Your post is not rude but allow me a counterpoint if you will. What you say is true of course. Take it for what value it is. Why is the rating even important? (not to mention "timer" - why is that important really?) Perhaps I am not at your level but having said the above, I use Tactic Trainer twice a day five days a week (really not just talking here, really use it as a process and as a learning system) and I have improved a lot in the two years I have been on chess.com and using it. So today is Friday and I have done 90 positions and perhaps 5 of them fit your description. So what? It has changed my entire way of seeing the board. My eyes pick up the situation so much better, so much quicker (timer still meaningless to me but I am quicker) It is a valuable tool. Recently I went back to the "old" books on chess problems I used prior to chess.com. Yes, it was easier by miles. I've learned from tactics trainer. Give it a chance for what it is and not necessarily everything. Maybe again I just wasn't at your level and had more to learn so it helped me quicker. Who knows? Anyway good luck.
Chess.com Tactics a Trainer Terrible Tool
I agree with you especially the timers!!!! why should one be forced to find the right move in just a couple of seconds to get full credir??? that part they can stuff!!!!!
I have had these exact grievances with the system. I'm disappointed, seeing as I only bought diamond membership to get unlimited tactics trainer lessons. I have learned something (mostly what to look for in blitz or bullet games), but for the most part, it just seems bad. It's a bunch of moves from the chess.com database of games extracted into a 2-3 move challenge (sometimes 1 move). And the advantage is not even nearly always obvious, the board analysis might show an advantage 5+ moves down the line.
Considering there is a timer which deducts points for every extra second you take thinking, nobody is going to think, say, 6 moves down the road before moving their piece in the challenge.
They are going to play intuitively and maybe take a guaranteed queen in a fork and mate a few moves later, rather than go for a heroic, movie-esque series of sacrifices to find that Hollywood checkmate in 4.
It's sad, because the Chess Mentor tool itself is actually top notch and as far as I know, unrivalled in the world of chess tutoring online (that is, it's the most comprehensive tool available and there is no real competition, seeing as actual FIDE IM's and GM's are constantly composing new lessons). In comparison, the tactics trainer is just kind of bad.
There appears to be no human touch, it's just all copy & paste with no explanation besides the board analysis button.
I'm going to start posting examples of obvious Chess.com Tactics Trainer flaws to illustrate how bad of a tool it is. Here is a perfect example from one that I just played a few moments ago:
I played Queen to G3 with an intention of mating on H2 next move in this position (note: this position came after Qf3-d5 check, me moving my King from G8 to H8, and then bishop on f5 taking my bishop on c8). But that was wrong according to Tatics Trainer, which instead suggusted Rook A8 takes Bishop on C8.
Why would I want a bishop when I can mate?!?
OOPS - OK. After reading comments from others who did this puzzle, I realized that I missed the problem of pawn takes knight on G4. I forgot that that knight was under direct attack.
I'm going to start posting examples of obvious Chess.com Tactics Trainer flaws to illustrate how bad of a tool it is. Here is a perfect example from one that I just played a few moments ago:
I played Queen to G3 with an intention of mating on H2 next move in this position (note: this position came after Qf3-d5 check, me moving my King from G8 to H8, and then bishop on f5 taking my bishop on c8). But that was wrong according to Tatics Trainer, which instead suggusted Rook A8 takes Bishop on C8.
Why would I want a bishop when I can mate?!?
How was that wrong? So, after you make the move Qg3, what do you do about Bxg4? Black's mate threat has disappeared.
I won't say there are not bad tactics on TT. I haven't used it as much recently as I have in the past but generally speaking, most of the tactics are fine.
If you think you find one that is wrong, try and find out what may be the reason the move given might be right. Then, if you can't figure out why, throw the position into an engine and see what it says. After all that if you are still right, report the tactic and it will likely get modified if there really is a problem.
Please don't take this as an insult because its not meant to be one. You have to learn to walk before you can run. Some of those puzzles are from "master games", and with your ratings, you wouldn't know what to look for. Sometimes, neither do I.
Why would I want a bishop when I can mate?!?
OOPS - OK, after reading comments from others on this puzzle, I realized I missed the problem of pawn takes knight on G4. Forgot that that knight was under direct attack.
hxg4 is wrong due to Qh4#
lolz
bring better examples!
Always suspect a gap in your understanding, before you attempt to trash the problem.
If you wanna run a thread about Tactics Trainer, and police and block TROLLS, that's fine. I think Erik would love it. But don't do it in "Help & Support".
Meanwhile day after day scores of players improve using this device. Isn't that why we have it?
It's a great tool but, the rating system for it is out of wack. It uses a generic and assumed starting point for each puzzle and gets reassigned a rating, based on the failures and solving of it's attempters.
Does the puzzle get inherently harder or easier after someone attempts it, regardless of the result ? No
It needs an intrinsic rating system, based on the inherent difficulty of each puzzle. Another issue is it's one deminsional use as a blitz trainer. There should be a slow rated mode, based on the aforementioned rating system I proposed.
The tool does what it is was intended for, teach you to make better moves in your chess games. The way it twists one's perception of the way it teaches you and how it conveys your progress is what gives the perception that it is so horrible.
I will admit that their are some puzzles that should give credit to users who want a straight forward check, without a bunch of fancy calculation, even if the answer is one move longer. I can move a chess piece twice, amid almost no calculation time, faster than I can think for 2 minutes and make one move. This makes a mockery of the excuse for it's set up that, it is for when you have very little time left in your game.
I have done thousands of puzzle. And even if sometimes I suspected there was some alternative solutions to a position, I was always wrong and the tool was right suggesting the best move.
In your example, you have to take the bishop because if Qg3, white plays Bxg4 and you lost a piece and the mate. Furthermore, you didn't take a free bishop.
I suggest to be more humble and practice more before to claim tactic trainer is bad.
Always suspect a gap in your understanding, before you attempt to trash the problem.
This is wonderful advice, not only for tactics trainer here at chess.com, but for most problems encountered in life.
Thanks defenserulz for a useful post which stimulated a lot of discussion. I have not seen the position in Tactics Trainer, only in your post: but looking at your diagram (just like you) I blundered with 1...Qg3??.
So why did we both make this blunder? Possible reasons:
(a) we are so familiar with this mating pattern (when there is no B on c8 saving White by protecting the Ng4) that we don't check it fully;
(b) we don't notice pieces moving "backwards" as the White Bishop does.
Thanks for posting!
Cheers, David
PS - I have given up on Tactics Trainer because (a) I don't like losing to it and (b) I tend to get much simpler tactics in my games. Having said this I still make simple tactical blunders (false combinations) most recently (and painfully) in http://www.chess.com/echess/game?id=95639346.
First, let me say that I'm a fan of many of the tools here at Chess.com and have benefited from them. However, I feel that the Tactics Trainer tool is quite a bad one.
There are puzzles where the "right" answer is subjective and does not entail mating sequences. It's one thing if there is a checkmate opportunity, but when there isn't one and merely some combination trades, non-forcing sequences, or a situation where a normal player would not even respond a certain way, then I believe tactics trainer is pointless and a bad tool. Worse, is that people get points deducted when failing to answer a puzzle of this sort and this can lead people to either not want to use it or use it trying to find the subjectively "right" answer that the tactics puzzle writer thought up. Yet, this reinforced bad thinking, as it might influence people to think this way in real games.
There are many examples of bad puzzles I could bring up, but just today there was one in which it was a non-mating sequence in which the right move created a sitaution where the computer made a move that likely no one would make (sacking a queen UNECCESARILY). This is not only unrealistic, but is stupid for the person training because we'd never find the "right" move in this situation, given no one would respond the way the computer does.
I've seen a lot of these bad puzzles the past few months and they seem to have gotten worse from just a few months ago. Have there been new writers of puzzles lately?
Apologies beforehand if my post seems at all rude. I am simply venting about a concerned problem I have with the site's trainer tool. It's a frustrating tool to use and may actually harm people's games. I say this to ask for it to be reviewed and possibly changed if appropriate. I would hate to think that Chess.com was actually hurting people's game.