It it better to practise easier puzzles, or normal-difficulty-level puzzles?

Dear All,

We know that puzzle practice is important to improve our chess. In Lichess, I can choose to practice puzzles with the normal difficulty level, where the rating of the puzzles is similar to my current puzzle rating. Alternatively, I can choose to practice easier puzzles with -300 rating.

In the former case, I need quite a long time to solve each puzzle, so I only practiced a few each week. In the formal case, I can practice more, which I feel would help me get familiar with particular themes (patterns). However, I don't hear anyone do the latter way. Which do you think is better?

Thanks a lot :)

IMHO both have their merit. Easier puzzles help with reliably spotting common patterns, harder puzzles with the patience and focus on deeper calculation.

Thank you! Which do you think one would practice more? Particularly for a beginner of about 7-year old? (with chess.come rating of 600)?

@mkubecek said in #2:

IMHO both have their merit. Easier puzzles help with reliably spotting common patterns, harder puzzles with the patience and focus on deeper calculation.

I want to add that in actual games, while the ratings of both players are determined, the difficulty of the positions that arise is unpredictable. In simpler terms, you can unexpectedly find yourself in a position equivalent to a 2000-rated puzzle or above.

I agree with @mkubecek: for beginners, I think it's beneficial to get a little bit of exposure to everything, and then later focus on the areas where you need to improve the most.

@NerdEuler said in #3:

Particularly for a beginner of about 7-year old? (with chess.come rating of 600)?
(Speaking as a father of a 9 year old (almost) beginner, not an expert on coaching.) In this age, unless the kid is an extraordinary talent (in which case an actual coach should be involved), I wouldn't focus on results too hard, it's much more important for the kid to actually enjoy chess and related activities. The problem is that young children often do things just to keep parents happy and it's easy to mix child's ambitions with your own. But if they don't actually enjoy the training on their own, it only leads to a revolt later.

Why not a mix? Do easy puzzles until the solution comes naturally and then switch to harder ones? Take your time and don't feel you must find a solution instantly. First ask yourself who's better and why and you'll improve your assessment skills as well as calculation.
And it's absolutely untrue that you must solve puzzles everyday to get better. In the old days people learned by reading and playing. The emphasis on puzzles is recent and only because there are so many readily available on the internet.

Thank you for your helpful suggestions! I totally agree that it is most important for a kid that he likes playing Chess :) @mkubecek @lizani @lazzaknight

wish my dad would have encouraged me to play chess at 9 yrs of age. please keep up your good work!!! JT

@mkubecek said in #5:

(Speaking as a father of a 9 year old (almost) beginner, not an expert on coaching.) In this age, unless the kid is an extraordinary talent (in which case an actual coach should be involved), I wouldn't focus on results too hard, it's much more important for the kid to actually enjoy chess and related activities. The problem is that young children often do things just to keep parents happy and it's easy to mix child's ambitions with your own. But if they don't actually enjoy the training on their own, it only leads to a revolt later.

Absolutely!
I've taught whitewater kayaking to similar ages (often kids of parents who REALLY wanted the child to excel). The most important things were:
constant praise for trying (&no criticism- for example: praising a correct technique they do by random actions and ignoring something not quite correct),
having a group of the kid's friends along learning together,
stopping early when they want to do a bit more and getting ice cream for all

-Bill