Chess is 99 percent tactics.

Is this true?

Sure. Unless you are AlphaZero. :)

Good positional play is achieved by means of small tactical operations („einfache Taktik“, see Jussupow/Dvoretzky), so there is no real difference.

All that matters is good moves. RJF

Master Sarg0n ...It's big question what is good move..Some good move also turns into dubious..

I remember one video on YouTube where this question was asked to Nakamura. He claimed that up until probably IM level, tactics dictate around 90% of the game (or something like that) and only at higher levels, true positional play became a major factor.

Tactics arise from a superior position, and a superior position is reached by accumulating positional advantages. So we could say that chess is 99% positional play as well.

@CrazySharkyy , 100% agree with @Dario19503. Against a good player, tactics are useless unless you have a positional edge. Positional mastery must be reached first. Magnus Carlsen would never have passed 2000 even if he studied tactics 20 hours a day, if he hadn't worked on positional play as well.

It is 50% motif knowledge (which consists of strategical middlegame and endgame motifs as well as tactical motifs), 20% logic based on common chess laws, 20% concrete calculation, and 10% hypnosis.

yeah that phrase is actually quite meaningless, I tell you chess is 97,45% memory.

Tactics often appear randomly. Computers taught us that small details matter. If the pieces are located in that way that it works well they can even be "shuffled" there.

Chess is 100% knowing how the pieces move. 99% perspiration. 10% preparation. 13% psychology. ,,,,
Add all these together and you have enough to entertain you for a lifetime.