Live data from Hacker News

Chess tactics explained

chesstactics.org

211–220 of 271 posts

Re: Chess tactics explained

#211
post #2

I wondered if the popularity of 'The queen's Gambit' would lead to a brief infatuation with chess in the popular imagination. The fact I've seen about 3 chess related submissions on HN recently, where I don't recall ever seeing one before, suggests it does. I used to enjoy a game of chess back in the day, although I was never very good. And I always imagined myself playing chess with a remote opponent by post when I…

not playing chess because someone might be cheating is like not living in a house because someone might rob it. You can't make this argument in the absence of the numbers.

Re: Chess tactics explained

#212
post #204
post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is really interesting! Thanks for sharing. What are the average number of moves per puzzle in the top groups? Do they all end up being 5+ moves or can there be 2800+ puzzles with only 2 or three moves?

There certainly can be short difficult puzzles, but as I mentioned elsewhere, I think the current 4000-rated puzzles look like outliers and may be removed. +----------------+---------+-------------------+ | ratings_band | count | avg_move_count | |----------------+---------+-------------------| | ... | | | | 3000-3099 | 917 | 3.9400 | | 3100-3199 | 434 | 4.1244 | | 3200-3299 | 282 | 4.2766 | | 3300-3399 | 144 | 4.750…

Thank you for sharing the information.

By the way... I really enjoy chess.com. The recent addition of getting to retry your game mistakes is really cool. I'd love to see those kept overtime and be able to retry them all in a random order later.

Re: Chess tactics explained

#213
post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is interesting and it makes me really want to see the 5 4000+ puzzles...

I am not sure that the 5 specific puzzles maxed out at the 4000 also represent the very best, most fun, and most insightful. Sometimes the reason a puzzle comes up as an extreme outlier is somewhat obtuse, and we are more inclined to remove the puzzle after we see how users interact with it. For example https://www.chess.com/puzzles/problem/568140 is mostly rated 4000 because ...Qe1+ is so compelling that it pulls in…

why is Qe1+ compelling? It pushes the king to greater safety and activates the rook. If the correct move is e3, then I think that the problem with a 4000 rated puzzle is that the prior is so strong that players feel like they can ignore the obvious moves. You should try just resetting the rating of that puzzle and see it ends up in a different spot.

Re: Chess tactics explained

#214
Personally, I recommend Go over Chess. I've played both not well and I enjoy Go more. Chess is extremely tactical and calculation oriented. One blunder and the game is over for the most part in Chess.

While in Go, reading is also incredibly important there are other aspects to it that make the game richer, IMO.

Re: Chess tactics explained

#215
post #2

I wondered if the popularity of 'The queen's Gambit' would lead to a brief infatuation with chess in the popular imagination. The fact I've seen about 3 chess related submissions on HN recently, where I don't recall ever seeing one before, suggests it does. I used to enjoy a game of chess back in the day, although I was never very good. And I always imagined myself playing chess with a remote opponent by post when I…

> as I'd never be sure my opponent wasn't just putting the moves into a computer and playing whatever it told him to play. As mentioned, cheaters are detected and banned. But from another perspective, cheater or not doesn't matter. You know you are playing against someone you have a statistical chance to beat. Same thing in Starcraft where people use map hacks. Who cares? The ranking system matches you with people yo…

Two other points about cheating relevant to non-expert players:

- Until expert level you most likely won't to be able to notice in real-time that you're playing a cheater. You'll be blundering and getting out-positioned regularly against legitimate players, so it's hard to notice that for one game a cheater played a perfect game against you, because most likely you made clear mistakes in that game. This is different for experts because they mostly stop making minor mistakes, so they have cause for suspicion when they know they played a strong and consistent game but still got destroyed. You also won't be strong enough to really recognize that some moves are "inhuman", especially because you'll be playing against folks who make weird/wrong moves all the time, whereas experts can sometimes tell if moves are computer-like (typically because there is a natural and obvious move to make and the cheating move is marginally stronger but hard to find).

- Cheaters don't stay in low ratings for long. If they aren't detected, they'll be out of your rating in no time, like in 2 or 3 wins. This reduces the chance you'll encounter cheaters, because if a cheater plays 100 games but only 2 of them are in your rating bracket, you're unlikely to ever match against them anyways.

Keeping those things in mind, and knowing that reaching expert level (~2000+ elo) takes many years and is unachievable for most adults, online cheating becomes a minor concern at best for anyone who's picking it up as a hobby in adulthood.

Re: Chess tactics explained

#216

Due to Magnus Carlsen, chess has had a major boost here in Norway. His major tournaments are covered in detail on TV with commentary by chess experts, which makes it quite approachable and exciting to watch. Given the inevitable slow parts of the game, the experts have time to explain the position on the board, and show how the variations can play out etc. They've somehow managed to turn chess into a spectator sport.…

And Magnus just lost! In the final of the Skilling Open there were 7 decisive games out of 10 - 8 rapid games followed by a 2 blitz game tiebreak.

Re: Chess tactics explained

#217
post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really love your chess puzzles, I play Puzzle Rush most days! If you can share, how many puzzles do you add each month? Are they mostly hand-generated or do you have some nifty way of deriving puzzles from real games automagically? Would also be really cool if a puzzle rush spread out puzzle types more it feels like there is heavy clustering of a specific problem type at key rating ranges: early puzzles (1-6) are ver…

Last month we added 2800, the vast majority automatically derived, though we also prize expert review. We are thinking of doubling that rate next month. I'm not sure much can be done about the predominance of certain puzzle types in the very early Rush puzzles. Would you prefer more hung pieces? But in the later levels, mixing it up by themes/tags is an interesting idea, about which I will make some measurements.

Yeah overall some theme diversity. Would also be interested to know the median Elo rating by tag - since that'd serve a good sort of table-of-contents of order for people to learn chess tactics.

What is also pretty interesting would be a (fuzzed) per-tag Elo rating on the user - so they can see which themes you are good/bad at relatively (for example, if you constantly get problems on Trapped Pieces wrong your rating on those problems would be lower than your average Puzzle Rating).

Re: Chess tactics explained

#218
post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as I'd never be sure my opponent wasn't just putting the moves into a computer and playing whatever it told him to play. As mentioned, cheaters are detected and banned. But from another perspective, cheater or not doesn't matter. You know you are playing against someone you have a statistical chance to beat. Same thing in Starcraft where people use map hacks. Who cares? The ranking system matches you with people yo…

Are cheaters really detected and banned? My guess is that there's a lot of lower grade cheating. Here are a few ways that would be difficult to detect: Run a position analyzer only to alert you to the existence of a strong move that you haven't noticed. Don't use it to find the move, just to alert you to when your position is strong. For instance, you might see that your position score is +10, but not realize why - t…

Most of your proposals can be detected by statistics:

- [...] just to alert you to when your position is strong. Oh, so you are a player that never misses a win? Hmm...

- [...] avoid traps in early games. Now you are a very strange player that never blunders during openings but blunders normally later on. Suspicious.

- [...] just for the occasional move. How do you know what move is that? Are you implying you never make _big_ blunders (but make plenty of non-huge ones)? Also suspicious.

In general, there are many signals you can collect. If other users are complaining about a player then you analyze them, and if your signals say "suspicious" then... you caught a cheater. If nobody complains about a particular user you don't do anything because it just doesn't matter.

Re: Chess tactics explained

#219
post #213
post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure that the 5 specific puzzles maxed out at the 4000 also represent the very best, most fun, and most insightful. Sometimes the reason a puzzle comes up as an extreme outlier is somewhat obtuse, and we are more inclined to remove the puzzle after we see how users interact with it. For example https://www.chess.com/puzzles/problem/568140 is mostly rated 4000 because ...Qe1+ is so compelling that it pulls in…

why is Qe1+ compelling? It pushes the king to greater safety and activates the rook. If the correct move is e3, then I think that the problem with a 4000 rated puzzle is that the prior is so strong that players feel like they can ignore the obvious moves. You should try just resetting the rating of that puzzle and see it ends up in a different spot.

We sometimes do that. I'm resetting that puzzle down to 1480.

Re: Chess tactics explained

#220
post #212
post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There certainly can be short difficult puzzles, but as I mentioned elsewhere, I think the current 4000-rated puzzles look like outliers and may be removed. +----------------+---------+-------------------+ | ratings_band | count | avg_move_count | |----------------+---------+-------------------| | ... | | | | 3000-3099 | 917 | 3.9400 | | 3100-3199 | 434 | 4.1244 | | 3200-3299 | 282 | 4.2766 | | 3300-3399 | 144 | 4.750…

Thank you for sharing the information. By the way... I really enjoy chess.com. The recent addition of getting to retry your game mistakes is really cool. I'd love to see those kept overtime and be able to retry them all in a random order later.

Definitely on the roadmap.
Post reply on HN