Does anyone know if there are databases (either via Lichess or elsewhere) of the most common wrong moves players make in puzzle positions? Not sure if this is recoverable with the Lichess API and I don't think I've seen puzzle books/repos that consistently include the most common errors players make. Thanks in advance!
I kinda asked this question a year or so ago and it kinda works out most puzzles are solved 50% of the time by everyone,so whatever mistake you made around 50% would have made the same mistake ,if that makes sense , so it's a pretty non plus answer you're looking for cause of the 50\50 ratio of the puzzle being solved ,so you're not alone if you failed a puzzle , if anyone cares to explain this better than me , feel free but that's my kinda naive understanding of it xxx
@SimonBirch said in #2:
> I kinda asked this question a year or so ago and it kinda works out most puzzles are solved 50% of the time by everyone,so whatever mistake you made around 50% would have made the same mistake ,if that makes sense , so it's a pretty non plus answer you're looking for cause of the 50\50 ratio of the puzzle being solved ,so you're not alone if you failed a puzzle , if anyone cares to explain this better than me , feel free but that's my kinda naive understanding of it xxx
thanks for the response - I'm not so much interested in the ratio of solves/mistakes, but what the specific mistakes are that players of different strength make. That is, if we look at the ~50% of people who didn't solve a puzzle, is it the case that most of them tried the same wrong move, or is it just highly variable? If there are consistent wrong moves that players choose, does playing strength affect which mistake you tend to make?
> I kinda asked this question a year or so ago and it kinda works out most puzzles are solved 50% of the time by everyone,so whatever mistake you made around 50% would have made the same mistake ,if that makes sense , so it's a pretty non plus answer you're looking for cause of the 50\50 ratio of the puzzle being solved ,so you're not alone if you failed a puzzle , if anyone cares to explain this better than me , feel free but that's my kinda naive understanding of it xxx
thanks for the response - I'm not so much interested in the ratio of solves/mistakes, but what the specific mistakes are that players of different strength make. That is, if we look at the ~50% of people who didn't solve a puzzle, is it the case that most of them tried the same wrong move, or is it just highly variable? If there are consistent wrong moves that players choose, does playing strength affect which mistake you tend to make?
I guess outta everyone who failed to solve a puzzle ,50 percent of players would make the first wrong move 35 percent would make the second wrong first move and 15 would make the third wrong first move and so on it would all be averaged out in the end over all puzzles , I think there's no real significant thing you can learn as higher rated players more likely to solve puzzles and lower rated not, I'm not trying to dis your post I'm just saying the results of such statistics would be the same over all puzzles and no different to what you're doing yourself , it would be the same , for instance I didn't see a queen was hanging to a pawn first move of a puzzle the other day , you're saying how many other people missed it? Ok I guess that might be intrresting but it would it really be beneficial that I was as stupid as say 20 % of other players(edit : to make me feel better that others made same mistake) other than knowing other people are making the same mistakes as me , which we already know , we all make the same mistakes , blunders and inaccuracies largely related to our rating , I mean no harm just wondering how useful it would be when we already know the answer ,rather than wasting valuable resources for an average answer , peace up happy chessing xxx
@SimonBirch said in #4:
> I guess outta everyone who failed to solve a puzzle ,50 percent of players would make the first wrong move 35 percent would make the second wrong first move and 15 would make the third wrong first move and so on it would all be averaged out in the end over all puzzles , I think there's no real significant thing you can learn as higher rated players more likely to solve puzzles and lower rated not, I'm not trying to dis your post I'm just saying the results of such statistics would be the same over all puzzles and no different to what you're doing yourself , it would be the same , for instance I didn't see a queen was hanging to a pawn first move of a puzzle the other day , you're saying how many other people missed it? Ok I guess that might be intrresting but it would it really be beneficial that I was as stupid as say 20 % of other players other than knowing other people are making the same mistakes as me , which we already know , we all make the same mistakes , blunders and inaccuracies largely related to our rating , I mean no harm just wondering how useful it would be when we already know the answer ,rather than wasting valuable resources for an average answer , peace up happy chessing xxx
I should probably clarify that I'm asking this because I'm a research scientist and I'm interested in how people evaluate chess positions. In cog. sci. studies, it's often interesting to consider whether or not people make consistent errors because that can help us understand the way they're thinking about the task. So I'm not asking how many people missed that the Q was hanging in the puzzle you mentioned - I want to know what they decided to do instead of the right answer. If lots of people do the same thing (not just missed the 2nd move or the 3rd, but maybe made a specific trade or something), then this might be an interesting hint about what those players noticed in the position first. My impression (which could be wrong) is that we may know in general what kinds of mistakes lower-rated players make, but don't necessarily have a ton of systematic data about this to say something more specific. That's why I'm asking about a db with that information included.
No worries - possibly a weird question for the forums, but you never know if someone might know about a resource that's out there.
> I guess outta everyone who failed to solve a puzzle ,50 percent of players would make the first wrong move 35 percent would make the second wrong first move and 15 would make the third wrong first move and so on it would all be averaged out in the end over all puzzles , I think there's no real significant thing you can learn as higher rated players more likely to solve puzzles and lower rated not, I'm not trying to dis your post I'm just saying the results of such statistics would be the same over all puzzles and no different to what you're doing yourself , it would be the same , for instance I didn't see a queen was hanging to a pawn first move of a puzzle the other day , you're saying how many other people missed it? Ok I guess that might be intrresting but it would it really be beneficial that I was as stupid as say 20 % of other players other than knowing other people are making the same mistakes as me , which we already know , we all make the same mistakes , blunders and inaccuracies largely related to our rating , I mean no harm just wondering how useful it would be when we already know the answer ,rather than wasting valuable resources for an average answer , peace up happy chessing xxx
I should probably clarify that I'm asking this because I'm a research scientist and I'm interested in how people evaluate chess positions. In cog. sci. studies, it's often interesting to consider whether or not people make consistent errors because that can help us understand the way they're thinking about the task. So I'm not asking how many people missed that the Q was hanging in the puzzle you mentioned - I want to know what they decided to do instead of the right answer. If lots of people do the same thing (not just missed the 2nd move or the 3rd, but maybe made a specific trade or something), then this might be an interesting hint about what those players noticed in the position first. My impression (which could be wrong) is that we may know in general what kinds of mistakes lower-rated players make, but don't necessarily have a ton of systematic data about this to say something more specific. That's why I'm asking about a db with that information included.
No worries - possibly a weird question for the forums, but you never know if someone might know about a resource that's out there.
@NDpatzer said in #5:
>
> No worries - possibly a weird question for the forums, but you never know if someone might know about a resource that's out there.
Then maybe you're just talking about 'talent' a natural gift for the game? , why is Magnus the best and why am I a lowly average rated player ,not fair! Lol xxx
Edit:
Can you measure natural talent , id love to be a formula one driver or a 100 metre runner but my natural talent is to be good with horses and riding. I don't think you can measure Gods gift to you xxx
>
> No worries - possibly a weird question for the forums, but you never know if someone might know about a resource that's out there.
Then maybe you're just talking about 'talent' a natural gift for the game? , why is Magnus the best and why am I a lowly average rated player ,not fair! Lol xxx
Edit:
Can you measure natural talent , id love to be a formula one driver or a 100 metre runner but my natural talent is to be good with horses and riding. I don't think you can measure Gods gift to you xxx