Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Dalton Perrine's avatar

As a Chessable author, students tend to like lots of explanation of moves and thorough analysis of alternative moves in tactic courses ("Why doesn't reasonable-looking-move xyz work?"). Not sure how important this is for a tactic course targeted for u1000 rated players though. Also, students tend to like when courses are regularly updated or when the author answers questions that are asked in the forum/position comments. With a tactics course I don't think updating the course later on with additional puzzles is necessary but answering questions and making small updates to the text tends to be a good thing to consider and keeps students happy while also looking good for potential future students.

Expand full comment
Jason Fikes's avatar

Dalton's courses are a fantastic model for how to maximize the Chessable course structure. His French Simplified is terrific. I am a huge fan. Representing ideas "theory sections" vs a "tactics section" is quite helpful.

I think if you could build a course that works all around a traditional opening, highlighting typical tactics that you can see in that opening you would have something quite popular.

Most of the time, this would be the result of "bad play" in which someone doesn't get what should be happening on the board.

u1000 players don't want to be "that guy" and they want to see how to punish opening mistakes. They know they should be able to but they don't seem to have the imagination to snag much more than hanging pieces. Tactics centering around pins, deflection, simple double attacks--but that are reached out of the same opening would be useful.

Or maybe you could turn things around and offer simple defensive technique out of 1...e5: typical beginner attacks and tactics that someone can anticipate. I wouldn't do anything deeper than 10-12 moves.

Expand full comment
10 more comments...

No posts