How to find the best chess move every time. (No one said it was easy) • page 1/1 • General Chess Discussion • lichess.org

GrandmasterCoral

First we must define "the best move". Well really, there is no such thing. As every position changes with one opponent having a slight advantage, or maybe it's a dead draw. When one refers to the best move, they simply mean "the best possible continuation from my given standpoint". Even if you are on the losing side.

Now, let's break it down. I have 2 ways of finding the best move, and a 3rd add-on on how GM's and superGM's use this technique but in a slightly different manner.

Method 1: This is the most popular method and one you've most likely heard of before. This is called the candidates method and it goes like this. "I have a position in front of me, and I'm going to weigh my options on what's best for my plan" Simply demolish the thought of any stupid moves like sacrificing the queen for a pawn in a typical situation (unless there's tactics. Make sure to look out for those). Then weigh your options like so. "I have 3 good moves, but which one will ultimately work out for me in the end?"You need to calculate REALISTIC variations in order to succeed. Remember, Always always always always assume your opponent will make the best move. Then if you'd like, weigh your options on a scale of 1-10. This way you can see what works best. However don't forget to interpret the nature of the game. Ask yourself "Have I seen similar position to this before in my knowledge of chess? If so what did I learn from previous positions?" In order to find the best move, one must really take a long hard look at the nature of a position. Then simply continue with your continuation. If it fails and you lose the game, then go back after and ask yourself "where did I go wrong?" "What could have I done better?" and "What can I do to avoid a similar calculation error in the future?"

Method 2: De Groot Method. This is a method straight from a book I read from "The Improving Chess Thinker" 2nd edition. This gives a step by step formula to finding the absolute best move in a given position. P.S. I am not the author of this book, and what I am using is a quotation from "The Improving Chess Thinker" 2nd edition By Dan Heisman

Step 1: What are all the things my opponent is trying to do? This includes "What are all the things my opponent's move does?" This also includes "What are all the moves he can do now that he could not do before? ; What are his threats? ; and "How did his move parry my previous threat? Don't forget the important step of asking about his move "is it safe"? Also don't stop when you find one reason for your opponent's move, because the ones you miss may cost you the game.

Step 2: What are all the positive things I want to do? This is the main goal of planning, and your decisions should be based on both sides' threats, strengths, and weaknesses. This step also includes identifying potential tactics. After considering tactics, other positive moves/ ideas are those that restrict your opponent's plans and pieces, in addition to those that enhance yours

Step 3: What are all the candidate moves which might accomplish one or more of those goals? I once read the advice, "Don't look for the best move; look for the best plan and the moves which accomplish that plan." This advice describes a combination of steps 2 and 3. The moves identified in this step are initial candidates.

Step 4. Which of those initial candidates can I reject immediately because they are not safe? In other words, does my opponent have any checks, captures, or threats which can quickly defeat an initial candidate? Once you have eliminated these "unsafe" candidates, the remaining candidate moves are final candidates. Doing this step consistently I call, "Real Chess." As stated in our 12-point list on page 173, not doing it is Hope Chess. In the lower class protocols, the majority of player made their moves without checking to see if their opponent could reply with a decisive, forcing move.

Page 181 of "The Improving Chess Thinker" 2nd edition by: Dan Heisman - "The final step in the sidebar (step #5) is by far the most difficult one; If you can perform this step perfectly then you can play world championship level-chess."

And there you have it, 2 ways to find the best move. Even though parts of both methods overlap one another, I still see this as a helpful tool. Now, here is a 3rd short side note.

Now if you truly mastered both these methods, along with an extreme devoutness to opening theory, and extensive knowledge of tactics, combinations, and common winning patterns, and you understood the purity of such things at a philisophical level, then you could pull off a 2600 - 2650 rating no big deal. However what separates someone who masters this from a world champion or even a super GM??

My answer is this: People who are super GM's and can master these sort of things have a 3rd bonus with them. It's the sense or feeling of moving forward. In order to be the best in the world, one must have the feeling to move forward. Not everyone has this. A typical strong player or GM even would look at this and say "if I master these set of skills, I can become one of the best players in the world" But here's the catch. Super GM's use everything taught in this article (and much much much much more i.e. memorization and pattern recognition) along WITH the sense of moving forward. One can not simply use extensive book knowledge to be the best. A 2600 rated player and a 2850 rated player can almost always detect the same good moves, but the 2850 rated player has the stronger ability to see long term winning patterns, the ability to combine overall winning recognition patterns with candidate moves, and the ability to judge the characteristic traits of their opponents and know how to plan accordingly. A sixth sense of willingness can mean the difference between a typical 2600+ GM and a World Chess Champion. Just some food for thought.

That's all for now. Thank you for taking the time to read this, and I hope you have a great day :)

Hello, and thank you for taking the time to click on this. Today I'm going to present to you on how to master finding logical moves and how to avoid blunders, inaccuracies, etc. The purpose of this is to help you (the reader) but also to help myself by writing this all down. (As I have a championship in 6 days). Let me begin, and enjoy. P.S. I'm open to any critique you have and I'm willing to discuss the possible inaccuracies I will mention (or will not mention) in this article. First we must define "the best move". Well really, there is no such thing. As every position changes with one opponent having a slight advantage, or maybe it's a dead draw. When one refers to the best move, they simply mean "the best possible continuation from my given standpoint". Even if you are on the losing side. Now, let's break it down. I have 2 ways of finding the best move, and a 3rd add-on on how GM's and superGM's use this technique but in a slightly different manner. Method 1: This is the most popular method and one you've most likely heard of before. This is called the candidates method and it goes like this. "I have a position in front of me, and I'm going to weigh my options on what's best for my plan" Simply demolish the thought of any stupid moves like sacrificing the queen for a pawn in a typical situation (unless there's tactics. Make sure to look out for those). Then weigh your options like so. "I have 3 good moves, but which one will ultimately work out for me in the end?"You need to calculate REALISTIC variations in order to succeed. Remember, Always always always always assume your opponent will make the best move. Then if you'd like, weigh your options on a scale of 1-10. This way you can see what works best. However don't forget to interpret the nature of the game. Ask yourself "Have I seen similar position to this before in my knowledge of chess? If so what did I learn from previous positions?" In order to find the best move, one must really take a long hard look at the nature of a position. Then simply continue with your continuation. If it fails and you lose the game, then go back after and ask yourself "where did I go wrong?" "What could have I done better?" and "What can I do to avoid a similar calculation error in the future?" Method 2: De Groot Method. This is a method straight from a book I read from "The Improving Chess Thinker" 2nd edition. This gives a step by step formula to finding the absolute best move in a given position. P.S. I am not the author of this book, and what I am using is a quotation from "The Improving Chess Thinker" 2nd edition By Dan Heisman Step 1: What are all the things my opponent is trying to do? This includes "What are all the things my opponent's move does?" This also includes "What are all the moves he can do now that he could not do before? ; What are his threats? ; and "How did his move parry my previous threat? Don't forget the important step of asking about his move "is it safe"? Also don't stop when you find one reason for your opponent's move, because the ones you miss may cost you the game. Step 2: What are all the positive things I want to do? This is the main goal of planning, and your decisions should be based on both sides' threats, strengths, and weaknesses. This step also includes identifying potential tactics. After considering tactics, other positive moves/ ideas are those that restrict your opponent's plans and pieces, in addition to those that enhance yours Step 3: What are all the candidate moves which might accomplish one or more of those goals? I once read the advice, "Don't look for the best move; look for the best plan and the moves which accomplish that plan." This advice describes a combination of steps 2 and 3. The moves identified in this step are initial candidates. Step 4. Which of those initial candidates can I reject immediately because they are not safe? In other words, does my opponent have any checks, captures, or threats which can quickly defeat an initial candidate? Once you have eliminated these "unsafe" candidates, the remaining candidate moves are final candidates. Doing this step consistently I call, "Real Chess." As stated in our 12-point list on page 173, not doing it is Hope Chess. In the lower class protocols, the majority of player made their moves without checking to see if their opponent could reply with a decisive, forcing move. Page 181 of "The Improving Chess Thinker" 2nd edition by: Dan Heisman - "The final step in the sidebar (step #5) is by far the most difficult one; If you can perform this step perfectly then you can play world championship level-chess." And there you have it, 2 ways to find the best move. Even though parts of both methods overlap one another, I still see this as a helpful tool. Now, here is a 3rd short side note. Now if you truly mastered both these methods, along with an extreme devoutness to opening theory, and extensive knowledge of tactics, combinations, and common winning patterns, and you understood the purity of such things at a philisophical level, then you could pull off a 2600 - 2650 rating no big deal. However what separates someone who masters this from a world champion or even a super GM?? My answer is this: People who are super GM's and can master these sort of things have a 3rd bonus with them. It's the sense or feeling of moving forward. In order to be the best in the world, one must have the feeling to move forward. Not everyone has this. A typical strong player or GM even would look at this and say "if I master these set of skills, I can become one of the best players in the world" But here's the catch. Super GM's use everything taught in this article (and much much much much more i.e. memorization and pattern recognition) along WITH the sense of moving forward. One can not simply use extensive book knowledge to be the best. A 2600 rated player and a 2850 rated player can almost always detect the same good moves, but the 2850 rated player has the stronger ability to see long term winning patterns, the ability to combine overall winning recognition patterns with candidate moves, and the ability to judge the characteristic traits of their opponents and know how to plan accordingly. A sixth sense of willingness can mean the difference between a typical 2600+ GM and a World Chess Champion. Just some food for thought. That's all for now. Thank you for taking the time to read this, and I hope you have a great day :)

MorningCoffee

you rationalise it too much
the thinking proccess when playing is weird and non linear

you rationalise it too much the thinking proccess when playing is weird and non linear

hachi88

#2
He's an engine. That's how engines win.

#2 He's an engine. That's how engines win.

TinchoVM

Copy & Paste just to look like a non-suspicious-of-engine-use user?

FKA_SooP

step 1 download fritz
step 2 install and use fritz while playing
step 3 ???
step 4 profit

step 1 download fritz step 2 install and use fritz while playing step 3 ??? step 4 profit