This is why memorising theory alone isn't a good way to get stronger. You need to know why the theory is the way it is so you can understand why the moves are good and how to punish opponents mistakes

[–] russmatney@programming.dev 3 points 2 months ago

Yup, learning theory is way more about Why the move than What the move is

[–] Gladaed@feddit.org 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)

This is why puzzles should feature more nothing burgers! Identifying a weakness is easy if you know that it exists.

[–] Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 months ago

That's such a big thing with puzzles in general. It's easy to look for a solution if one exists, but during real matches you can't waste a bunch of time looking for an ideal move that isn't actually there.

[–] Bonsoir@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Even at ~2800 in puzzles I'm sometime faced with mates in one or mates in two that are quite easy. I feel like that score doesn't mean anything and shouldn't be compared to real games ELO.

[–] helix@feddit.org 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

How is puzzle elo calculated? Guess stockfish just shits on the board and rolls some dice?

[–] Bonsoir@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I have no idea.
Usually, an elo system implies that two individuals are matched together and hopefully end up with a winner and a loser. They might do something similar to rate every puzzle.
Although last month, they readjusted everyone's elo to lower it down. I went from 2860 to 1930 from one day to an other. Doesn't change a thing, but I guess it does feel less inflated now.

[–] Toes@ani.social 2 points 1 month ago

I try to walk people into puzzle-like situations. Works well for me in blitz.