I find them helpful in two ways. First, when working on a particular skill, like Arabian mate or hook mate or knight vs pawn endgame, they give you practice and may help you spot opportunities to use those skills in a game. Second, they're good exercise--like you might maintain your tennis skills by just hitting with someone for an hour, working on your strokes, rather than playing a match. Doing puzzles when you don't feel like playing a game or don't have time works similarly.
Also, they're fun.
There's a danger that, if you do a lot of them, you'll start treating every position in a game as a potential puzzle--always looking for that killer forcing move that wins the game. Usually, there is no killer forcing move and you just need to find a good move.
Also, they're fun.
There's a danger that, if you do a lot of them, you'll start treating every position in a game as a potential puzzle--always looking for that killer forcing move that wins the game. Usually, there is no killer forcing move and you just need to find a good move.
Hm, the puzzles for a single opening helped me to find other lines for the used opening. But the tactics, I expected after exercising, I did not find often in games.
@Kbz10troy
"There's a danger that, if you do a lot of them, you'll start treating every position in a game as a potential puzzle--always looking for that killer forcing move that wins the game. Usually, there is no killer forcing move and you just need to find a good move."
What you say is true, but I wouldn't characterize it as a "danger" for most players.
The only real danger is if you let frequent deep calculations in quiet positions put you into time trouble or eat up the mental energy you need for strategic planning. That could be a danger, but only for inexperienced players.
But on the flip side, experienced players how to look at a position and start calculating tactics or rather say "Hey, it's a quiet position - let's think strategy instead".
Having skills in calculating tactics is a HUGE advantage in chess.
"There's a danger that, if you do a lot of them, you'll start treating every position in a game as a potential puzzle--always looking for that killer forcing move that wins the game. Usually, there is no killer forcing move and you just need to find a good move."
What you say is true, but I wouldn't characterize it as a "danger" for most players.
The only real danger is if you let frequent deep calculations in quiet positions put you into time trouble or eat up the mental energy you need for strategic planning. That could be a danger, but only for inexperienced players.
But on the flip side, experienced players how to look at a position and start calculating tactics or rather say "Hey, it's a quiet position - let's think strategy instead".
Having skills in calculating tactics is a HUGE advantage in chess.
Myslím že mi to dost pomáhá...tyhlety úlohy mi jdou a vždy pomůžou
Můj příspěvek je v czech language
Ale lepší jsou opravdové šachy tam se musí improvizovat
When I was a beginner, learning standard mating patterns and about pins forks, x-rays, double attacks, the greek gift,... definitely had a huge impact on my playing.
Later, it is hard to estimate how much doing a sequence of random tactic puzzles has helped. At our local club, puzzle-rush was discussed recently- my scores were about the same as players I am much stronger (and older) than. I think a lot of chess skill is intuiting / knowing what to look for / build up to rather than ability to spot random tactics in new positions.
What I can say definitely helped me is to study complete games in an opening and learn where the pieces go, what the pawn breaks are, what the plans are and what the thematic tactics are. I have about 700 positions saved that are thematic tactics in openings I play a lot. These came from full games I played through carefully. I also save positions where the needed move is completely anti-intuitive for me.
What also helped is to study in detail lots of examples of a type of ending that I had recently played (or often misplayed). That includes the tactics specific to that sort of ending (usually from van Perlo).
And, f course, fixing my understanding of positions when it leads to positional or other errors later.
-Bill-
Later, it is hard to estimate how much doing a sequence of random tactic puzzles has helped. At our local club, puzzle-rush was discussed recently- my scores were about the same as players I am much stronger (and older) than. I think a lot of chess skill is intuiting / knowing what to look for / build up to rather than ability to spot random tactics in new positions.
What I can say definitely helped me is to study complete games in an opening and learn where the pieces go, what the pawn breaks are, what the plans are and what the thematic tactics are. I have about 700 positions saved that are thematic tactics in openings I play a lot. These came from full games I played through carefully. I also save positions where the needed move is completely anti-intuitive for me.
What also helped is to study in detail lots of examples of a type of ending that I had recently played (or often misplayed). That includes the tactics specific to that sort of ending (usually from van Perlo).
And, f course, fixing my understanding of positions when it leads to positional or other errors later.
-Bill-
@Benjamin87 said in #1:
> Did you notice that doing chess puzzles actually improved your chess
I played hard endgame puzzles 2200+ and yes I can see improvement against 2000+ rapid players in endgames
I have quite of wins recently
> Did you notice that doing chess puzzles actually improved your chess
I played hard endgame puzzles 2200+ and yes I can see improvement against 2000+ rapid players in endgames
I have quite of wins recently
studying master games are 100 times helpful imo. solving endgame puzzles are helpful but doing random puzzles forever just makes you unnecessarily tired.