.
If you hate tactics, then you should probably quit chess and just start playing go.
thechessvids wrote:
If you hate tactics, then you should probably quit chess and just start playing go.
I'm happy I didn't listen to that advice...
I used to hate tactics, now I love them and appreciate them after lots of study and experience with them. The way tactics and strategy work together is what makes chess beautifull in my opinion, only having one part doesn't make it complete.
With that said, a game that was purely strategical does sound interesting.
Tactics Trainer here on C.c is great.
I haven't improved worth a crap in three months of doing tactics. I was just doing it to help my concentration, not to compete in tournaments, but I'm still beginning to think it's a complete waste of time.
BorgQueen wrote:
I love tactics, hate studying openings. Endgame study is ok, but I simply hate studying openings.
Strange...I can't stand endgame study. I dislike it more than anything else in chess (although I do still enjoy it, since it IS chess after all!). I enjoy middle game study and have a fascination with opening study. I have so many opening books, but at my level, opening study doesn't help so much. At my level, it's all about tactics.
Jul 4, 2014
0
#20
Elubas wrote:
thechessvids wrote:
If you hate tactics, then you should probably quit chess and just start playing go.
I'm happy I didn't listen to that advice...
I used to hate tactics, now I love them and appreciate them after lots of study and experience with them. The way tactics and strategy work together is what makes chess beautifull in my opinion, only having one part doesn't make it complete.
With that said, a game that was purely strategical does sound interesting.
That's not advice, that's just some jerk being an A-hole.
I know this is probably a question with very different answers and opinions, but I love studying strategy and endgames and openings, but I hate studying tactics. It feels so monotinous. I am used to studying for concepts, not just pattern recognition. Also, I don't know the most efficient way to study tactics. I don't want to throw myself into something I don't like to do if I am not going to get much out of it. I am determined to study tactics though, as I know it will greatly improve my play.
Somebody please help!
Thanks!