Training

I don't understand why I've gotten 10 openings in a row that are 150 points bellow my rating. Over the course of 3 problems, I guess 14 correct moves and get 1 wrong. My overall rating drops 26 points. It's a bit frustrating. Could we tweak the problem distribution a bit? At least give us a chance on some tougher ones. The actual number of my rating doesn't matter to me. It would just be nice to be able to make reasonable progress from my effort.

Overall, I'm loving this new thing. But from a pure "gaming" aspect, i think it could improve.

@clarkey - dredging this old thread up:
--Any update on the position generation progress? (you mentioned your code was busy crunching through thousands of NIC games)

--Any plans on allowing per opening training? I have not used this feature much - but would more if I could train specific openings (and ideally specific variations in those openings)

*TWIC that is :P

One thing I just thought of that might be useful for this...we're building quite a number of correspondence games over the last several months. A majority of these games will have fairly precise openings due to the use of opening books/databases in many of these games. It might be a way to help narrow the search process...i.e. looking at higher intermediate/advanced correspondence and slow clock games where the opening moves will be more precise and generally following theory? Just a thought.

@static - are we technically allowed to use books/databases? Just don't know the official policy on this.

But - still - don't think it is necessary - the TWIC database of GM games should give more than enough material to work through.

My main problem with the current feature is it is more like 'opening principles' training - i.e. get a feel for right moves in any opening situation. It is not training to actually play a specific opening.

.... @goldilocks [AND, yes static your input is welcome]: don't know how old you are but what do you say to the following point (made earlier in a thread I can't find):

______In the 'opening' puzzles, a3 a6 h3 &h6 are often guarenteed winners for the '4 strong move' puzzles -- the way I learned chess the danger in these moves is alowing your opponent to gain a pawn when sacrficing a piece & often creating a situation where a recapture by the supporting pawn b2 b7 h2 h7 becomes somewhat forced WHEREAS LEAVING the a2 a7 h2 h7 structure provides you with the option of not capturing...

Is there a book on updated opening theory that explains the changes in 'current, cutting edge theory"? Mine from 2002 does not address it & ;my others are @ 30 years old

Puzzle generation has completed. Next step is to work on functionality, but this isn't the highest thing on the todo list.

@Isaiah4031 - not sure how valid a point that is: these are moves as ACTUALLY played by GMs (and furthermore assessed by an engine). ... nothing to do with any theory behind it. The idea being simply if GMs play the moves, they are likely OK to play.

@clarkey - is there a publicly visible todo list? Or even high level 'what are next big changes/features' list? I check out github for what is done... but would be cool to see what is planned.

Thank you 'goldi'...
_______Situations that are clearly winnable for a GM may be beyond me... Although I have been scaling down on games & gathering advice that supposedly can raise me 200-300 pts, I am well removed from both the strategic & tactical skill they posess.....
____ So learning the stategic base is my best hope of using these 'new' tools..........