I don't think Tactics Trainer helps one's long term abilities to calculate moves ahead, or see checkmates.
No problem! Anybody has his own opinions. Most professional players think the contrary, but again, maybe one can improve his chess in different ways. Also, if your purpose is to improve a meaningless TT rating, I think that you are justified to have such opinions.
Tactics Trainer gives too high points. I have a TT-rating of 2400 at the moment and it goes up and down from 2300 to 2500. This is definately too high because my real elo is only 1900.
Doing tactics puzzles do help the ability to see checkmates. And if they require you to calculate moves ahead then they help that skill too. No doubt about it.
EDIT: And I don't use online tactics trainers, but puzzle books which have certainly helped my ability to calculate, spot patterns & improved my overall vision immensely.
I've been using it for 30 minutes a day since before Christmas. My TT rating had a lot of variability at the start, but has in the past month or two been steadily increasing. I am a bit stuck at the moment in the mid-1700s, but haven't been there long enough to say I'm really stalled out.
I have seen definite improvement in three areas: seeing the whole board, seeing more possibilities in terms of moves, and thinking through my moves. I have seen this in both my TT work, and in my games.
I agree that one should take the TT ratings with a grain of salt. Say you have a multi-move solution, and you don't get the last move. TT will give you credit for the moves you got. But say there is another solution, with a different first move, that is still winning but not as good. TT will give you no credit for that. So it is rewarding partial success in some areas but punishing it in others. That makes it a less accurate estimate of the tactical skills you want to have in the game.
I don't think Tactics Trainer helps one's long term abilities to calculate moves ahead, or see checkmates.
No problem! Anybody has his own opinions. Most professional players think the contrary, but again, maybe one can improve his chess in different ways. Also, if your purpose is to improve a meaningless TT rating, I think that you are justified to have such opinions.
How many chess professionals have you asked about chess.com's Tactics Trainer?
How many chess professionals have you asked about chess.com's Tactics Trainer?
OK, none. But I read many opinions of chess professionals on the emarald TT [too bad I didn't save them to post here]. Why do you think this TT would be different?
I reset my rating once I read that you could, because it has been a moving target. I improved steadily over about 4000 problems in 9 months. My graph was a classic learning curve. Even though I backslid a lot, the slope was steadily upward. Just after the end of the year I took a long, discouraging slide, but I did notice that the calculation system was changing and that explained the slide. Once I reset I felt a lot better about where I was. I improved from lower than 1200 in the old system to a high of about 1650. Now I'm hovering around 1400 and that seems like where I should be. Tactics Trainer has absolutely improved my chess. I struggle with the timer and it's helpful to know there's a way to stop using it if I want to. The timing struggle has been worth it so far.
That was a good suggestion: to set a goal for the higher pass rate and not move until you see the solution.
I started doing 25 a day since December. Within a week I hit around 2150. I stayed there for another week,then got a string of problems I just couldn't do, also another slump earlier this month. Now I'm struggling to maintain 1800. I have no explanation, just an observation that the slumps in TT coincides with slumps in play.
That's about the same time I went into an awful slide. It was due, I think, to the changes in the calculation system, which had the effect of lowering the average rating from the high 1300 - low 1400's down to where it is now - mid 1200's?
TT has helped my chess....yah, it has, i'm not disputing that. It has helped a little bit,
But the title of the post is....Have you ever actually improved your Tactics Trainer rating? And reading these answers has proven (so far) that NO ONE EVER HAS!!!
Everyone peaks quickly then hovers right around there. You either got it...or you don't.
Did you read my answer? In case it was not clear, yes, you improve. But in time. It's not something which happens overnight. It took me two years to improve my rating on the tactics server I mentioned with about 300 points. Here the rating system has changed quite recently, and the ratings dropped significantly. I was at 2600-2700 before the change, now that rating looks unrealistic for me to achieve. Shall I draw the conclusion, like you, that you can't improve the TT rating and therefore the TT here is useless?
In addition, nobody can tell if your chess improvement is due to a tactics improvement, presumably because a normal player studies all the aspects of the game.
Did you read my answer? In case it was not clear, yes, you improve. But in time. It's not something which happens overnight. It took me two years to improve my rating on the tactics server I mentioned with about 300 points. Here the rating system has changed quite recently, and the ratings dropped significantly. I was at 2600-2700 before the change, now that rating looks unrealistic for me to achieve. Shall I draw the conclusion, like you, that you can't improve the TT rating and therefore the TT here is useless?
In addition, nobody can tell if your chess improvement is due to a tactics improvement, presumably because a normal player studies all the aspects of the game.
I never said it was useless. It helped my chess.
I treat Tactics trainer like basketball hoops or pass and move in Soccer, quick set of exercises to keep yourself alert.
Sometimes when I am in the mood (drunk) I do a lot of them.
I am not too bothered about the rating.
I read one post stating that they get more from a book regarding tactics training than computer trainers. I think that the best aspect of books, regarding tactics (from what I've encountered), is that you don't just solve the tactic, but categorise it. You understand what type of tactic it is and the subtilties of the position.
Something that seems obvious enough, but escaped me completely for a long time, is that you have to create positions that allow for tactics. It is easier to create these positions when you understand the tactics deeper.
I've not developed these skills to any real level of ability at all, but it is something that I'm working on. I'd be interested to know if stronger players agree.
I have done over 5000 tactics trainer problems here but have generally stopped and gone for the book approach. However, I think that a combination of the two would be better rather than one or the other. TT is good, but you'll get more results using it in conjunction with others sources. That's what I think.
A few comments:
I think the relationship between OTB performance and TT is soley dependant on how you use the TT ... do you sac a queen becuase it "looks right" or becuase you calculate every variation? it is the latter that will improve your game more than the former.(but, the former will probably give you a higher TT rating)
and what do you do when you fail a puzzle? work out why or promptly do another? it is obvoius how studying failure might help improvement, but how many people actually do look at thier tactical failures? and what about the other odd situation where you get a puzzle right but are confused as to why it is the solution... do you carry on with another puzzle our investigate why X move works?
Therefore, as already mentioned, accuracy should be more important than actual rating.
one other thing: you SHOULD feel pissed off with yourself if you calculate a line incorrectly but nonetheless get the puzzle right (i.e you failed to consider a defensive try, even though it does not work, you should nonetheless be hard on yourself for not even considering it) ... this is simply because real games are won and lost by people being able to look at all the possibilites... get yourself into the right habbits!
In conclusion then, TT is a good tool which will help you improve if you use it correctly. focus on understanding, and accuracy -- although sucess rate is more important than rating it is also very important that your not sucessful due to luck, make sure you understand why you gets thing right and wrong. for this reason, spending an hour doing 20 puzzles is better than doing 60 in the same amount of time.
Btw, My stats:
|
Current: |
2259 |
| Highest: | 2555 (1 Sep 2009) |
| Lowest: | 1195 (27 Mar 2008) |
| # Attempts: | 626 |
| Passed: | 374 (59.7%) |
| Failed: | 252 (40.3%) |
| Total Training Time: | 10.7 hrs |
Maradonna...I think you may be onto something regarding the books. For one, it forces you to calculate entirely in your head, as you can't actually move the pieces around. In TT, many times you might just guess at the first move and then if its right, get the next move after you know you're on the right track so to speak. So I think a puzzle book might force you to think it through more, but there is no doubt that TT, or any of the other Tactics servers are indispensable tools. I also agree that using both books and the app is probably a good approach. IMO the more tactics you're digesting the better you get....which seems to be in question by some here in this thread.
I'd also be interested in hearing some stronger players opinions regarding your other question about "Creating" tactical chances. I used spend all my time trying to set up tactical shots in games, at the exspense of any real positional planning. Needless to say my play was very sporadic and not generally very good. My approach right now rather than trying to create tactical shots, is rather to improve my position all the while keeping an eye out for "clues" that a tactic may be available to me. i.e. Weak K position, undefended pieces, over worked pieces. When I spot one of those 3 things, I start looking for combinations.
Maybe that's wrong? but that's sort of where I am currently.
Regards!
A few comments:
I think the relationship between OTB performance and TT is soley dependant on how you use the TT ... do you sac a queen becuase it "looks right" or becuase you calculate every variation? it is the latter that will improve your game more than the former.(but, the former will probably give you a higher TT rating)
and what do you do when you fail a puzzle? work out why or promptly do another? it is obvoius how studying failure might help improvement, but how many people actually do look at thier tactical failures? and what about the other odd situation where you get a puzzle right but are confused as to why it is the solution... do you carry on with another puzzle our investigate why X move works?
Therefore, as already mentioned, accuracy should be more important than actual rating.
one other thing: you SHOULD feel pissed off with yourself if you calculate a line incorrectly but nonetheless get the puzzle right (i.e you failed to consider a defensive try, even though it does not work, you should nonetheless be hard on yourself for not even considering it) ... this is simply because real games are won and lost by people being able to look at all the possibilites... get yourself into the right habbits!
In conclusion then, TT is a good tool which will help you improve if you use it correctly. focus on understanding, and accuracy -- although sucess rate is more important than rating it is also very important that your not sucessful due to luck, make sure you understand why you gets thing right and wrong. for this reason, spending an hour doing 20 puzzles is better than doing 60 in the same amount of time.
Very insightful and helpful!!! Thanks!
In the opening chapter of the book, Winning chess tactics by Yasser Seirawan, he mentions Silman's rules to ascertain weather there is a tactic on the board and some other fella, I've forgotten who. I've also managed to forget the rules!
However, I'll dig the book out and post here in the future. It might help you with your current approach.
yes, not this one but I play on another one and the rating has gone from 1200 to 1650 and when I play it continues to go up
Maradonna...its Averbakh and Silmans rules of recognition.
Averbakh states combos are almost always based on double attack.
Silman states Weakened K
Stalemated K
Undefended pieces
Inadequately guarded pieces (or as I said, overworked)
are all signs a combo might be in the works.
I love Winning Chess Tactics BTW...great book!
P.S. When I said before "maybe thats wrong", I didn't mean recognising tactical possibilities, I meant my approach to trying to play what the position wants, instead of always trying to create tactical chances. Sorry it I wasn't more clear on that.
I started doing 25 a day since December. Within a week I hit around 2150. I stayed there for another week,then got a string of problems I just couldn't do, also another slump earlier this month. Now I'm struggling to maintain 1800. I have no explanation, just an observation that the slumps in TT coincides with slumps in play.