Daily Tactics

I dont do them daily, but just before I start up a session. Played sports all my life and always warmed up there, dont see how chess should be any different. Anyway, couple questions.

How many tactics or puzzles should I do daily?(I still use that term loosely but ya) And what about if Im struggling with them? Missing easy puzzles, dropping my rating, should I continue to whatever number that is? Should I even bothering playing any games after that?

Maybe tactics 2-3 times per week, 20-30 minutes total time. At your rating level, they may be to easy if you are solving under 30-45 seconds. Shoot for 1-3 minutes, but stop at 5 minutes as this would be too hard. Try my MOM acroymn - motif (weakened kingside, undefended piece), opportunity (specific tactics, e.g., pin, skewers, forks, etc.) and means (move order), i.e., you may have the right moves, but in the wrong order. Also recommend CT-Art for solving tactics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bS5soG5aT2I 

Don't quit playing, you need this the other days of the week to put the tactics into play.

do you wanna try and reword that...? :S

He's saying M.O.M. = motif, opportunity, and means. Then in parenthesis gives examples of each.

Although I think he mixed motif and opportunity.  It seems to me a motif is a pin or skewer while an opportunity is a weakened kingside.

You can also swap "motif" for "motivation" as a memory guide. That is, if you don't see a weakened kingside or undefended piece, there is no motivation. If no motivation (part of the MOM acroymn), then no tactic. You would then proceed with strategy, etc. 

no no i get his acronymn. im confused with all the time things you brought up. do tactics for 20-30 mins. k. but 30 secs is too easy... and i should go for a minute? and quit after 5? none of that made sense. little confusing. thats what im asking you to reword.

and i never said id quit. i was wondering if i should even play any games that night after i was struggling to see basic tactics. since i only do tactics before i play really

I generally warm up with a few tactics (few minutes) before a tournament. I don't want to exhaust my mind with too much focus on tactics before playing. That is why I generally do tactics on alternate days of study, such as strategy, endgames, playing, etc. As to the time on tactics, I worked with a coach who chastised me for going through 130+ tactics in like 30 minutes. He said you have remembered easy patterns, and now you need to go up to the next level. So, for me, if I was solving tactics under a minute, he would have me go up to the next level, where it took me 2-5 minutes to solve one tactic. Many month later as my rating increased, he did the same thing, this time with no one tactic under five minutes, and none over 20 minutes. 

oh i see. but i dont have a coach. im only using chesstempo. and i cant just jump my level up

Hi just my two cents it sounds like you're doing the blitz on chess tempo personally I avoid the blitz and solely do standard (no time limit) don't move the pieces until you see everything! you should see your rating jump this way to answer your question of how many to do... until problems start taking too long (subjective)to solve!

I got to 3000 on chess.com doing a lot of tactics.  What I have learnt is that you have to have a method or otherwise you will peak.  Random analysis is inefficient, even for very strong players.  They get away with it because they have a very good nose which they have developed over many years.  The other other thing you need is to learn to move the pieces in your head without missing too much.  This ability comes with practise.  I don't agree however that you should sit there forever until you solve a problem.  Better in my experience to give up after a while and then work out what you missed and why.  You might see a pattern in what you miss.  Every player has a natural tendency towards analysing certain lines and not others and a tendency to miss typical things.  This is the nose that experienced players have.  Your nose will develop with experience.  There are grandmasters who have a good nose for practical tactics but an average one only for compositions (because their nose for compositions was never developed very much).