Chess Tactics! (1200-1600 ELO)

Hello everyone,

Thanks for viewing my study. I've added seven more exercises (2-1 to 2-3 and 2-5 to 2-8).

Please like so I can be inspired to add more exercises and create more topics.

Thank you!

#1 i like the study, well done at all. Those examples are great, we love to sack the queen. But this is not for 1200-1600 ELO. I am 1590 otb and mates in 2 are not things i would struggle with. I guess its more like 1000-1400 or rather 0-1400. To me it felt like motives i should already know well and spot in a second and are rated like 1200 in online puzzles. Of course, your rating is never too high to learn what is Legal mate if one does not know.
1-10 took me some time, its harder and not similar to previously shown examples. I tried capturing a queen at second try, idk if theres an option but it should say sth like "its a good move but u have better one, look for checks first", its a winning move at all.
2-1 feels like it should not capture a queen, rather play Qg6 as main solution.
2-4 mate in two is not worse than mate in 3, i played 4.Rh4 and black can only sack the queen on h1 but its considered wrong.

@LowSkilledPlayer Thank you for the feedback.

Regarding:

1-10: If you don't mate a player and decide to take their queen instead, you may be up in material but the game's not over. He may still win due to a blunder on your part. Be clinical and finish the game when you can.

2-1: Not the point of the exercise. It's to re-create Pillsbury's mate. 1...Qg6 leads to a winning endgame for White, so Black, presumably a human, wouldn't play 1...Qg6 in a real game. He would take the queen or just resign.

2-4: 4. Rh4 is not the fastest way to win. In tournaments/OTB play, in similar situations you may not have the time to do such a maneuver. In some situations, that attitude would allow a perpetual check. Again, just like in 1-10, be clinical.

@QueenMyPawn
1-10 i agree its important to be clean but in terms of tactics there are two solutions. Its ok that it says failed but for me you should also pop up the message of kind "its winning but you have a better move". Its good to signalize that its indeed working and "failed" is not an accurate word here
2-4 "in some situations" yes but in this exact one no. I was solving this puzzle, not some other ones. This is a solution, otb if you find mate in 3, you dont wonder if there is mate in 2. Same as in 1-10 it could pop a message of type "great move but there is a faster/other mate, can you find it?". From the teaching point of view, longer solution is also the solution.
I mean... i dont create studies so i dont know if you can make it pop this message after an exact wrong move but if possible, why not ;)

@LowSkilledPlayer regarding 1-10, it's not though. You win by checkmating the king, not capturing some silly queen.

Maybe that's why many of the chapters include queen sacrifices. It teaches you that possessing the queen isn't required to win. Because of that, I can play like this:



Or this:



In your mind, replace the queen with the value of a knight. It will help you ignore the queen and go for the king.

Also, no...a "longer solution" is not a solution. This attitude that it is will cause you to plateau because you'll think you're always right and you won't accept the learning process.

Regards,

Jossie

Dude, dont teach me value of pieces, im rated 2000+ i can realize that checkmate ends game. My point is that winning a queen with that position makes game over, read correctly. In that EXACT puzzle white pieces are doing nothing.
You give me counterexamples of winning without a queen. First is sacking queen for mate, second is with huge material advantage and indeed queen sack was not even needed, Qe3 gets the job dane. Sacking the queen in second example leaves white with counterplay and is an inaccuracy and i dont care if it is top computer suggestion because computer knows how to deal with counterplay. This is not an example of not needing a queen. Sure, you dont need a queen when your opponent blundered twice and you are like +9, great example of position type "everything wins here, too high advantage". If i can blunder a queen up in 1-10 then you can more likely lose in this example.
2-4 not the solution? You asked to find checkmate? I found checkmate. How is that not a solution?
From teaching (that was the point, right?) point of view a person finds the answer, valuating this as "failed" is discouraging and that is what im trying to tell you...

I don't think this is the study for you @LowSkilledPlayer . You are too strong.

New exercises are up (2-8 through 2-12)!

Added three chapters regarding the opening and one exercise.

Added three more exercises involving mastering opening play.