|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Apr-16-07 | | JustAFish: Even the most trivial puzzles serve the purpose of reinforcing chess patterns in our brain. Both De La Mazza and Susan Polar have recommended playing through the first 450 or so puzzles in her Tactics book (one move mates) on a regular basis in order to keep them fresh in our minds. When repeated over and over, an entire chess position can be seen as a single unit, a "chunk" so to speak, that is processed with minimal concious effort. The more of these "chunks" we have, the less computation effort we need to expend. |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | boson: Julius Thirring has TWO r's in his name. He was the father of Hans Thirring, famous among physicists for the so-called Lense-Thirring effect in general relativity, and the grandfather of Walter Thirring, an eminent theoretical physicist at the University of Vienna. |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | nateinstein: <JustAFish: Even the most trivial puzzles serve the purpose of reinforcing chess patterns in our brain. Both De La Mazza and Susan Polar have recommended playing through the first 450 or so puzzles in her Tactics book (one move mates) on a regular basis in order to keep them fresh in our minds. When repeated over and over, an entire chess position can be seen as a single unit, a "chunk" so to speak, that is processed with minimal concious effort. The more of these "chunks" we have, the less computation effort we need to expend.
> So you fell for that sales gimmick and bought her book right? :) |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | micartouse: <LMAJ: Either this site is frequented by a host of people with FIDE 2500+ tactics ... or some people are not being 100% honest with us.> Pretty much. I think it's usually very obvious when this happens though because the people who do it leave their tracks and you can usually spot it from a mile away; I don't think it's a big deal though. I love the puzzles no matter how easy or hard they are, and if I ever have too easy a time there is no shortage of difficult puzzles elsewhere. Now if somebody says they solved today in less than 1 second ... I'm inclined to believe them. :) |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | twin phoenix: thanks for sharing <realbrob>. i now understand why people do that. (thought they were just tooting there own horn...)
i stand corrected.
|
|
| Apr-16-07 | | Cannon Fodder: <JustAFish: Even the most trivial puzzles serve the purpose of reinforcing chess patterns in our brain. Both De La Mazza and Susan Polar have recommended playing through the first 450 or so puzzles in her Tactics book (one move mates) on a regular basis in order to keep them fresh in our minds. When repeated over and over, an entire chess position can be seen as a single unit, a "chunk" so to speak, that is processed with minimal concious effort. The more of these "chunks" we have, the less computation effort we need to expend.>
Don't listen to GMs, particularly not the ones who taught Judit Polgar how to play. Stick with the advice you get around here and you'll be OK. |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | micartouse: I actually think it's neat when people give the time it took just to see how other players think differently. As a rule, the first thing I do is count the material before looking for tactics. So unless it's extremely easy I won't find it in less than 10 seconds. It's a matter of context. Usually you can tell who's giving honest info about their thought process and who's not. |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | Crowaholic: I wouldn't necessarily say that this is too easy for a Monday (Monday is beginner's day after all) but we had almost the same queen sac last week, only this time without the double check follow-up, so some more variation in mating rsp. winning patterns wouldn't hurt. Here's a simple puzzle with a more unusual pattern that I derived from a possible continuation of yesterday's puzzle (Black to play): 
click for larger view |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | YouRang: The rook and bishop mate comes in many flavors. |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | kevin86: This is still yet another version of the Reti-Tartakower game with yet another twist: Instead of using the bishop move to double check,it is used to chase the queen away-and then the black queen is sacfificed. |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | kevin86: <Crowaholic> in case your puzzle is not a rhetorical one,the answer is g5# |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | artemis: boson: thanks for putting that spin on it. (pun most definitely intended!). |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | Cuellargacharna: Good morning!
When a test is given we usually get two kind of comments: Or it was easy, or it was hard; for the ones that knew all the answers was easy, and for the ones that did not was very hard, so I can see the difference of opinions.
For the ones that solve some of these puzzles is less than a second I tip my hat to them; my question to them is how they measure that time 'less than one second', it takes me one second to look at my watch and then at the computer screen and when I am back looking at my watch two seconds has elapsed, so the question is: What type of instrument you use to measure those split second so accurately?
Thanks |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | zb2cr: Quick and simple to see, if you're familiar at all with the Rook + Bishop mating pattern. I think posting your time (being honest, too) is a useful addition. If you're solving these puzzles under simulated games conditions (no moving of pieces, etc.), then being able to solve the puzzle in under circa 5 minutes is an important skill. |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | HannibalSchlecter: Those guys claiming to solve the puzzle in less than a second are the same ones claiming they're going out with a hot babe. Riiiiight! After how many beers fellas? |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | truefriends: <HannibalSchlecter> with this simple 2 mover in which every move is forced you can see it at first glance. I do agree with you on let's say thursday and friday, which are so difficult you have to calculate for a while to check your first thoughts... |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | Crowaholic: I looked at one of the other kibitzer's puzzles - no spoiler intended - and realized that Monday really _is_ queen sac day. So here's a puzzle I created about two months ago (White to play), can Black avoid checkmate for now and at what price?
click for larger view |
|
Apr-16-07
 | | playground player: Ignoring the penchant for Queen sacs featured in Monday puzzles, this should've been an easy one for any regular at CG.com. We should be able to recognize this Rook&Bishop checkmate pattern by now. Right? See it on the board, and wham! Of course, the tricky part is getting there. |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | JustAFish: I actually don't own Polgar's or De La Mazza's book. The former is too big to read at lunch, the latter can be fairly summarized on the back of a post card. For tactics study, I use CT-ART 3.0, mostly. For the trivial stuff, I fall back on Anatoly Lein's tactics book, of which the first 200 or so puzzles are extremely easy. GM endorsement or not, there is some scientific basis to the idea of "chunking" as the means by which one aquires great skill in a realm like chess. The idea is that repetition reinforces the pathways in the brain that deal with that activity. The more repetition, the more reinforcment and with greater reinforcment, comes speedier and more "intuitive" recall Moreover it allows a range of of related concepts to be brought together under one 'unit" which is easier to manage than its individual consituents. For instance, one can chunk the idea of "pawn on f2, g3, h2 and bishop on g2" into the single unit "fianchettoed bishop". This saves time and thought. One can then chunk the idea of "fianchettoed bishop" and pawns on c4, d4 etc,. under a broader topic like "Catalan Formation". Each of these "chunks" has its own characteristics, and aids in figuring out the nuances of larger chunks. Better players have more and more kinds of "chunks." Certainly chunking must help. If one, for instance, has (as Silman says) the "Lucanna" postion in 'muscle memory' (that is, so entirely memorized and reinforced that one can win it almost unconsciously) then one needn't waste effort dealing with its nuances when calculating positions earlier in the game. If one simply knows, intuitively, that a position is (or will be) Lucenna, and one perform it easily, then no calculation of that part of a long chaing of moves is necessary. Given infinite time, this would not be an issue. OTB chess, however has limited time. Similarly, with middlegame tactics, if one simply, because of chunking, has a feeling that a given position is laden with tactical possibilities, then one skips the process (and time) of having to figure this out. Over time, as my chess has improved from "pathetic" to "middling" I've found myself, more and more, encountering positions that simply 'feel' ready for a combination or a certain type of positional move. This sense, brought about by countless tactical exercizes I suspect, is extremely useful. It doesn't absolve me of the need to calculate, from time to time, but I certainly nudges me in the right direction much of the time. |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | JustAFish: <Those guys claiming to solve the puzzle in less than a second are the same ones claiming they're going out with a hot babe. Riiiiight! After how many beers fellas?> I can believe that a puzzle like this could be solved in 1 sec. (It took me about 5 seconds.) Isn't a simul nothing more than a long string of 1 or two second spot calculations which, amazingly, happen upon a decent move in the vast majority of cases? This isn't calculation, it's "feel" or, as I said above, "Chunking." With respect to the other comparison, it should be noted that most of the hot babes out there are involved with <someone>. In other words, <some> lucky guys <or girls to be fair> have hit the jackpot- ergo, it's possible to date a hot babe. |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | javasnob2: Why do suppose Krejcik did 2.exd6? 2.Nf3 seems to defend the e-pawn and force either an exchange of Queens or greatly hamper K-side development. |
|
Apr-16-07
 | | fm avari viraf: It is not the question of solving the puzzle in 1 sec. or 5 mts., it is the question of to relish the beauty of Chess in its different shades. |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | MostlyAverageJoe: <fm avari viraf: it is the question of to relish the beauty of Chess in its different shades> Where is the beauty in this game?
BTW, putting aside my on-going experiment in puzzle difficulty evaluation that causes me to comment on whether the puzzles are easy or not, I agree with: <mkrk17 :...we should concentrate more on what made the game a give-away>. However, in today's POD, white played so badly that it is kinda difficult to turn this puzzle into something educational. |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | MasterSavely: For a moment i was like, whoa, can't find it then i look up, Black to Play.... ohhh.... |
|
| Apr-16-07 | | simsan: I am not going to say that a monday puzzle is too easy, because it's supposed to be easy. But IMHO it would be nice if CG allowed us to explore some other simple tactical themes. Not just the queen sac & #. There should e.g. be plenty of simple forking and pinning tactics to choose from. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 4 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
sac: 10...Qd1+