Take a little advice from your cat...and chill. Rest in the sun, chase a bird or two, have a drink. You don't have nine lives, just the one; enjoy it! ;0)
Tactics Trainer and you
Sort:
2 and 4: agree.
3: shorter is not better. Also not in training. Top GMs regularly prefer the safest and easiest path to win over shorter, but more unclear and complicated possibilities. They know what their human strengths are as opposed to chess engine strengths.
kdlittle88 wrote:
There seems to be a growing trend on this site that I don't understand and frankly frustrates the heck out of me so I thought I'd throw these out regarding the tactics trainer and other tools.
1) Nobody cares that you solved a puzzle in x seconds or that you have x rating. It is a setup position from a game that you didn't play in where a tactic not only exists but is telling you it's right there waiting, and more than likely will not see that exact position in hundreds if not thousands of games. Real games don't tell you when a tactic is waiting.
2) Nobody cares that you are "first" or on the first page. All that means is you happened to be awake and on the site at the time it was submitted, not that you are any better or faster than anyone.
3) Yes it does matter that the provided mate in 3 is better than your suggested mate in 5. In an over the board game either solution should be enough to get your opponent to resign. It's not about winning a game nor debating multiple solutions, it's about honing tactical accuracy.
4) If you offer an alternate solution and complain that the puzzle is wrong or bad or whatever, you probably should engine check your analysis before providing erroneous solutions and complaining that your analysis is superior to the already computer checked solution. There are plenty of free and quite strong chess engines to check your analysis, not to mention a built-in computer to actually practice the problem against. (This doesn't count "broken" problems)
When you use the tactics trainer, (or the puzzle of the day) it is a tool for us to improve our tactical vision. The rating is only so you can judge your improvement. Just because you can solve a problem where the tactic has been provided doesn't mean that a) you will spot that over the board in a live game and more to the point b) you can actually play good enough chess to get to that position in the first place.
If I had a dollar for every chessplayer who could solve tactics like a whiz from a book or whatever but couldn't play a complete game to save their life...
Notice one thing... you never, and I mean NEVER see a master or titled player do these things. Why? Nothing to prove because they have already proved it with their actions by beating players over the board.
We are all both good and bad chess players... it's all relative to who we are playing.
Who's with me?
whats it say
There seems to be a growing trend on this site that I don't understand and frankly frustrates the heck out of me so I thought I'd throw these out regarding the tactics trainer and other tools.
1) Nobody cares that you solved a puzzle in x seconds or that you have x rating. It is a setup position from a game that you didn't play in where a tactic not only exists but is telling you it's right there waiting, and more than likely will not see that exact position in hundreds if not thousands of games. Real games don't tell you when a tactic is waiting.
2) Nobody cares that you are "first" or on the first page. All that means is you happened to be awake and on the site at the time it was submitted, not that you are any better or faster than anyone.
3) Yes it does matter that the provided mate in 3 is better than your suggested mate in 5. In an over the board game either solution should be enough to get your opponent to resign. It's not about winning a game nor debating multiple solutions, it's about honing tactical accuracy.
4) If you offer an alternate solution and complain that the puzzle is wrong or bad or whatever, you probably should engine check your analysis before providing erroneous solutions and complaining that your analysis is superior to the already computer checked solution. There are plenty of free and quite strong chess engines to check your analysis, not to mention a built-in computer to actually practice the problem against. (This doesn't count "broken" problems)
When you use the tactics trainer, (or the puzzle of the day) it is a tool for us to improve our tactical vision. The rating is only so you can judge your improvement. Just because you can solve a problem where the tactic has been provided doesn't mean that a) you will spot that over the board in a live game and more to the point b) you can actually play good enough chess to get to that position in the first place.
If I had a dollar for every chessplayer who could solve tactics like a whiz from a book or whatever but couldn't play a complete game to save their life...
Notice one thing... you never, and I mean NEVER see a master or titled player do these things. Why? Nothing to prove because they have already proved it with their actions by beating players over the board.
We are all both good and bad chess players... it's all relative to who we are playing.
Who's with me?