Chessville

Today is

Site Map

If you have disabled Java for your browser, use the Site Map (linked in the header and footer).

Chessville
logo by
ChessPrints

From the
Chessville
Chess Store

Pablo's
Chess
News

Problem
of the
Week

Reference
Center

Tactics, Tactics, Tactics

by S. Evan Kreider

There are a lot of people out there these days who claim that the only important thing to study until you hit master level is tactics, and that anything else, like strategy, endgames, etc., is a waste of time. I agree that tactics are the most important thing, but I can’t agree that they are the only important thing. I can say from my own experience that I have found studying middlegame strategy, openings, and endgames very useful. I've won plenty of games against fellow amateurs by understanding the ideas behind the openings better and getting a much better middlegame position as a result, and / or knowing how to enter into and a superior endgame and how to win it as well.

I can't help suspect that the "Only Tactics Matter" school of thought represents a "quick-fix / no effort" approach which most people are looking for (whether in chess or in other areas of life – how many times have you seen advertisements like "Lose 50 pounds in 2 weeks without diet or exercise!!!!"). Most people don’t want to deal with more difficult and sometimes dull material like strategy and endgames. They’d rather spend their time on fun stuff like tactics and attacking the enemy king, and so if one or two decently-rated players come along claiming that they earned their rating through tactics alone, the rest of us are only too willing to buy into it.

I'm don’t deny that tactical improvement may have helped a lot of people improve quickly, but I don’t think that this is because tactics are all that matter. Rather, I believe it is because tactics are the most (but not the only) important thing for non-masters, and because so many of us amateurs are so weak tactically, and because there are some pretty straightforward and efficient ways to improve tactics, unlike strategy, which requires more time and experience to accumulate.

Again, I want to make it clear that I don’t disagree that tactics are important, and that studying tactics can go a long way to improving your practical results. In fact, I've even written about the importance of tactical training in "Suggestions for Improving Your Play" and "Practicing Tactics" and "Reducing Your Over-the-Board Errors." I do believe that it will really help anyone's game improve, maybe even dramatically, and maybe even in a fairly short period as well. But I know that I surely won’t leave strategy behind, especially not when I see it at work in my own games.

[Interested in discussing this issue? Come to Chessville's Discussion Forum!]