IsaVulpes wrote on 09/19/18 at 21:21:14:
Does anyone who has worked with the book for a bit have a concrete opinion as to how it stacks ups to "simply" doing ChessTempo or CT-Art?
I am not very concerned about the repetition vs new puzzles debate; if I believed the method to work, I could after all just do the same with a different book / custom problem set in CT / etc (naturally neither of the authors did their run of the system with the book..) , so this would mostly be a question about quality of the puzzles, clarity of the solutions, and I guess entertainment value of the book as a whole - when compared to the other tactics sources out there.
Did anything about the book 'grip' you in particular fashion, or did you indeed feel there was little difference compared to other tomes (such as eg Palliser's "The complete chess workout")?
In October I will have some amount of time, but little access to the internet. Would you recommend me to get the CT-Art mobile version, or the book on Forward Chess, or perhaps something entirely else?
I am currently tending towards the book, as it seems 'more different' to my usual Chesstempo puzzles than CT-Art does, but while skimming through places, I eg found a 2014 review by ReneDescartes, who called CT-Art smth like the by far best tactics.. thing, something. I know very little about it, so I cant judge, and of course I also don't know if something changed in the last 4 years.
Or indeed, perhaps someone has a great different idea as to what would be an optimal way of practicing tactics, on mobile, without internet?
Ct-Art 3.0 is still the best tactics training program you can find, especially for woodpeckering. I actually bought Crossover for my Mac only to run this old program which does not run under windows 10 anymore. Don't bother with the Peshka (Ct-art 4.0 and later) versions, they totally messed up a brilliant program. Send me a PM if you've got trouble finding the good ol' CT-art 3.0.
I got the mobile Ct-art version too. It is fine, but it can't compare with 3.0.
I think the benefits of the Woodpecker Method are besides pattern recognition the
training of your decision making under severe time constraint. I consider this as more important than pattern recognition.
If I study chess most of the times I go deep and there isn't a time limit which I set for myself. I could spend any amount of time on a problem and most of the times I just want to get it right.
The difference with the woodpecker method is that it isn't about getting it right, but it's primary goal is to increase the speed of your problem solving. You do have to make a serious effort of course and choose a move for which you take responsibility.
With the woodpeckermethod you first start solving for 4 weeks (the first cycle), the amount of problems you solve there is your set. So that could be 200 for a beginner or 1000 for an advanced player. You can see this as a baseline measurement.
The next cycle you need to solve your set it in 2 weeks, (taking advantage of pattern recognition), then the next cycle in 1 week etc. Right now I am only in my second cycle, and it is already quite tough.
I write all my solutions and time used down.
I averaged 5 minutes per problem in the first cycle and it is now down to 4 minutes in the second cycle.
Smith and Tikkanen say that speed is your nr.1 focus with the training. The ticks really help in that regard. If you see that your tactics work good enough, write it down and go the next problem, there is no need to flesh out the entire variation.
In a way this really is the best experience I have with training which simulates OTB decision making with a clock running.
In the second cycle I actually got some problems wrong which I got the first cycle right. That is intensely frustrating, but also quite revealing, that not all patterns stay in the memory banks. Overall my solving percentage is slightly higher.
It is quite hard to train solo with limited time, because it is hard to say how much time you need. The baseline which you set in the 4 weeks works great in that regard.
I think it was Sadler who said that when he trained with Dvoretsky, the most grueling part was that he had to solve a tremendous amount of hard problems in a set amount of time.
https://matthewsadler.me.uk/news/memoriam-mark-dvoretsky/I think the spaced repetition is different from the Woodpecker in that there is no increased time strain, which makes Woodpeckering so tough, and therefore a great practice tool.
Also I think it is good to focus on all the problems and not necessarily the ones you got wrong as you forget a lot sadly.
Of course this is from a sample size of one, but still

As for the book. In a way it is YATB, you can use any tactics book for woodpeckering.
But I still recommend it if you own other tactics books.
The timeline for the tactics from all the word champions from Steinitz to Carlsen is a nice feature and outlines a nice path in the book.
The ticks are a good feature to make more intuitive decisions where you see far enough. Sometimes you can disagree with the placements, but than you can use common sense.
The quality of the book, paper and bindingwise is of the usual top stuff from Quality Chess.