For me, if I've done enough tactics training, it just becomes natural. The more you practice, the more evident the patterns become and the less time it takes to identify them.
If you haven't spent much time doing tactics, then inevitably you will take longer to find the correct sequence.
It's like anything else in life, you put enough time into it and you'll get better. Then when you go to play games (not actively looking for tactics), you'll find them anyway out of wrote habit.
You don't spend any time. I don't think that searching for something that probably isn't there is a good use of time. If there is a reason to think that there may be a winning tactic then search to your heart's content but if there isn't then just spend your time on finding a good strategic move. Note that I said good, not the best, as again I don't believe that looking for a better move after finding a good one is a wise use of your time.
You don't spend any time. I don't think that searching for something that probably isn't there is a good use of time. If there is a reason to think that there may be a winning tactic then search to your heart's content but if there isn't then just spend your time on finding a good strategic move. Note that I said good, not the best, as again I don't believe that looking for a better move after finding a good one is a wise use of your time.
Makes sense. Thanks.
One analogy would be how people are often NOT MINDFUL and "speed read" or skim through stuff ... if your brain is attentive/conditioned AND knows the words/patterns well enough, you'd slam the brakes if something was fishy. If you can't do that naturally, you can always train to be more mindful of patterns that emerge.
For instance, try reading these 3 groups of sentences just once.
three blind mice
see how they run
a bird in the
the hand is worth
two in the bush
how many woodchucks can
a woodchuck chuck if a
woodchuck could chuck wood
Case 1 : A young child or a "just learning english" adult would slowly move past one word at a time and not be sure if the word/grammar was even correct or not .. he's too focused on just spelling it and getting to the next one => Rank Beginner in chess.
Case 2 : a older child (or an adult with *some* experience) would read this in a cinch ... and most of them would shrug their shoulders if you asked them "AFTER" they read it IF they saw anything wrong in what they read ==> This would be your average casual chess players who are often oblivious to missed tactical opportunities for them and/or their opponent.
Case 3 : An OCD editor of a newspaper (highly trained to spot oddities, mistakes, anomalies) would slam his/her brain's "brakes" on the second sentence and spot the mistake in a heart-beat. They may not immediately see the actual error, but something of a spider-sense will tingle and they'll feel a mistake in there somewhere.==> No different than a tactically trained chess player who's burned enough patterns and deliberately practiced in a "mindful" (fully focussed, concentrating on getting better at spotting things, making an effort to make less mistakes each time) manner to get good at slamming his brakes.
Many an author/research journal goes over this chunking idea but this is a very common behavior of an EXPERT in any field ... they sense that things are wrong even before they know WHAT is wrong. My own mentor in software engineering can spend less than a minute looking at my 1000 line-code review and zero in on an area that "smells" bad and in a few seconds, will tell me what was wrong. This is NOT magic, nor is it some God given talent that he's this fast.
So it's really not a question of time taken to search. It's conditioning your brain for that light-bulb moment when the TACTICAL PATTERN jumps out of the board for to you SEE IT.
In order to get that good, you have to first get decent, meaning practice a ton of basic 1-3 ply single or double-motif tactics (The famous Bain Tactics book, or levels 10,20 or 30 of CT.ART etc.) and then gradually work out the more complex problems requiring longer calculation (which has diminishing returns unless you can solve the easier problems in less than a second!)
Shivsky;
I now suspect age has something to do with it. Mental reflexes probably slow down just like everything else (I'm past my 70th birthday). I must have read over the sentences 3 or 4 times before I noticed the double "the".
Now, if I read you correctly, you are agreeing with Ghost_of_P_M. If the pattern doesn't jump out at you, then don't spend a lot of time looking for a tactic unless there is an obvious clue (undefended piece, etc).
Great feedback. Thanks.
Shivsky;
I now suspect age has something to do with it. Mental reflexes probably slow down just like everything else (I'm past my 70th birthday). I must have read over the sentences 3 or 4 times before I noticed the double "the".
Now, if I read you correctly, you are agreeing with Ghost_of_P_M. If the pattern doesn't jump out at you, then don't spend a lot of time looking for a tactic unless there is an obvious clue (undefended piece, etc).
Great feedback. Thanks.
Pretty much ... you can't force your brain to catch all the tactics on the board nor will alloting a ton of time guarantee that you will see it either (unless I told you there was a tactic hiding somewhere! :))
You can however train it to spot common themes / patterns through a lot of practice. Google for NM Dan Heisman's Novice Nook called the Seeds of Tactical Destruction; he suggests a few markers/warning signs to help train your brain to be alert when certain positions (relative piece positions etc.) show up on the board.
Age is proven to slow things a bit (a recent ex-World Champion may grudgingly agree with you) but if you are playing club players (as opposed to Masters), training to spot 1-3 ply tactical shots consistently is more than enough firepower to provide strong competition to your evidently younger opponents.
One analogy would be how people are often NOT MINDFUL and "speed read" or skim through stuff ... if your brain is attentive/conditioned AND knows the words/patterns well enough, you'd slam the brakes if something was fishy. If you can't do that naturally, you can always train to be more mindful of patterns that emerge.
For instance, try reading these 3 groups of sentences just once.
three blind mice
see how they run
a bird in the
the hand is worth
two in the bush
how many woodchucks can
a woodchuck chuck if a
woodchuck could chuck wood
Case 1 : A young child or a "just learning english" adult would slowly move past one word at a time and not be sure if the word/grammar was even correct or not .. he's too focused on just spelling it and getting to the next one => Rank Beginner in chess.
Case 2 : a older child (or an adult with *some* experience) would read this in a cinch ... and most of them would shrug their shoulders if you asked them "AFTER" they read it IF they saw anything wrong in what they read ==> This would be your average casual chess players who are often oblivious to missed tactical opportunities for them and/or their opponent.
Case 3 : An OCD editor of a newspaper (highly trained to spot oddities, mistakes, anomalies) would slam his/her brain's "brakes" on the second sentence and spot the mistake in a heart-beat. They may not immediately see the actual error, but something of a spider-sense will tingle and they'll feel a mistake in there somewhere.==> No different than a tactically trained chess player who's burned enough patterns and deliberately practiced in a "mindful" (fully focussed, concentrating on getting better at spotting things, making an effort to make less mistakes each time) manner to get good at slamming his brakes.
Many an author/research journal goes over this chunking idea but this is a very common behavior of an EXPERT in any field ... they sense that things are wrong even before they know WHAT is wrong. My own mentor in software engineering can spend less than a minute looking at my 1000 line-code review and zero in on an area that "smells" bad and in a few seconds, will tell me what was wrong. This is NOT magic, nor is it some God given talent that he's this fast.
So it's really not a question of time taken to search. It's conditioning your brain for that light-bulb moment when the TACTICAL PATTERN jumps out of the board for to you SEE IT.
In order to get that good, you have to first get decent, meaning practice a ton of basic 1-3 ply single or double-motif tactics (The famous Bain Tactics book, or levels 10,20 or 30 of CT.ART etc.) and then gradually work out the more complex problems requiring longer calculation (which has diminishing returns unless you can solve the easier problems in less than a second!)
Wow, this is so well done. Thanks for posting that.
How long do you search for a tactic during a game? While working the Tactic Trainer, I found myself spending quite a while looking for a tactic that was somewhat deep. Then I realized that unless there were some clues (ie undefended piece, weak back rank, poorly defended King, etc) I would never spend as much time during a game and therefore I probably miss a lot of tatics.
How long do you look if there isn't an obvious tactic?