Chess is 99 % tactics

I dunno who wrote that or why but I might challenge the premise given enough incentive.  What percentage of a chess game do you actually think is tactical?  I think its nowhere near 99%.

I don't know, but you can certainly set yourself up for tactics... or not.

Above is a recent game of mine. After 9 moves it may look like nothing noteworthy has happened, but black's game is, practically speaking, better already because he is the one with the pawn breaks (d5 and f5) and white won't be able to engineer d4. White has a hole on d4 but black has no hole on d5. Finally the bishop on h4 is a bit off sides. Black can make a very simple attacking setup, which I did

Now it's move 16 and I'm being a little dramatic when I say, practically speaking, the game is over already. It's going to be hard for black to mess this up when 1) he has a big attack and 2) white has no counterplay, so will be stuck passively defending.

In the original position white can play d4 immediately, black will have a weak d pawn on a half open file, a permanent weakness.  Furthermore white can fight for control of d5 by preparing and playing b4-b5.  Anyway these are all strategic considerations, what percentage of your game would you consider to consist of actual tactics?  By that I mean forcing variations?

d4 right away loses a pawn (the e4 pawn), and the king is still in the center.

b4-b5 is the right idea, but only helps the d5 square if you can pile up on c6 and force black to capture on b5, which should be impossible, so that choice will always be black's.

---

Yeah they're all strategic considerations. I'm saying you can get the opportunity for a lot of tactics... but only if you know non-tactics. You can also be white, just making moves with no plan, and end up in a position that offers you no tactics. That was my point.

---

I'd say 100% of my games have tactics. Also 100% have strategy. You can't separate the two, just like knowing white can't play d4 because after exd it uncovers the rook's attack on e4. Strategy and tactics mixed together.

I am not asking you you if your games contains tactics , what I am asking you is what percentage of your games contain forcing variations or avoidance of forcing variations.  I bet its nowhere near 99% 

I am not trying to separate the two.  I want to know what percentage of your game consists of actual forcing variations.

White can chop the knight on f6 and then play d4, maybe prepare it with h3.   King in the centre? White can castle in a single move.

 100%

This is pretty basic stuff. d4 (regardless of prep) would lose a pawn, and yes, opening the center is a bad idea with the king on e1 and rook on e8. What do your want me to say? This conversation is weird to me. I don't know if you're joking or what.

It was 1.c4

 c4 e5 a3 and now I was clueless what theory might be, I played Nf6 and eventually decided to put the dark bishop in a fianchetto. Don't know what was actually correct.

Wow as in good or wow as in bad lol

I usually do the Bb4 or Bc5 lines, but when I couldn't put it there, and since a3 was a waste, I decided to pretend it was like a KIA reversed. Also opponent was much lower rated, so doing something slower usually confuses them.

I go between high 1900 and low 2000 OTB.

nonsense, your opponent plays 1.d4 and you reply with 1...Nf6 and there are no forcing variations.  He play 2.c4 and you reply 2...g6 and there are no forcing variations.  I reject the assertion that its 100%

loses a pawn, how?

bah! humbug! fine it loses a pawn! curses!

Honestly I am interested in the idea of what percentage of a game actually consists of forcing variations that need to be calculated.  I reject the idea that its 99% or 100% as has been postulated.

Two games where the centre opens and the king is uncastled leading to the conclusion that the only rule is that one should not be dogmatic.  There is always an exception in chess.

yes but I cannot be bothered to fix it.  It does give the option of Nd5 though after you chop with the Queen which is a great pity that there is a pawn on c6

at least one of us was thinking

I see this topic has been raised before with others querying the premise.  I also read somewhere that the better you become the less you need to calculate although I cannot source the author.  I would also be interested in looking at the average length of variations that need to be calculated and how many tempi they consisted of.  I suspect that it would be somewhere near 5 tempi on average.  Obviously less for recaptures and more for longer variations.  I also wonder if its possible to play a chess game without calculating anything.

Ok if we say calculation, what is there to calculate after 1.d4 Nf6? nothing 2.c4 and g6, nothing, 3.Nc3 Bg7, nothing, 4.e4 d6 probably nothing although we need to be conscious of our knight getting hit with a move like e5.

If they know theory they probably can hit 20 moves without calculating a single thing, thats 50% of a 40 move game where they do not need to calculate anything! 

I really wondered about the percentage during an average chess game of say 40 moves where this actually occurs.  I doubt its anywhere near 99% or 100% as some others have claimed.