Beyond Tactical Puzzles: The Real Path to Chess Mastery

[@MrMauPat]

I really liked the context of this video because it makes you feel you are in an excellent classroom where the intention is to teach the subject well. thanx

[@Dr.CansClinic]

I am so glad to read this, that is exactly the goal of this channel.

[@eschiedler]

Everyone knows you need Carlsen's hair to be ranked #1. JK - Chess needs many more cognitive science videos, well done again.

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Thanks a lot! I brought Carlsen here not for the clickbait, but the video features a great game of his :) And he is a very strong GM.

[@ibiwisi]

Another winning video, DrCan; thank you. Excellent quote I pulled from your remarks: "Tactics are the servants of our strategic goals." That says it all, eh?

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Thank you so much! Yes, that quote summarises the whole video :)

[@ibiwisi]

@@Dr.CansClinic Do you think it's also fair to say, at least in some situations, "Tactics are the rewards of reaching our strategic goals"? In other words, I think there's an interesting synergy between tactics and strategic goals that works in both directions. Your thoughts?

[@Dr.CansClinic]

@@ibiwisi Indeed! That is why there is the following chess aphorism: "Tactics flow from good positions." This also means we have to resort to tactics at some point to make use of our great strategic build up. I have spoiled so many advantageous positions because I failed to find tactical executions that were present in the position...

[@hooptron9]

Kasparov: "Tactics involve calculations that can tax the human brain, but when you boil them down, they are actually the simplest part of chess and are almost trivial compared to strategy." Kasparov: "Without a goal [maneuvering is] aimless. You might be a master tactician, but you'll have no sense of strategy."

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Such a beautiful quote, thank you!

[@Willeinhelm]

Love this video and your enthusiasm❤

[@Dr.CansClinic]

I love this comment, thank you for your encouraging words. I hope I spread the passion :)

[@sthenx0r]

TOUSANDS AND TOUSANDS AND TOUSANDS

[@Dr.CansClinic]

THOUSANDS! :)

[@andrejennings1577]

Good Evening, I haven't started studying your Multi-Purpose course yet, now I'm really looking forward to it...

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Super nice to hear it, please ask me anything on Chessable while you are studying that course ☺️

[@anthonyjaglal]

👏👏👏💯💯💯very early in chess life,I started of with a book (combination the heart of chess)by Irving chernev,I program so much of this book that I was lost if no tactics are available, as other aspects of chess was missing,I would trade a strong piece thats exerting pressure in the position as well as the psychological pressure,is traded of for the sake of tactics, your videos always seems to go directly to an aspect of my chess life, that's why i concluded that when one is beginning chess it's important to get all knowledge in systematic manner, there's tendancy to be book hopping when you self coach, and parts of one's knowledge is broken up, really really like this video thank you 🙏

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Thank you so much for this insight!

[@Woodflooralchemist]

I guess o have to reassess my road to GM strategy

[@briandwi2504]

Excellent. Tactics are, to some extent, more straightforward and clear than strategic and positional play.. Strategic play requires a wider skill set that isn't taught very well as it's hard! Very glad that you are filling the void.

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Super happy to hear your kind feedback 🙏

[@greatdanelegend7001]

In the last position my first idea was to put the queen on g6 so that if he takes, my rook targets all his weak pawns, but I don't think it works because his bishop is attacking my f pawn and also of course it's better not to trade Queens if his king is weaker than mine

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Absolutely, thanks for mentioning it! Absolutely, the king safety decides the queen trade most of the time.

[@rotatingmind]

Now the problem remains: how to convert a positional advantage into a win

[@Dr.CansClinic]

And here lies the circle. You need tactics/accurate calculation to convert a positional advantage. But you need good positional skills to build such a position.

[@Joel-vw9mo]

Its like 90% tactics

[@timt6312]

Who cares? 99.99% wont be a master anyway. Puzzles does get you a long way to 2000 tho

[@Dr.CansClinic]

I never said puzzles are not important.

[@timt6312]

@@Dr.CansClinic me neither

[@Crazywaffle5150]

No, puzzles are useless. I started doing them and I have been stuck under 500 for 2 years. I'm about to hit 2000 just after a single night of solving. I'm pretty confident I can reach even 3000 with minimal effort. They are that EASY. So I have concluded there is no correlation. They only make me better as solving puzzles.

[@eschiedler]

1. Ng5+ fxg5 (or else Queen lost) 2. Rf3+ Kg8 3.Qxe6+ Kh8 4. Rf7 Qg8 5. Qxh6+ Qh7 6. Qxh7# or 3...Kg6 4. Qd3+ Kg7 5. Rf7+ Kxf7 6. Qxh7 tha's gg. All other lines Black throws away material. fyi Didn't engine check all in-head. Fingers crossed.

[@Dr.CansClinic]

You should be proud of yourself :)

[@fiuza78]

Another excellent video, Dr Can! I think puzzle rush/storm is very useful if you are into bullet and blitz. In classical chess, very rarely you will need to figure out a tactical opportunity in just a few seconds. It's much better to invest your time to other aspects of the game. That will also give you more tactical opportunities due to superior position!

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Thank you so much! Indeed, it depends on your goal at the end. Still, when I mean chess, I am mainly talking about slower time formats :)

[@bluefin.64]

In a way the person who said all you need is tactics is right, because if you could calculate like an engine you'd win every game. Humans need to manage deep tactical potential with ideas, though, ones collected from generations of experience. We call it strategy. Your new course sounds like a winner, Dr. Can.

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Thank you for your kind comment! Yes, we humans need this strategic vision to navigate the jungle :)

[@masonparkman5567]

Excellent! Qd2 was a beauty. Thanks for another good video Can

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Thank you so much Mason!

[@Daniel-G-P]

Such a helpful video. Thank you.

[@Dr.CansClinic]

You are so welcome!

[@shlomolaufer]

Great videos. Thanks

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Glad you like them! Very welcome.

[@Peonh7]

Woow

[@TheNamshubofEnki]

Great video, thank you

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Glad that you liked it! Thanks!

[@edl5731]

Most of what you said makes sense to me. (Although I was never of the view that tactics is everything, just the most important thing and I view the premise somewhat as strawman,) But the idea that the last move is relevant to what is the best move doesn't make much sense. Yes, it does give me some hint to what my opponent is planning. But it doesn't change what *my* best move is. (maybe my opponent is planning something dumb) For example in the second position, lets say we reach the exact same position but the black king was already on d7, but the move that got us into this position was the black rook moving from a8 to e8. Are you suggestion that Ra1 is no longer whites best move but rather the white player should be addressing the threat of Re6? (with Re1 followed by Kf2) My thought regardless of what the board looked like in the past white's best move is taking the open a-file.

[@bluefin.64]

You're of course right that the history of a position doesn't matter. Ideas like you shouldn't trade a piece that moved a bunch of times for one that hasn't because of the different amount of time invested are nonsense. What if you can snag a queen for a knight that way? The best move is the best move, period. Anyway, Dr. Can didn't say that knowing the last move changes the position evaluation, and, give him more credit, there is zero chance he would. His point is about psychology. He thinks it helps for puzzles to be more like game play, where you're alerted by your opponent's moves. There's a good chance he's right, given he has a PhD in cognitive science.

[@Dr.CansClinic]

Thanks for the comment! You can definitely find the best move in the position without having any information on the opponent's last move. But in a practical game, under time constraint, asking questions on what that last move does (threat) and no longer does (drawback) can significantly shorten the process of finding the best move. What is changed, and can I take advantage of it? Coming back to your question, I am assuming we are playing against a rational player who generally wants to occupy the open file with their rook. So if they go Ra8-e8 in that moment, I would still pay attention to this move and what it threatens, but I would also ask what it no longer does (drawback principle). This would shorten the process of me finding e.g. Ra1, followed by doubling up the rooks on the a-file.

[@bluefin.64]

@@Dr.CansClinic The example of the drawback principle that stands out for me is overlooking that when you do something, you undo something at the same time. I've lost too many games because I carelessly gave up control of important squares. I'm trying to come up with a short checklist of drawbacks for avoiding blunders, starting with asking yourself what's being undone if you make your candidate move. I'm not sure a checklist makes sense, though. I wonder if you'd consider making a video addressing this, and how else we might develop this kind of habit until it's automatic.

[@edl5731]

@@Dr.CansClinic Thank you for the explanation.

[@Dr.CansClinic]

@@bluefin.64 A great question! If only this blunder issue could be resolved by a checklist! Checklists can help at the beginning, although they should not get overwhelming :) Surely a nice idea for a future video!