I've logged alot of hours on chess.com tactics trainer. Being an older age newbie to chess, the timer and my below average rating has at times been frustrating. I often turn the rateing and timer off in the settings which takes the pressure off and my success per puzzle improves. Trying to learn chess and chess tactics under time pressure is just counter-productive unless you're shooting for speed chess. PS: I often turn the setting back just to see if I'm improving...
The old Tactics Trainer timer debate
Sort:
Kijiri wrote:
What is essentially wrong with the tactics trainer system is that the timer is basically the "average" time spent on that problem by all users who have attempted it.
(Please do correct me if I am wrong but that is my impression, obviously if I am mistaken the following point is moot and should be disregarded).
Essentially you should have the time limit (imo) be the average of people getting it correct. So if you look at a problem for 10 secs and guess (and fail) your solving speed doesn't contribute to making the timer lower.
Take for instance the most difficult tactics on Chess Tempo, the avg time of those might be let's say 25 minutes. But when you look at the solvers that get it correct, they usually spend 2-4 hours on it. Furthermore it becomes clear that the timer is flawed when you notice that the problem has a 10-15% pass rate, in other words most people that attempt look at it for 20 minutes, gets pissed, gives up and then guesses.
Personally I have a lot of trouble actually improving my rating on TT on chess.com (partly because I only have 3 problems ;-)). Simply because for training purposes I always attempt to calculate all the way through and even when I calculate fast (in my opinion) I top the score at 50-60% gaining only a few points. To further my point my tactics rating on chess tempo is several hundred points higher than my rating here.
The time limit is the average of people getting it correct. And must be completely correct if there are multiple moves.
If it was everyone I'd expect the timer to be much higher since there would be no force pushing it downwards more so than upwards.
Low pass rates are typically caused by the problems that have multiple moves. It only counts as a pass if the people get all the moves correct, but you still get points and cause the tactics rating to go down if you get, for example 5 out of 6 moves correct. The first 5 might have been very easy while the last was at a 2400 level. You see these 2-3% ones occasionally at the 1100 level for this reason. (The site is not exactly the most well designed.)
The ELO rating system for here and CT are different, so having a higher rating there may not mean much as far as chess knowledge goes.
There's an app for the iPhone that is free and has unlimited tactics. I've gotten much better from that. Took me a while to get used to the idea that I have unlimited time to solve one. Not one person has ever complained that it needs a timer; rather quite a few have said they like it better without one. It's bit flawed, but better than just 3 a day. (Or worst 25/day for the "star" paying users. I don't see the point in paying so much for so little) I don't even understand the point in buying a membership at all. Everything is free somewhere else. Videos are all over the internet. Tactics also exist. ChessMentor can be free (I won't go into that :) and I don't really use anything else. Plus the existing stuff is far too buggy to justify paying for it. Outside of live chess, which is also free because no one would pay for it, this site doesn't have a huge value over other options out there.
Well, I get a pretty backgroud, I guess.
cailleach wrote:
If you want to offer a meaningful contribution, then kindly answer to my question as to why in your opinion, the present system is better than what I propose, and do not just tell me I should not bother. Because that's really for me to decide.
You've contacted staff and nothing has happened. You've posted in the forum and got a less than enthusiastic response. When are you going to decide it's pointless? Many people in this thread have given you reasons why it should stay as it is and while you have answered them it is your own opinion. As I have indicated before, this subject is too ambiguous for either side to be correct and as such there is no reason to change the current system.
TL;DR The post directly above sums it up exactly.
Jun 19, 2013
0
#25
owltuna wrote:
cailleach wrote:
Then again, if I can play and enjoy it more by a small change in the system, why shouldn't I put in some effort?
And everybody else who thinks it works just fine should just do what you want.
Oh come on. This is a discussion. Trying to persuade others of my idea, trying to get an idea why others think differently. Stop being so defensive and instead give me a good reason why the present system is better than mine. You haven't offered any big insights except that a rating is for comparing people, which stays exactly the same in my system.
Jun 19, 2013
0
#26
ground-zero wrote:
When are you going to decide it's pointless?
Whenever I choose to do so. But again. Why do you think the present system is better? To name a subject too ambiguous and then refuse to talk about it... I'm sure you can do a slightly better job at a discussion, no?
Jun 19, 2013
0
#27
owltuna wrote:
I do my best to avoid wrestling with pigs. (That's a metaphor, so don't get your panties in a wad about perceived porcine insults.)
So you're a white dove of peace sitting on the fence of the stockyard, dropping its bird shit outside the actual topic.
Five posts and not one straight to the point.
Jun 19, 2013
0
#28
Is it possible that you are actually feeling insulted by a metaphorical white dove, or where is that strong reaction coming from?
In post #7, as I have said before, you are explaining that a rating is for comparing people (big revelation), and you talk about eliminating the timer which I never even proposed. You never even came close to answering my original question, which is why the current system is better than mine (passing out 0 for a correctly but slowly solved puzzle instead of -10). How about giving that a shot? Straight to the topic instead of trolling?
"Stop being so defensive and instead give me a good reason why the present system is better than mine. You haven't offered any big insights except that a rating is for comparing people, which stays exactly the same in my system."
Maybe that's why no one can find a reason to think your "system" is better. It's the same thing. All you did was change some number over a bit. How can something be better if it's not any different.
Jun 22, 2013
0
#30
Yes, it's not such a big change. But you got it backwards, so far, in my opinion, no one really provided a good reason why the current system is better ;)... I'm finding some, to me, pretty logical reasons why mine is better. Let me reiterate:
- Better balance between right/wrong and slow/fast. In the current system, slow/fast is overrated, you can make a point that it is 5 times more important than right/wrong.
- This better balance means less time stress, leading to less people guessing prematurely, thus taking more time to think, which increases the learning effect for them.
- For some people, mainly online game players like me who like to sit over a board for a long time, less time stress will also mean it's more fun. Note that it does not get less fun for blitzers, things do not really change too much for people who answer the puzzle quick anyway.
- My system makes a difference between a quick mistake (-10) and a mistake after longer deliberation (-15). I find it logical that the timer should also influence your score when you get it wrong, not just when you get it right.
@chessplayer11: Ok, I started replying to everything you said then gave up on you. If you don't mind my curiosity, are you female? I've learnt during the years that there is a gender specific affinity towards logical versus emotional argumentation, that's why...
Well, apparently you haven't learn much then. Where I live males tend to be logical and females tend to be emotional. Since your basic argument is that you don't like the feel of the system, are you female?