I don't know about that. Thought it was derogatory remark about tactics. I only do tactics were i have to think. Never tried puzzle rush. Don't know about patterns But when i do hard tactics the other easier stuff improves too without knowing the patterns.
Studying the Reti opening ? A lesson in transposition, which makes opening study difficult for everyone.
Here's the first five moves of a Reti Opening- transposed game.
Reti-Opening; English Opening; Anglo-Indian Defense; King's Knight Variation; English Opening; Anglo- Indian Defense; Old Indian Defense; Normal Variation; Rare Defense.... Who knew? :] - lichess.org/study/p1BYy3H8/lRznwsij#9
Here's the first five moves of a Reti Opening- transposed game.
Reti-Opening; English Opening; Anglo-Indian Defense; King's Knight Variation; English Opening; Anglo- Indian Defense; Old Indian Defense; Normal Variation; Rare Defense.... Who knew? :] - lichess.org/study/p1BYy3H8/lRznwsij#9
#100
Well, to strike a reasonable balance I feel like a 2300 blitz and bullet player on this website should get about 35 on puzzle rush as their highest score, and should regularly hit 30+
2100 should get minimum of about 33 top puzzle rush score and regularly get to high 20s and sometimes cross 30, or he will feel lack of tactical skill VS fast aggressive opponents.
I have noticed that some players are rather good at tactics, getting high 30s on puzzle rush, but know nothing of openings and probably are not great in positional and phycological stuff (nerves, concentration etc.) and thus their rating still suffers because of that.
While on the other side of the extreme someone like myself, a late starter adult, is suffering tactically, I feel like literally EVERY opponent I play these days (usually 2100-2300) is better than me at tactics. My best puzzle rush is 32, and regularly I get about 28. Today I almost hit 2300 blitz here, and I clearly felt lack of tactical skill. It’s really obvious. But I can stay even with my current opponents due to other aspects of the game that I do a little better (namely Sargon’s favorite clock bashing! LOL, I’m fast... it saved my butt many times in hopeless positions)
Adults and late starters will be behind in simple tactics always, while kids will do better at tactics and worse at opening repertoire and tricks (flagging, shuffling pieces to neutral safe squares without any purpose just to put pressure on the opponent’s clock etc.)
Well, to strike a reasonable balance I feel like a 2300 blitz and bullet player on this website should get about 35 on puzzle rush as their highest score, and should regularly hit 30+
2100 should get minimum of about 33 top puzzle rush score and regularly get to high 20s and sometimes cross 30, or he will feel lack of tactical skill VS fast aggressive opponents.
I have noticed that some players are rather good at tactics, getting high 30s on puzzle rush, but know nothing of openings and probably are not great in positional and phycological stuff (nerves, concentration etc.) and thus their rating still suffers because of that.
While on the other side of the extreme someone like myself, a late starter adult, is suffering tactically, I feel like literally EVERY opponent I play these days (usually 2100-2300) is better than me at tactics. My best puzzle rush is 32, and regularly I get about 28. Today I almost hit 2300 blitz here, and I clearly felt lack of tactical skill. It’s really obvious. But I can stay even with my current opponents due to other aspects of the game that I do a little better (namely Sargon’s favorite clock bashing! LOL, I’m fast... it saved my butt many times in hopeless positions)
Adults and late starters will be behind in simple tactics always, while kids will do better at tactics and worse at opening repertoire and tricks (flagging, shuffling pieces to neutral safe squares without any purpose just to put pressure on the opponent’s clock etc.)
@Skittle-Head #102
That's the problem with reti, english, 1. d4 and not 2. c4 openings. One plays these openings well, if he knows a little bit about the mainline stuff and when transpositions are favorable. They're openings for players who have settled their playing strength and maintain it now with a rather narrow repertoire.
In your game white plays a position, which he could have reached via 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 Either he knows some lines or he should play something else.
That's the problem with reti, english, 1. d4 and not 2. c4 openings. One plays these openings well, if he knows a little bit about the mainline stuff and when transpositions are favorable. They're openings for players who have settled their playing strength and maintain it now with a rather narrow repertoire.
In your game white plays a position, which he could have reached via 1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 Either he knows some lines or he should play something else.
@Kusokosla Thanks for the reply.
My top PR score is 30 and I hit 25-28 daily (1 go per day) but openings are my weakest area and probably hold me back a lot especially at faster controls. (I'm 1800+ blitz here, 1600 bullet.) This is backed up by the lichess insights. When I do play in familiar structures my win rate can go up by as much as 20% over less familiar ones.
My top PR score is 30 and I hit 25-28 daily (1 go per day) but openings are my weakest area and probably hold me back a lot especially at faster controls. (I'm 1800+ blitz here, 1600 bullet.) This is backed up by the lichess insights. When I do play in familiar structures my win rate can go up by as much as 20% over less familiar ones.
Thats funny i dont study openings and my punishment rate of blunders is highest in the opening.
#105
That is a nice puzzle rush score, it seems you would make a significant jump in rating on here if you got an opening repertoire. Remember, not openings study, but specifically opening repertoire. Meaning you know one line against everything, but you must know the line deeply.
You can use Alburt’s black book for your black repertoire, but it’s very positional and lacks some sidelines by white, but it also teaches you positional chess basics, it’s a really really great book. The white book isn’t even close. Ginger GM is just the best at teaching opening repertoire, he is the man. Another good choice is “My first Opening Repertoire” by Vincent Moret. I’m sure there are other good options out there.
You know what it is about opening prep? When you know the first dozen or even two dozen moves you will find that it places massive pressure on your opponent, he will spend time, AND get not the best positions, positions that he doesn’t know, but you do know... You will then find that 2000-2300 players make terrible blunders all the time because they are in an unfamiliar territory, it’s really interesting, a 2200 player smashes people easily when he is comfortable, but when you know the opening line and he doesn’t he makes beginner blunders!
I’ll give you a quick example: in Jobova London (as white you play d4, Nc3, Bf4, e3) I had many, I mean probably hundreds, of opponents play Nc6 as black and lose instantly to a Nb5 trick (hits c7), it’s absolutely amazing how many people fall for this, 2400 lost to me that way, as did many 2300s. It’s like having a fast serve in Tennis, you may not be as good a player as your opponent, but when you serve an ace he can’t return it, so you catch up to him. And if your opponent is about the same level as you, you will win due to your fast serve.
That is a nice puzzle rush score, it seems you would make a significant jump in rating on here if you got an opening repertoire. Remember, not openings study, but specifically opening repertoire. Meaning you know one line against everything, but you must know the line deeply.
You can use Alburt’s black book for your black repertoire, but it’s very positional and lacks some sidelines by white, but it also teaches you positional chess basics, it’s a really really great book. The white book isn’t even close. Ginger GM is just the best at teaching opening repertoire, he is the man. Another good choice is “My first Opening Repertoire” by Vincent Moret. I’m sure there are other good options out there.
You know what it is about opening prep? When you know the first dozen or even two dozen moves you will find that it places massive pressure on your opponent, he will spend time, AND get not the best positions, positions that he doesn’t know, but you do know... You will then find that 2000-2300 players make terrible blunders all the time because they are in an unfamiliar territory, it’s really interesting, a 2200 player smashes people easily when he is comfortable, but when you know the opening line and he doesn’t he makes beginner blunders!
I’ll give you a quick example: in Jobova London (as white you play d4, Nc3, Bf4, e3) I had many, I mean probably hundreds, of opponents play Nc6 as black and lose instantly to a Nb5 trick (hits c7), it’s absolutely amazing how many people fall for this, 2400 lost to me that way, as did many 2300s. It’s like having a fast serve in Tennis, you may not be as good a player as your opponent, but when you serve an ace he can’t return it, so you catch up to him. And if your opponent is about the same level as you, you will win due to your fast serve.
I have a repertoire but it is extremely patchy. At it’s best I have certain openings where I can do exactly as you say and almost immediately get a middle game position on the board. This is usually based around familiarity with the structures but in other openings these are concrete mainline variations. This is probably only 20% of my repertoire at a guess, could be less.
In other openings I go for playable off-beat lines where I can ‘get a game’ this is OK, but both players are in a similar position – there’s no advantage but it’s neutral ground.
Then there are the openings/variations where I just have to go by general principles as I’ve either not studied the opening or I can’t decide what I want to play in it etc. These are where I can be on the backfoot.
Openings I just find are a massive blackhole and something that seems to me to be a lifetime of constantly re-adjusting and tweaking until you find openings that best fit your playing style I don’t know. I also just dislike studying the opening in most cases, but that’s just something I have to get over. The thing is it seems that in some openings you can succeed by knowing structures or in memorising a few mainlines that crop up all the time, but in others there are multiple nuances and many variations you have to be able to handle and this seems like far too much work for the return that could best be spent elsewhere.
(Earier I said 1600 bullet, that's also 1800 I forgot.)
In other openings I go for playable off-beat lines where I can ‘get a game’ this is OK, but both players are in a similar position – there’s no advantage but it’s neutral ground.
Then there are the openings/variations where I just have to go by general principles as I’ve either not studied the opening or I can’t decide what I want to play in it etc. These are where I can be on the backfoot.
Openings I just find are a massive blackhole and something that seems to me to be a lifetime of constantly re-adjusting and tweaking until you find openings that best fit your playing style I don’t know. I also just dislike studying the opening in most cases, but that’s just something I have to get over. The thing is it seems that in some openings you can succeed by knowing structures or in memorising a few mainlines that crop up all the time, but in others there are multiple nuances and many variations you have to be able to handle and this seems like far too much work for the return that could best be spent elsewhere.
(Earier I said 1600 bullet, that's also 1800 I forgot.)
Openings are one area where I think online blitz really comes into its own. If you want to learn something new and a bit sharp, you can just play it regularly, get hammered a few times, go look at the game afterwards and get one move deeper, and then in not too long you have developed a basic competence in that opening and have fallen into all the standard traps.
Tactics trainers or things like puzzle rush are (in my opinion) not that helpful beyond a certain level (although to be fair maybe I feel that because I am naturally inclined towards tactics and so have never felt that my chess was being held back by tactical weaknesses) Puzzle rush places an emphasis on speed of move in a position where you know there is a tactic, and so once you see what the move 'ought' to be you can play it without further analysis, but in a real game you need to check and double check that a tactic is sound.
Tactics trainers or things like puzzle rush are (in my opinion) not that helpful beyond a certain level (although to be fair maybe I feel that because I am naturally inclined towards tactics and so have never felt that my chess was being held back by tactical weaknesses) Puzzle rush places an emphasis on speed of move in a position where you know there is a tactic, and so once you see what the move 'ought' to be you can play it without further analysis, but in a real game you need to check and double check that a tactic is sound.
Before i start playing the ginger way i probably use a database myself. The alburt Isn't it already antique? I only know his puzzle book were talked esoterically of 50 basic positions gms know. Sounded like bull but long time i might remember it incorrectly. Cm how can you say something like that? I bet with gm tactical skill you would easily be fm.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.