#10
A tactics puzzle is about a tactic. For a puzzle the solution must be unique. The lichess puzzles are derived from real life games.
The question is if solving tactics puzzles where you know there is a tactic and for whom helps you in a real game.
@tpr said in #11:
> #10
> A tactics puzzle is about a tactic. For a puzzle the solution must be unique. The lichess puzzles are derived from real life games.
> The question is if solving tactics puzzles where you know there is a tactic and for whom helps you in a real game.
It certainly helps but to limited extent. For example one is more likely to recognise the ppportunity for a smothered mate, but that rarely occurs in one's games.
@tpr said in #11:
> The question is if solving tactics puzzles where you know there is a tactic and for whom helps you in a real game.
And if there is a tactic in a real game and you don’t train it because it’s “overrated,” then you’re going to miss it. Solving puzzles is not about finding a tactic over the board; it’s about training your mind to find the best moves.
@IamNOTamod said in #12:
> It certainly helps but to what extent? For example one is more likely to recognise the ppportunity for a smothered mate, but that rarely occurs in one's games.
you make it happen, you set it up moves before, thats why its important to know patterns
@nnjuguna said in #14:
>
> > It certainly helps but to what extent? For example one is more likely to recognise the ppportunity for a smothered mate, but that rarely occurs in one's games.
>
> you make it happen, you set it up moves before, thats why its important to know patterns
Okay but the opponent may recognise what you're "setting up".
One thing ALL Lichess puzzles have in common is the solver mist capitalise on a mistake by the opponent.
@IamNOTamod said in #15:
> Okay but the opponent may recognise what you're "setting up".
>
> One thing ALL Lichess puzzles have in common is the solver mist capitalise on a mistake by the opponent.
if opponent follows tpr's advice of "tactics are overated" then he wont see it coming
@nnjuguna said in #16:
> if opponent follows tpr's advice of "tactics are overated" then he wont see it coming
Overrated not useless...
#16
"if opponent follows tpr's advice of "tactics are overated" then he wont see it coming"
* It is not an advice, it is an assessment.
If you play soccer and you have to kick a penalty and you have never kicked a penalty, then you may not succeed.
However, kicking penalties all day will not make you a good soccer player.
Solving like 4 tactics puzzles before you play is a good warm-up, but that is about it.
Coming back to my #8
1) D plays 15+10 rapid and analyzes lost games.
2) E studies annotated grandmaster games.
3) C studies endgames.
4) A solves puzzles.
5) B studies openings.
@tpr said in #8:
> #7
> How would they rank after say 1 year if they play a double round robin tournament against each other?
I don't know. Do you? My guess would be: After one year most ganes are still decided by tactics, so the puzzle man would be good in the race. To analyze your games helps, too, if you analyze them the old way (mostly without engines) but I don't know if that makes sense on a beginner level. To study endgames is a good way too because you learn a lot about how pieces work. To study openings or grandmaster games won't help that much if you're on a low level.