Before everybody recreates those lengthy suggestions they spent hours writing the last time you posted this two months ago, did you try any of the suggestions?
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/im-convinced-now---studying-too-many-tactics-makes-me-worse
Also, looking at your ratings graph over the last 90 days, please point out the point where you dropped 150 points since mid-October, the time of your last post. I couldn't find one. It seems like your rating has improved since then.
When i reached 2000 in tactics here i stoped. recently i play d5 as black 1st move and d4 as white 1st move. After a month i was losing games - reason - simple tactical shots and also i was wrong in calculation in tactic sharp positions. 1. d4 and 1..d5 (scandinavian) made me weak and specially that i stoped solving tactics. Now my tactic trainer is set to 1700 unrated and i have difficulties even on that level!
@ Censored - I do exactly that. I don't use a timer, and I calculate as long and hard as I can. On the lichess trainer, I'll routinely spend 5+ minutes on a single hard problem to calculate it.
As well, at least 50% of my tactics study was on a pgn file of 1001 Reinfled Tactics in chessbase. This is important, because I do play out ALL my mistakes (so many!) and save them for review - I don't just learn the right answer and move on.
The reality I've found is that at leaset at my ability right now, most of my chess games (the vast majority actually) are not lost due to me achieving a superior position and then being unable to close out the tactics shot. It's because I can't build that superior position to begin with, and then it becomes super easy to blunder when there's a ton of pressure on your position.
I'm not even exaggerating - my rating (now nearing 1500 blitz) sank all the way down to 1150 (!!) during this tactics-study phase, and it wasn't just for a day. I hovered around 1250ish until I started reviewing my positional stuff again, and whammo - back up to where I normally am (1400+)
Before everybody recreates those lengthy suggestions they spent hours writing the last time you posted this two months ago, did you try any of the suggestions?
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/im-convinced-now---studying-too-many-tactics-makes-me-worse
Also, looking at your ratings graph over the last 90 days, please point out the point where you dropped 150 points. I couldn't find one.
I'm not making it up. This is where my rating was hovering on 12/6/15, about 2 weeks ago before I said "dang it - NO MORE TACTICS!!"
I honestly didn't know I could even play 1160 chess anymore, but clearly I can!
So I was actually being conservative - it wasn't a 150 point drop - as of today, my blitz rating = 1470, so 1470-1160 = a 310 point drop as of merely 2 weeks ago at its low point!
Incidentally, I'm pretty sure that on that graph of my rating you posted, the other dip before Dec, was also a period where I was studying lots of tactics. Its like clockwork for me - study a lot of tactics, lose a lot of rating points!
It also possible that some of the 200 games you played on 12/6/2015 were less than your best. You began the day with a 1380 rating and managed to drive your rating down to 1172 on that one day.
You lost a whole bunch of 1,2 and 3 move games and other very short games on that day. I find it hard to believe that a focus on tactics had anything to do with it.
I have to apologize but it looks more like you were trying to drive your rating down so you could have fun beating lower rated players. I am sure I must be mistaken. Please explain further. I am sure that you right-- everyone really needs to stop studying.
I don't think you should worry as much about your rating as you do feeling comfortable in different positions.
I don't study at all and I'm seeing an improvement in my play as I find myself over the board.
@notmtwain - sorry, but I wasn't intentionally driving my rating down. It was a terrible downturn!
For real - this is exactly what it felt like - I was trying to 'analyze' objectively, but in these short 3-5' blitz games, all my brain wanted to do was calculate tactics, tactics, tactics, even when there were none. It's good to scan for tactics, but not good to overlook basic positional play - I couldn't break out of the mindset.
I do agree with 'feeling comfortable in different positions' concept, which is what most of my nontactical studying seems to be aiding with. I look at both my losses as well as related master games from some books I have, and try and learn them. I usually can only memorize the opening moves early on, then in a day or two I can learn the middlegame, and later on, the endgame. Takes awhile, but seems to translate into better thinking in similar positions in games.
Sometimes when I do too many tactics puzzles, it is not good for my rating because I start to look at every position as a tactic to be solved.
You can need to get your pieces developed, gain space, get castled, weaken your opponent's pawn structure, get superior piece mobility,trade your bad pieces or trade down to a superior endgame. As White, it's important to know how to deal with pins on your c3 or f3 Knight.
Just thinking.....
Guess it just took a little time to get the tactics to actually affect your rating - look you're now at your highest ever; 1478. Give it time and don't get frustated, as it often pays off in the end anyhow.
Guess it just took a little time to get the tactics to actually affect your rating - look you're now at your highest ever; 1478. Give it time and don't get frustated, as it often pays off in the end anyhow.
I used to think it just took the tactics some time to 'settle in', but I'm convinced now that my best ratings are NOT due to tactics.
None of my wins from 1350-1478 in my last good stretch were due to superior tactical shots. Literally zero of them. Sure, opponents blunder, but they at this level, they almost always blunder because you've put good positional pressure on them, making it very easy to blunder.
In fact, in my last several games, I miss several easy (1-2 move) tactics, but since my position isn't weak, I can continue at equal or better eval.
This actually makes sense to me - although the tactics I study are many moves deep (lichess.org tactics at 2000+ rating are many moves most of the time!), if my games don't require them to win, they won't have much impact on my game.
Guess it just took a little time to get the tactics to actually affect your rating - look you're now at your highest ever; 1478. Give it time and don't get frustated, as it often pays off in the end anyhow.
I used to think it just took the tactics some time to 'settle in', but I'm convinced now that my best ratings are NOT due to tactics.
None of my wins from 1350-1478 in my last good stretch were due to superior tactical shots. Literally zero of them. Sure, opponents blunder, but they at this level, they almost always blunder because you've put good positional pressure on them, making it very easy to blunder.
In fact, in my last several games, I miss several easy (1-2 move) tactics, but since my position isn't weak, I can continue at equal or better eval.
This actually makes sense to me - although the tactics I study are many moves deep (lichess.org tactics at 2000+ rating are many moves most of the time!), if my games don't require them to win, they won't have much impact on my game.
I'm amazed you're worrying this much about your rating...
It seems online tactical training is less effective compare to tactics book. Try another tactical book like Chess Tactics for Champion by Polgar. That book by Polgar has good diversity of tactics.
But for over all improvement, yeah study positional play/strategy and endgames as well. In your thinking process, if you can't find tactics look for the strategic/positional elements of the position. You can only get good at looking the strategical/positional elements of the position by studying strategy/positional play.
My opponents blunder a lot, too, and I am 2100+, and I drop my pieces to where they just can be taken aswell, and my tactics trainer is 2450+ and has been 2600+. This doesn't mean that I will see all the simple tactics.. Just don't worry about it too much. If you're tired of practising tactics, take a break, and come back to it only later (maybe a few weeks, or months, that usually work. And when you have finished other things then you see that you lack some tactic skills.)
Worrying(just don't over do it) is a good sign of competiveness. People who become successfull has this competetive thing.
It seems online tactical training is less effective compare to tactics book. Try another tactical book like Chess Tactics for Champion by Polgar. That book by Polgar has good diversity of tactics.
But for over all improvement, yeah study positional play/strategy and endgames as well. In your thinking process, if you can't find tactics look for the strategic/positional elements of the position. You can only get good at looking the strategical/positional elements of the position by studying strategy/positional play.
Actually, I think both books AND online sites together work best if you're going to study tactics.
The books force you to calculate all of it in your head - even the answers! But it's much harder to find refutations to your misses in complex problems. Books are also good in that it's a lot easier to repeat missed problems so you get more reinforcement.
The sites like lichess tactics training are good because you get more tactics, and tactics to your level. It complements the books, because in the books you can actually start to just look for 'kills' and start neglecting counterplay, whereas in chesstempo or lichess, you'll start losing a lot of tactics rating points if you're neglecting the counterplay.
Interestingly, although I'm pretty new to strategic play, it seems a LOT more about memorization to me than tactics. You just have to memorize certain positional moves and setups, whereas in tactics you can really just calculate and not memorize a lot of things.
Guess it just took a little time to get the tactics to actually affect your rating - look you're now at your highest ever; 1478. Give it time and don't get frustated, as it often pays off in the end anyhow.
I used to think it just took the tactics some time to 'settle in', but I'm convinced now that my best ratings are NOT due to tactics.
None of my wins from 1350-1478 in my last good stretch were due to superior tactical shots. Literally zero of them. Sure, opponents blunder, but they at this level, they almost always blunder because you've put good positional pressure on them, making it very easy to blunder.
In fact, in my last several games, I miss several easy (1-2 move) tactics, but since my position isn't weak, I can continue at equal or better eval.
This actually makes sense to me - although the tactics I study are many moves deep (lichess.org tactics at 2000+ rating are many moves most of the time!), if my games don't require them to win, they won't have much impact on my game.
I'm amazed you're worrying this much about your rating...
I do worry about my rating. A lot!
It's THE key marker that keeps me honest about my studying. This thread is a great example - I enjoy studying tactics, and it 'feels' like I'm gaining tons of chess ability by studying tactics for hours, day after day!
Turns out though, that if I've got a big weakness in my openings or positional play understanding, I'll still be a crappy chess player, tactics be darned. The ELO keeps you honest - makes you study stuff that you sometimes don't want to study if what you're doing isn't working.
I also don't obsess over keeping the absolute highest ELO. I'm ok with dips here and there, esp if I'm learning in my losses. It's avoiding those -200 points drops that I'm watching out for!
It seems online tactical training is less effective compare to tactics book. Try another tactical book like Chess Tactics for Champion by Polgar. That book by Polgar has good diversity of tactics.
But for over all improvement, yeah study positional play/strategy and endgames as well. In your thinking process, if you can't find tactics look for the strategic/positional elements of the position. You can only get good at looking the strategical/positional elements of the position by studying strategy/positional play.
Actually, I think both books AND online sites together work best if you're going to study tactics.
The sites like lichess tactics training are good because you get more tactics, and tactics to your level. It complements the books, because in the books you can actually start to just look for 'kills' and start neglecting counterplay, whereas in chesstempo or lichess, you'll start losing a lot of tactics rating points if you're neglecting the counterplay.
Interestingly, although I'm pretty new to strategic play, it seems a LOT more about memorization to me than tactics. You just have to memorize certain positional moves and setups, whereas in tactics you can really just calculate and not memorize a lot of things.
I am not familiar with lichess, but it seems that chess trainer here at chess.com is not as good because I see a lot of post saying they are not improving with chess.com tactics trainer.
There are these tactical patterns and strategic patterns. Tactical patterns are more absolute. Learning and getting better at strategical patterns is harder. There are strategic patterns that might work on certain position, but will not work on others. This is what makes chess great as there is no absolute chess principles. One chess principle might contradict another principle. Every rule has exception.It's the experience and lots of study that helps a player what principle to follow.
I've posted about this before, and yes, I'm yelling about it again since it seems to be so true.
Studying a lot of tactics makes me worse! For real - I start looking for sacs here and there, and start losing sight of the safer positional pluses in hopes of some (unsound) sac.
I went through a ratings lull for 2-3 weeks where I lost nearly 150 points - during that time I was studying lots of tactics, from 1001 Reinfeld, lichess, and chesstempo, mainly because I hadn't done them in quite awhile. I did quite a few of them, and probably 90%+ of my chess study time was tactics.
Got depressed about my big ratings slump, and lost motivation to study tactics. Went back to reviewing lost games (which were usually really lost from positional oversights), watching GM Akobian's youtube videos (gawd they're good!) and refreshing my openings a bit.
Have done minimal (essentially none) tactical exercises for the past 2 wks, and I'm playing MUCH better again - more solidly, faster, and with a better feel for the positions.
It just amazes me how much of a drop I get when I study all tactics. Part of it might be my opening selection, which is admittedly less tactical now (London/French/Stonewall), but it's still amazing to me how little pure tactics study is benefiting me at my level.