NO chess is 98 , 9 % tactic .
How can i post puzzles in the forum Thanks for help and merry Christmas
<Comment deleted by user>
What many people call 'positional' play is actually based on an understanding and anticipation of tactics. Examples: I push the pawn to h3 to prevent the opponent pinning my knight. In other words, an awareness of possible tactics motivated a move that you might call positional (but that I see as part of tactics)
Or, black moves the rook to the half open file where the white queen is sitting. It's a possible tactic that motivated the move.
I would include under "tactics" such common things as, I open 1.e4 so that I can use the tactic of exd5 or exf5 if my opponent advances a pawn to those squares, plus it helps me set up the possible tactic of Bc4 followed by Bxf7, or maybe even Qh5+
Reading GM analysis of a game, I often encounter a GM justifying a 'positional' move by explaining the possible tactic he or she is preventing or setting up. Of course, I never saw that possible tactic, so I would have no reason to make the 'positional' move. If I could anticipate or foresee the hidden tactics, and make great positional moves.
Looked at that way, chess moves are 100% tactics, in terms of awareness. Of course there are also the factors of focus, concentration, fatigue, distraction, and so on. Calculating ability and pattern recognition I would include under awareness of tactics.
Like the chicken and the egg, it merely depends on how you look at it. Or semantics, how you define the terms.
Or, black moves the rook to the half open file where the white queen is sitting. It's a possible tactic that motivated the move.
I would include under "tactics" such common things as, I open 1.e4 so that I can use the tactic of exd5 or exf5 if my opponent advances a pawn to those squares, plus it helps me set up the possible tactic of Bc4 followed by Bxf7, or maybe even Qh5+
Reading GM analysis of a game, I often encounter a GM justifying a 'positional' move by explaining the possible tactic he or she is preventing or setting up. Of course, I never saw that possible tactic, so I would have no reason to make the 'positional' move. If I could anticipate or foresee the hidden tactics, and make great positional moves.
Looked at that way, chess moves are 100% tactics, in terms of awareness. Of course there are also the factors of focus, concentration, fatigue, distraction, and so on. Calculating ability and pattern recognition I would include under awareness of tactics.
Like the chicken and the egg, it merely depends on how you look at it. Or semantics, how you define the terms.
yeahhh...only 1% strategy
No. 30% mistakes and blunders , 60 % tactics and 10 % checks .
Heresy:
Does the percentage number change anything important of the way you're playing chess?
Does the percentage number change anything important of the way you're playing chess?
#27
Yes, it means you should always take time to look for tactics: your tactics, tactics from your opponent, opening tactics, middlegame tactics, endgame tactics.
Yes, it means you should always take time to look for tactics: your tactics, tactics from your opponent, opening tactics, middlegame tactics, endgame tactics.
#16
@Sarg0n Richard Teichmann died in 1925... doubt he said that computers taught him chess is full of tactics
@Sarg0n Richard Teichmann died in 1925... doubt he said that computers taught him chess is full of tactics
#29
Teichmann said: "Chess is 99% tactics"
Engines now prove he was right.
Teichmann said: "Chess is 99% tactics"
Engines now prove he was right.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.