Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Chess

Joined
Oct 26, 2016
Messages
1,898
Puzzles are kind of bullshit - especially the chess.com ones. I prefer the lichess ones. However my main complaint with puzzles is that you get penalized for a good, or an OK move - and you don't get penalized for a very bad move. No, you *have* to make the perfect move and get rated on that. This is a dumb way to train. You will progress much quicker in pretty much everything by just making lots of small improvements. I also prefer Lichess because its puzzles from real games.

You missed the point (intentionally or otherwise). You probably never find the optimal move in a real game, however you insist on practing this way. In no sense are you presented with this situation in a real game, knowing that theres a perfect forcing continuation.
Therefore, as I said, its more effective to practice making good moves, not just perfect.

I disagree, it happens frequently in practical games that I find the best move. It happens even more often that I find a good move (2nd or third best option etc). The problem are those times when the move was utter shit. The frequency and severity of those errors is what influences the outcome of the game the most. Finding the best move in a given position is a skill like any other and can be trained like any other skill. if you train to find the best move, you will get better at finding the best move. Shocking.

There's a deeper truth to my point that you aren't understanding. I'm assuming (from your judgment) you are not a titled player.

If you are a higher titled player then maybe that's effective to always seek the perfect move. However I bet most times if you analyse your game where you did make the best move (and I too, often do make the best move), you will notice there is a horizon effect. While you and I may play "best" moves sometimes we often completely and utterly miss the point behind that move.

Now this "perfect" move you play is a bit delusional a claim because often its simple luck if you pull it off. Usually a perfect move is only presented in 2 situations. 1) a book move, 2) a simple tactical solution.

In a real game, its not always clear *if* there is a best move. Its totally suboptimal to waste time searching for the perfect move when there is none. In these positions you must try to find some kind of plan and play a move that works according to the plan (i.e. a good move).

Yes, yes, I realize puzzles are for improving calculation. And here is my gripe with this kind of isolation training. Its often not realistic. Which is, as I said, why I prefer lichess puzzles. But even then, if I get a +2 or a +2.5 from a move WHO CARES in real life? Its still a good move, especially if under time constraints.

... you train "puzzles" exactly to separate solutions from common sense moves. If you don't do that you lose your ability to actually calculate forced moves. If you keep making "good" moves you fall into the first and largest chess trap: stereotyped play. Chess is always concrete. Of course stereotyped play has its merit and should be employed in thinking and execution. But to reduce your play to it is limiting and will lead to stagnation.

Not sure where you came up with this idea, or why you think that way. Perhaps you are a beginner and if so then yes, do chess tactical puzzles. Indeed some tactical training is essential for everyone, to avoid blunders.

Compared to your idea, my reasoning about training with puzzles is pretty well established, and perhaps better explained by someone else like GM Igor Smirnov https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/2ha1ep/tactical_puzzles_do_they_help/

Theres other training methods that help develop calculation strength. I recommend something like this https://chessfox.com/improve-chess-tactics/

Anyway, there are some interesting studies done on chess calculation with some surprising findings (citation needed)!
 

coldcrow

Prophet
Patron
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
1,649
Okay, there is something of a language barrier and laziness in explanation on my part here.
1st: I have around 2250 elo, so not really a beginner
2nd: With "puzzles" I do not mean the usual stuff printed in books for ages. What is important is for example knowledge of motives and training in general thinking techniques (clear abstraction, no re-caclulating and so on and forth). For example Polgars 2 huge books (middlegames/endgames) contain a wealth of typical structures which are good study now and then.
3rd: still doing puzzles now and then is exactly good for training calculation as a skill, which was my main point. To clearly picture variants in your mind and solve them in short time. That is a very valuable skill.
 
Joined
Oct 26, 2016
Messages
1,898
Okay, there is something of a language barrier and laziness in explanation on my part here.
1st: I have around 2250 elo, so not really a beginner
2nd: With "puzzles" I do not mean the usual stuff printed in books for ages. What is important is for example knowledge of motives and training in general thinking techniques (clear abstraction, no re-caclulating and so on and forth). For example Polgars 2 huge books (middlegames/endgames) contain a wealth of typical structures which are good study now and then.
3rd: still doing puzzles now and then is exactly good for training calculation as a skill, which was my main point. To clearly picture variants in your mind and solve them in short time. That is a very valuable skill.

I see. By "puzzles" I am referring to those on Chess.com and Lichess, just by doing loads and loads of these is not really all that great a way to improve.
Often these puzzles are doing many dumb things like just for example, e.g. I make a move and get 4.7+ in position, but NO puzzle says theres a 5.2+ better move. This is really unrealistic way to learn.
 

coldcrow

Prophet
Patron
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
1,649
Today's game was another shining example of his refusal to actually win more games. I mean, spending 1h in a known position on a logical move. WTF. This guy better not qualify, MC will just destroy him.
 

Chunkyman

Augur
Joined
Dec 8, 2013
Messages
159
Grischuk lost on tiebreaks in the 2012(?) Candidates and is 3-time Blitz World Champion, I think he's a lot more dangerous than people are giving him credit for even though he's drawn all of his games so far.
 

and 8 others

Savant
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
128
Holy shit, this banter blitz match between Carlsen and Firouzja was intense.

Firouzja is going to be a force to contend with in the coming years.
 

Doktor Best

Arcane
Joined
Feb 2, 2015
Messages
2,849
After only 2,5 hours more tactics puzzles 2500 has been breached.


A milestone in the history of Chess. I will be working on the 2600, problem is of course the higher the rating the harder the puzzles become.

Did you go into the puzzles as complete beginner or did you have prior experience? How did you start at 800?

I'm currently trying to get into chess as a complete rookie. Reading Yasser Seirawans "Beginning Chess Tactics" right now, which does a good job teaching the basics of tactics as far as i can tell. I'm not even on 1k puzzle rating on chess.com though with about 200 puzzles tried.
 
Last edited:

VentilatorOfDoom

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2009
Messages
8,600
Location
Deutschland
Did you go into the puzzles as complete beginner or did you have prior experience? How did you start at 800?
800 is probably the starter rating the site gives you. I have close to 2000 DWZ (deutsche wertzahl) which required years of study and practice to reach, so I'm definitely not a beginner.
 

Country_Gravy

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 24, 2004
Messages
3,406
Location
Up Yours
Wasteland 2
After only 2,5 hours more tactics puzzles 2500 has been breached.


A milestone in the history of Chess. I will be working on the 2600, problem is of course the higher the rating the harder the puzzles become.

Did you go into the puzzles as complete beginner or did you have prior experience? How did you start at 800?

I'm currently trying to get into chess as a complete rookie. Reading Yasser Seirawans "Beginning Chess Tactics" right now, which does a good job teaching the basics of tactics as far as i can tell. I'm not even on 1k puzzle rating on chess.com though with about 200 puzzles tried.
Keep at it, bro. Chess is great if you like to learn shit and compete. Even if you suck, it's still fun to keep getting better even in small increments. It's the best turn based combat ever invented.

Computers are starting to ruin it for the people that actually can attempt to solve the puzzle of the 64 squares. For you and me, we have infinite progress to make. It's awesome.
 

Burning Bridges

Enviado de meu SM-G3502T usando Tapatalk
Joined
Apr 21, 2006
Messages
27,562
Location
Tampon Bay
Do Americans always talk shit the whole time when they are playing? It's perfectly possible to play chess without constantly bragging about your play like a jackass.
 

abnaxus

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Dec 31, 2010
Messages
10,849
Location
Fiernes


QONVIyz.gif
 

coldcrow

Prophet
Patron
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
1,649
And today there are: MC, Judit, Grischuk and Gustafson as board technician.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom