nice!! 
How to Use Logic to Find Wins in Chess (How to find tactics more easily)
Sort:
ghost_of_pushwood wrote:
From what I saw, it just looked to be the usual simplistic, specious stuff (as you might expect, with such a silly title).
So what method do you recommend?
imadarkhorse wrote:
ghost_of_pushwood wrote:
From what I saw, it just looked to be the usual simplistic, specious stuff (as you might expect, with such a silly title).
So what method do you recommend?
You literally criticized without giving anything else better...
Sep 15, 2018
0
#5
Really nothing new, but still a nice video. I would say that #5 and #1 are intertwined. If there are no weaknesses around the king, you need to see if you can create any.
CoolChess01 wrote:
nice!!
Thanks
Sep 15, 2018
0
#7
Good stuff Dylan, I like the systematic approach and simple logic in this
Sep 15, 2018
0
#8
It's a little-known fact that every tactic must begin with a queen sac. This makes some positions easy to analyze, since any position that lacks a queen on the board cannot have any tactics present.
No need to thank me for this little pearl of wisdom...
Sep 15, 2018
0
#9
EscherehcsE wrote:
It's a little-known fact that every tactic must begin with a queen sac. This makes some positions easy to analyze, since any position that lacks a queen on the board cannot have any tactics present.
No need to thank me for this little pearl of wisdom...
not always.
Not every time a tactic needs a queen, you often use knights for forks, rooks for skewers or pins, Bishop for double check or threat, and well... the queen does all of the tactics. Just because you lost your queen doesn’t mean that there is no tactics
Sep 15, 2018
0
#13
KittensOnMe324 wrote:
Not every time a tactic needs a queen, you often use knights for forks, rooks for skewers or pins, Bishop for double check or threat, and well... the queen does all of the tactics. Just because you lost your queen doesn’t mean that there is no tactics
see my example, the previous comment before this
NoRush18 wrote:
Good stuff Dylan, I like the systematic approach and simple logic in this
Thanks but say that to the man who made it himself, I'm just sharing it with you guys
IMBacon wrote:
Really nothing new, but still a nice video. I would say that #5 and #1 are intertwined. If there are no weaknesses around the king, you need to see if you can create any.
Makes sense
Sep 15, 2018
0
#16
I'm continually amazed at how many people here take ridiculous statements seriously.
Sep 15, 2018
0
#17
EscherehcsE wrote:
I'm continually amazed at how many people here take ridiculous statements seriously.
...
Hey dude, thanks for sharing.
hmmm
I just found this video on IM Eric Kislik's YouTube Channel and I think this is the best method for solving tactics that I've seen so far, do you agree?