Here's a thing I have been pondering for a while.

Everyone agrees that basic patterns (double attacks, pins, etc.) are instantly recognizable with enough practice. I think the same holds for the same patterns with one preperatory move (eg. displacing a target before a double attack works). Also, long and difficult combinations will almost never be instantly recognizable, unless you already know the exact position or a really similar one.

When I practice tactics on chesstempo, most problems will have 3+ move solutions. While that's good calculation and visualization practice, I feel my instant recognition isn't improving anymore. Is this ok? I'm also still repeating basic exercises to keep instant recognition on par. What balance should I strike here? Am I approaching this wrongly altogether? Halp!

I have essentially the same concern. Is it a problem that tactics practice turns into calculation practice? And if so, how does one continue to practice tactics and get even better at spotting them?

Fwiw what I've been doing is switched from standard chesstempo problems to blitz ones. Maybe I simply am not high enough in blitz rating but most of the problems seem to still rely mostly on tactics recognition vs. calculation while the standard problems that match my rating certainly involve tactics recognition but often a ton of calculation.

I wish I could find tactics that resembled actual game situations, and not a random mess of pieces splattered about the board. I also wish more tactics would focus on the opening/middle game. Too many tactics are forced mates-in-3 or whatever. That's great but I think knowing what the best 7th move of an opening is is much more helpful for most amateur noobz like me.

ChessTempo's tactics are realistic. They are generated from actual games. chess.com's offering is hilariously bad -- a sloppily curated set of problems with a five-per-day free cap, compared to unlimited tactics on CT.

Here's an assorted selection of 1000-1200 tactics.

http://chesstempo.com/chess-problems/21839
http://chesstempo.com/chess-problems/57461
http://chesstempo.com/chess-problems/97993
http://chesstempo.com/chess-problems/60546
http://chesstempo.com/chess-problems/12394

This isn't the usual solving mode. The panel at the left provides hints, so don't look at it if you want to solve these.

I've done something similar by starting practice at chess.emrald.net. At least it's some fun diversification . I will probably try out chesstempo blitz mode as well.

Rei, I would classify the problems in that list as solvable by recognition. Below are some problems that are mostly calculation practice for me. Would that be true for you as well?

http://chesstempo.com/chess-problems/94454
http://chesstempo.com/chess-problems/74490
http://chesstempo.com/chess-problems/103527

(I know you were replying to ARC, just being curious)

In order: mostly calculation, mostly recognition, mostly calculation.

Chess.com absolutely blows compared to ChessTempo.

As for the rest of the thread - This has me once again questioning implementing blitz into my routine or not. I'm always in time trouble because I'm over calculating and not trusting my intuition. Do any more experienced players have any input on this? I mean, I use my clock wisely as in ...most of it. The simple fact is though that in today's faster time control games, being behind on time means having to attack and win via checkmate if there is no or only a five second increment or delay. That said, I typically answer the standard CT questions correctly in about the same time as the average if not somewhat faster. Should I work in some CT blitz and some online blitz vs other players to increase my intuition so I can calculate less? I'm already playing 15/0's but am concerned about playing 3/0 and 5/0 as I don't want to go too far the other way and stop calculating properly in long time control games ...which is what I'm most concerned about performing in.

You're more likely to run into this problem with 15-minute games than with 3- and 5-minute games, actually. 15-minute games exist in a sort of hybrid zone where you can calculate variations -- just not thoroughly, or anything close. So you can get into the habit of sloppy "pseudo-calculation".

Blitz is a different animal altogether. You can calculate sometimes, but you're mostly going to be playing moves on a "this looks right" basis (blunder-checking shouldn't be mistaken for calculation). You won't be using a bastardized version of your long-game thought process.

Or by way of analogy: if playing 15-minute games is like playing basketball by shooting a volleyball into a 9' rim, playing blitz is like chucking a Nerf ball into a rim hung up on the back of a door.

But . . . blitz draws heavily on intuition, knowledge, and pattern recognition. If yours are at a 1400 (or lower) level, I don't see what you'll be practicing other than making moves quickly under time duress. So if that's what you want to practice, go for it.

ChessTempo's blitz mode isn't particularly useful.

Interesting perspective on all of this. Thanks.

15/0 is definitely kind of a hybrid but that's why I like rapid chess TC's. We're going to have a somewhat sound opening and then we pretty much have to make longterm decisions quickly and it's a race to the other guy's king. It's helping me with attacking chess quite a bit. Quite a bit.

I might just make it my little niche speciality outside of classic time controls. Let's be honest: Rapid chess is more and more common in "standard" tournaments in the USCF these days. I think focusing more on just rapid and standard would benefit me well but ...I can certainly see where a touch of blitz would have it's place now and then, especially when constructing opening repertoire's right before tournaments.

edit: One thing I forgot to mention regarding blitz tactics on CT - I don't see how these are more beneficial than playing blitz and rapid against other, higher rated players. I think the true strength of CT lies in forcing you to spend the time calculating and visualizing standard problems until you finally see them. Repetition of this process is what seems to lead to rapid recognition of these same patterns in OTB games. Being 33 years old and just starting out a few months ago like this, I've recongized that I need to work much, much harder than everyone else at tactics. It started out as my weakness so I want to turn it into my strength. Thus far, ChessTempo has been a godsend in the tactical department. I don't see how I could possibly catch up without it or something just like it. Anyone trying to seriously improve who is using the tools on Chess.com instead of ChessTempo is honestly missing out severely, IMHO. ChessTempo + ICC + Stockfish 6 + Game Databases + Book Study. That's the system I'm utilizing right now.

Thanks to this thread, I started using Chess Tempo for the first time a few weeks ago. So far, I really like it. I mainly do blitz tactics, but from what I can tell so far it's pretty dang challenging.

It's an amazing site and an absolute must have for anyone looking to seriously improve.

Do you use Stockfish? Have you figured out how to intergrate it with CT's database yet?

I do use Stockfish, but haven't tried integrating it with CT yet. So far I just click on the PGN link on CT and paste it into Chessbase.

I just paid for CT gold or whatever and it shows the best 4 lines with analysis. Also, even before that the comments sections often cover the crucial lines that may be hard to spot.

If you go into your settings and set up Stockfish as your engine, you'll be able to use the game database as a sort of GUI on steroids. You can play against Stockfish, open up any game in the database and play against Stockfish from any point in that game, and all around do more work on opening variations than I have seen capable on anything else that's this affordable.

The best tactics book IMO is Back to Basics Tactics by Dan Heisman. Most of the sections are separated by themes, but he has one long section with no hints at the end of the book. His choice of positions is extremely practical, and it's not just a puzzle book(ala Reinfeld etc.) he has plenty of commentary and explanation.

After I worked through the book, I've seen some of the same positions several times in my games.

Meh...not a huge fan of Dan Heisman. If you ask me, I don't think he's really in touch with the way chess is played today. He's past his prime, to say the least.

When he does ANY game analysis, every other sentence he utters is "and the engine says". The man is simply incapable of analyzing a position without an engine at this point. Definitely not the kind of education I need. I have Stockfish 6 for that.

What do you mean by "the way chess is played today"?

Heisman's "Novice Nook" series is brilliant. I don't think it's possible for an informed opinion to express the contrary.

I mean, you act as if I'm the only person on earth who isn't a fan of Dan Heisman. I can assure you, I'm not alone.

I just don't like his series. Of all the video series made on ICC, his is by far the least beneficial. As much respect as I have for someone who reaches the title of National Master in the USCF, we really are talking about someone who's light years behind a FIDE FM or GM. I know a guy from the chess club who got to 2200 playing nothing but 35/5's. I'm sorry but that's not someone who's on the level of chess understanding as an FM or GM.

As for an informed opinion: Honestly, you have to realize that outside of the US, Dan Heisman isn't studied very much at all. People study endgames, My System, and tactical work these days. Dan's dull, boring lectures about what Stockfish said the best move is are just next to useless in comparison.

Didn't know that, I appreciate the tip. Thank you.

No worries. Enjoy. CT is, by far, my favorite website right now.

Leaving aside the dick waving why is Dan Heisman bad? Reading his stuff has improved me to where I am now. The fact that he uses stockfish makes him more professional, not less. The trick is interpreting the numbers stockfish throws at you correctly and to know when they matter and when they dont. In fact my biggest criticism towards Silman is that he looks down on computer analysis.

My chess coach is a FM and he is awful at coaching. Reading Heisman stuff is 10 times more helpful.

If Heisman is bad post just one example of his advice hurting intermediate players please.

Hi Judit!


btw WC, this argument only started because

is different from

Btw this is a good thread to show your chess skills http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/14...ition-1529272/

Fight, gogogogogogo!

Part of the forum rules are not to respect Dan Heisman. I have my opinion on him and that's fair. I'm not the only one who doesn't follow his material. If you think he's helping you guys out and you love him, good for you.

There was never a reason for an argument.

You havent said a good reason why he isnt good though. You pointed out his rating and the fact that he uses stockfish. Both arguments were refuted by me.

If you are looking to improve at chess you should at least listen to what other players say.