Comments on: Concentrating on easier tactics problems http://www.eddins.net/steve/chess/2007/05/19/86 Fri, 03 Dec 2010 15:41:19 -0500 hourly 1 By: Steve http://www.eddins.net/steve/chess/2007/05/19/86/comment-page-1#comment-1221 Steve Mon, 21 May 2007 12:43:19 +0000 http://www.eddins.net/steve/chess/2007/05/19/86#comment-1221 Thanks for your comments, BDK. I'll have to give the Fritz attack training and check training modes a try. Thanks for your comments, BDK. I’ll have to give the Fritz attack training and check training modes a try.

]]> By: Blue Devil Knight http://www.eddins.net/steve/chess/2007/05/19/86/comment-page-1#comment-1209 Blue Devil Knight Sun, 20 May 2007 05:25:42 +0000 http://www.eddins.net/steve/chess/2007/05/19/86#comment-1209 I think this is a great point. Recently I've vastly simplified my thinking during games, making it a priority to look at checks, captures, and threats first. And by threats, I mean simple one-move tactics such as fork, skewer, etc.. I try not to let myself think about more complicated stuff until I'm sure my candidate moves can survive this basic tactical evaluation. It has simplified my thinking in games (no more 10 minutes spent thinking about pawn structure: I allow only quick thinks when it comes to quiet positions), made the games more fun, fewer embarassing losses (though I'll always have embarassing losses I'm sure). Because of this, I'm really glad I am using Chess Tactics for Beginners for my tactical vision training. Also, right before my T45 league game, I review about 30 'easy' problems from CTB, and then go through the Fritz 'attack training' and 'check training', which really puts me in the mindset of looking out for simple tactics first, sexy combinations second. Today I won a game because my opponent responded to a threat of losing a single pawn, but didn't see that I was about to go up a piece plus the exchange using a simple discovered attack! Those are the kinds of mistakes I'm trying to avoid. Those are the kinds of mistakes that decide most of my slow games, and all of my blitz games. My reasoning when I started this was, "Hey beginners start by learning simple mates and one-move tactics in their books and puzzle software, maybe I should reorient my thinking in real games to look for simple stuff first, and once it becomes second-nature to do that, I will be more disposed to build vision for the higher-level stuff." -A very long winded BDK. PS I'll be very curious to see what you think of Heisman's book, and especially whether he includes a good number of counting problems (they are the hardest of all tactical problems to find in puzzle collections, so I am always on the lookout for more). I think this is a great point. Recently I’ve vastly simplified my thinking during games, making it a priority to look at checks, captures, and threats first. And by threats, I mean simple one-move tactics such as fork, skewer, etc.. I try not to let myself think about more complicated stuff until I’m sure my candidate moves can survive this basic tactical evaluation. It has simplified my thinking in games (no more 10 minutes spent thinking about pawn structure: I allow only quick thinks when it comes to quiet positions), made the games more fun, fewer embarassing losses (though I’ll always have embarassing losses I’m sure).

Because of this, I’m really glad I am using Chess Tactics for Beginners for my tactical vision training.

Also, right before my T45 league game, I review about 30 ‘easy’ problems from CTB, and then go through the Fritz ‘attack training’ and ‘check training’, which really puts me in the mindset of looking out for simple tactics first, sexy combinations second. Today I won a game because my opponent responded to a threat of losing a single pawn, but didn’t see that I was about to go up a piece plus the exchange using a simple discovered attack! Those are the kinds of mistakes I’m trying to avoid. Those are the kinds of mistakes that decide most of my slow games, and all of my blitz games.

My reasoning when I started this was, “Hey beginners start by learning simple mates and one-move tactics in their books and puzzle software, maybe I should reorient my thinking in real games to look for simple stuff first, and once it becomes second-nature to do that, I will be more disposed to build vision for the higher-level stuff.”

-A very long winded BDK.

PS I’ll be very curious to see what you think of Heisman’s book, and especially whether he includes a good number of counting problems (they are the hardest of all tactical problems to find in puzzle collections, so I am always on the lookout for more).

]]>