Ranked by frequency × severity × recency over 7089 analysed games (weighted 1282.2: over-the-board counts fully, blitz a fifth, bullet almost nothing). Confirmed needs 12 or more occurrences; provisional 5 to 11; fewer is a watch. Only confirmed leaks may drive more than a fifth of a week's training. Tactical motifs shown here passed validation against the Lichess puzzle database at 70% precision or better; the rest are tracked but hidden until they do.
01Mistakes and blunders with no tactical shape (judgement, not calculation)
confirmed
86.7 per 100 games (95% CI 49–55 of games)severity 31% win chance per occurrencen = 6413 in 3787 games (weighted 1112.2)score 477.7trend: flat (-4.2% vs previous 60 days, n 832/792)
02Slow eval slides over several quiet moves with no single big error
confirmed
97.1 per 100 games (95% CI 62–67 of games)severity 19% win chance per occurrencen = 7007 in 4655 games (weighted 1244.6)score 328.3trend: flat (-1.1% vs previous 60 days, n 902/850)
42.0 per 100 games (95% CI 15–19 of games)severity 36% win chance per occurrencen = 4950 in 1886 games (weighted 539.0)score 278.9trend: flat (+0.1% vs previous 60 days, n 615/463)
04Reached a clearly winning position (≥ +2) and did not win
confirmed
26.7 per 100 games (95% CI 24–29 of games)severity 50% win chance per occurrencen = 1980 in 1980 games (weighted 342.4)score 238.0trend: flat (-2.4% vs previous 60 days, n 254/245)
05Errors in critical positions after thinking under 5 seconds
confirmed
29.5 per 100 games (95% CI 20–25 of games)severity 20% win chance per occurrencen = 2482 in 1809 games (weighted 378.1)score 105.9trend: flat (+12.1% vs previous 60 days, n 311/261)
06Mistakes and blunders once the game reached an endgame
confirmed
15.3 per 100 games (95% CI 8–11 of games)severity 37% win chance per occurrencen = 1204 in 727 games (weighted 196.6)score 94.9trend: better (-17.5% vs previous 60 days, n 152/148)
07Allowed the opponent a fork (blunder-check / prophylaxis)
confirmed
9.5 per 100 games (95% CI 7–10 of games)severity 41% win chance per occurrencen = 677 in 613 games (weighted 121.6)score 65.3trend: worse (+19.9% vs previous 60 days, n 96/79)
08Allowed the opponent a mate in n (blunder-check / prophylaxis)
confirmed
3.9 per 100 games (95% CI 3–5 of games)severity 54% win chance per occurrencen = 308 in 289 games (weighted 49.4)score 41.4trend: worse (+17.3% vs previous 60 days, n 49/37)
7.6 per 100 games (95% CI 6–8 of games)severity 33% win chance per occurrencen = 557 in 503 games (weighted 98.0)score 37.5trend: worse (+18.3% vs previous 60 days, n 70/52)
10Allowed the opponent a royal fork (blunder-check / prophylaxis)
confirmed
5.4 per 100 games (95% CI 4–6 of games)severity 43% win chance per occurrencen = 398 in 367 games (weighted 69.3)score 36.8trend: worse (+20.8% vs previous 60 days, n 53/41)
11Missed your own fork (calculation / board vision)
confirmed
5.1 per 100 games (95% CI 4–6 of games)severity 40% win chance per occurrencen = 393 in 358 games (weighted 65.0)score 33.6trend: flat (-3.8% vs previous 60 days, n 45/43)
12Missed your own sacrifice (calculation / board vision)
confirmed
4.5 per 100 games (95% CI 3–6 of games)severity 38% win chance per occurrencen = 327 in 307 games (weighted 57.5)score 32.6trend: worse (+17.1% vs previous 60 days, n 43/37)
13Allowed the opponent a sacrifice (blunder-check / prophylaxis)
confirmed
4.6 per 100 games (95% CI 3–6 of games)severity 38% win chance per occurrencen = 314 in 294 games (weighted 59.0)score 30.1trend: flat (+7.6% vs previous 60 days, n 39/39)
14Allowed the opponent a knight fork (blunder-check / prophylaxis)
confirmed
4.2 per 100 games (95% CI 3–5 of games)severity 39% win chance per occurrencen = 315 in 292 games (weighted 54.0)score 29.0trend: worse (+45.6% vs previous 60 days, n 46/35)
15Allowed the opponent a queen fork (blunder-check / prophylaxis)
confirmed
2.7 per 100 games (95% CI 2–3 of games)severity 45% win chance per occurrencen = 190 in 180 games (weighted 34.1)score 19.1trend: worse (+16.3% vs previous 60 days, n 26/20)
16Missed your own royal fork (calculation / board vision)
confirmed
2.5 per 100 games (95% CI 2–3 of games)severity 43% win chance per occurrencen = 202 in 190 games (weighted 32.5)score 16.9trend: better (-23.7% vs previous 60 days, n 20/22)
17Missed your own mate in n (calculation / board vision)
confirmed
1.4 per 100 games (95% CI 1–2 of games)severity 55% win chance per occurrencen = 117 in 110 games (weighted 18.5)score 16.0trend: better (-52.7% vs previous 60 days, n 13/25)
18Allowed the opponent a discovered attack (blunder-check / prophylaxis)
confirmed
2.0 per 100 games (95% CI 1–3 of games)severity 38% win chance per occurrencen = 155 in 142 games (weighted 26.3)score 14.6trend: better (-21.6% vs previous 60 days, n 17/21)
19Missed your own knight fork (calculation / board vision)
confirmed
2.1 per 100 games (95% CI 1–3 of games)severity 39% win chance per occurrencen = 166 in 147 games (weighted 27.4)score 13.7trend: flat (-4.4% vs previous 60 days, n 20/18)
20Missed your own queen fork (calculation / board vision)
confirmed
1.7 per 100 games (95% CI 1–2 of games)severity 42% win chance per occurrencen = 130 in 126 games (weighted 21.4)score 11.3trend: flat (-1.2% vs previous 60 days, n 15/13)
Game data from Chess.com (Published-Data API) and Lichess (open API and CC0 database). Engine analysis by Stockfish. Ratings from FIDE. Board design is our own. Data generated 2026-11-10 20:51 UTC.