Your network blocks the Lichess assets!

lichess.org
Donate

The Art of Interference

Some say the double threat is the soul of tactics. Example 1 is an example of a triple threat. Are there any examples in chess of a quadruple threat?

Some say the double threat is the soul of tactics. Example 1 is an example of a triple threat. Are there any examples in chess of a quadruple threat?

@Wodjul said in #2:

Some say the double threat is the soul of tactics. Example 1 is an example of a triple threat. Are there any examples in chess of a quadruple threat?

Cheers, you could say Example 1 is a quadruple threat, as after Nf6 he is threatens Qg7#, Qf8#, Qxh7# and Rg8#!

@Wodjul said in #2: > Some say the double threat is the soul of tactics. Example 1 is an example of a triple threat. Are there any examples in chess of a quadruple threat? Cheers, you could say Example 1 is a quadruple threat, as after Nf6 he is threatens Qg7#, Qf8#, Qxh7# and Rg8#!

@Mcie said in #3:

Cheers, you could say Example 1 is a quadruple threat, as after Nf6 he is threatens Qg7#, Qf8#, Qxh7# and Rg8#!

QED! I should have taken the time to check that myself. I can only plead my low rating. I headed off to do simpler puzzles.

@Mcie said in #3: > Cheers, you could say Example 1 is a quadruple threat, as after Nf6 he is threatens Qg7#, Qf8#, Qxh7# and Rg8#! QED! I should have taken the time to check that myself. I can only plead my low rating. I headed off to do simpler puzzles.

@Wodjul said in #4:

QED! I should have taken the time to check that myself. I can only plead my low rating. I headed off to do simpler puzzles.

you're good no worries! we've all been there :) good luck and thanks for the support!

@Wodjul said in #4: > QED! I should have taken the time to check that myself. I can only plead my low rating. I headed off to do simpler puzzles. you're good no worries! we've all been there :) good luck and thanks for the support!

@Mcie said in #5:

you're good no worries! we've all been there :) good luck and thanks for the support!

I can appreciate the beauty of advanced tactics and advanced puzzles but I can't find such moves in play and often not even if taking almost endless time to solve the tactic or puzzle.

I decided the very worst part of my overall bad play was very poor tactics and not even seeing all possible moves under time pressure! So I am doing lots of simple Lichess puzzles on "Easiest" under what is real time pressure to me: the need to do 60 puzzles within 60 minutes. I do 20 Lichess puzzle types in rotation: one type per one hour session.

There is at least one puzzle type which is too hard for me even on "Easiest"! That one is Defensive Move. I suspect there will be others like Equality. I had to leave them out of my rotation. I am now considering adding these into my training in a different way. That is to do them on "Easiest" unrated, with no time limit and following a method based on the Steps Method to ask myself all the pertinent questions about the position and attempt all possible solutions. Defensive Move is hard for me because I do not yet have the ability to check all my opponents threats methodically and calculate combinations from "his side of the board".

I am hoping to add "Equality" puzzles in the same way, if they also prove very hard for me. What Lichess really needs is positional puzzles too where the goal is to make sound positional moves and even maybe induce the opponent to make positional mistakes. (I have no real understanding of positional play.) How would Lichess do this? I suspect that puzzles where there is only one or a few moves that do not make a mistake, or even maybe an inaccuracy, would fit the bill. So in other words where it is relatively hard to find an accurate move in a position where there are no technically winning moves according to the algorithm. Or does the Equality puzzle already do this? I will have to find out.

I will note here that I think Defensive Move puzzles are quite hard, even when low rated, because only very good players do them in training. Most average players would never do one. So it's a biased sample perhaps. Not sure if this is right though. It would depend on how the puzzle rating algorithm works.

My training method upsets the puzzle rating algorithm. Just a few blunders will smash my puzzle rating down so it is volatile and the algorithm keeps the "?" against it. These are interesting observations to me but they are probably boring observations to advanced players and programmers.

@Mcie said in #5: > you're good no worries! we've all been there :) good luck and thanks for the support! I can appreciate the beauty of advanced tactics and advanced puzzles but I can't find such moves in play and often not even if taking almost endless time to solve the tactic or puzzle. I decided the very worst part of my overall bad play was very poor tactics and not even seeing all possible moves under time pressure! So I am doing lots of simple Lichess puzzles on "Easiest" under what is real time pressure to me: the need to do 60 puzzles within 60 minutes. I do 20 Lichess puzzle types in rotation: one type per one hour session. There is at least one puzzle type which is too hard for me even on "Easiest"! That one is Defensive Move. I suspect there will be others like Equality. I had to leave them out of my rotation. I am now considering adding these into my training in a different way. That is to do them on "Easiest" unrated, with no time limit and following a method based on the Steps Method to ask myself all the pertinent questions about the position and attempt all possible solutions. Defensive Move is hard for me because I do not yet have the ability to check all my opponents threats methodically and calculate combinations from "his side of the board". I am hoping to add "Equality" puzzles in the same way, if they also prove very hard for me. What Lichess really needs is positional puzzles too where the goal is to make sound positional moves and even maybe induce the opponent to make positional mistakes. (I have no real understanding of positional play.) How would Lichess do this? I suspect that puzzles where there is only one or a few moves that do not make a mistake, or even maybe an inaccuracy, would fit the bill. So in other words where it is relatively hard to find an accurate move in a position where there are no technically winning moves according to the algorithm. Or does the Equality puzzle already do this? I will have to find out. I will note here that I think Defensive Move puzzles are quite hard, even when low rated, because only very good players do them in training. Most average players would never do one. So it's a biased sample perhaps. Not sure if this is right though. It would depend on how the puzzle rating algorithm works. My training method upsets the puzzle rating algorithm. Just a few blunders will smash my puzzle rating down so it is volatile and the algorithm keeps the "?" against it. These are interesting observations to me but they are probably boring observations to advanced players and programmers.

@Wodjul said in #6:

I do agree, defensive puzzles are much more difficult, at higher levels too. its takes a different mindset and their are no immediate gains (as with offensive puzzles). Positional puzzles would be beneficial but I think hard to implement. Positional understanding is complex and sometimes the positional "best" move won't be any better than the 2nd or even 3rd objectively best move. It is something I feel should be worked with through a course/book or coach or a study partner, simply because more elaborations are needed.

Anyways whatever type of puzzles you are doing, I would also advice to revisit puzzles you have completed before from time to time to see if previous learnings have sunk in and to build pattern recognition.

@Wodjul said in #6: I do agree, defensive puzzles are much more difficult, at higher levels too. its takes a different mindset and their are no immediate gains (as with offensive puzzles). Positional puzzles would be beneficial but I think hard to implement. Positional understanding is complex and sometimes the positional "best" move won't be any better than the 2nd or even 3rd objectively best move. It is something I feel should be worked with through a course/book or coach or a study partner, simply because more elaborations are needed. Anyways whatever type of puzzles you are doing, I would also advice to revisit puzzles you have completed before from time to time to see if previous learnings have sunk in and to build pattern recognition.

Yet another good blog. Hats off to you Mcie! :)

P.S Why is your username Mcie? Is it like an abbreviation of your full name or something else? BTW mine is my first name and last initial.

Yet another good blog. Hats off to you Mcie! :) P.S Why is your username Mcie? Is it like an abbreviation of your full name or something else? BTW mine is my first name and last initial.

@Siddhartha_S said in #8:

Yet another good blog. Hats off to you Mcie! :)

P.S Why is your username Mcie? Is it like an abbreviation of your full name or something else? BTW mine is my first name and last initial.

Thanks alot for the support again Siddhartha! :) my handle is my initials (MC)

@Siddhartha_S said in #8: > Yet another good blog. Hats off to you Mcie! :) > > P.S Why is your username Mcie? Is it like an abbreviation of your full name or something else? BTW mine is my first name and last initial. Thanks alot for the support again Siddhartha! :) my handle is my initials (MC)
<Comment deleted by user>