@sausage4mash , I look at my developed pieces and see how I can use them, even if it is the most stupid move I can think of.
I talked to many strong players upt to GMs I played and I noticed that their thinking was "random". I never talked to a tree.
They start with a high standard "picture" and refine it iteratively, no-one has a list. It's best described as "random".
So my tipp is: just get experienced, expose your brain to as chess content as possible and let it compose the stuff. Don't think like a tree and forget about lists. Don't corrall your brain, it's no good!
They start with a high standard "picture" and refine it iteratively, no-one has a list. It's best described as "random".
So my tipp is: just get experienced, expose your brain to as chess content as possible and let it compose the stuff. Don't think like a tree and forget about lists. Don't corrall your brain, it's no good!
@etaLaskera
TURN UP YOUR VOLUME!
(starting 17:00 min)
"Random... I read all the books and I never... Just something came up my mind... No structure, it's a mess... in my head!"
www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5mg8uOjENg
TURN UP YOUR VOLUME!
(starting 17:00 min)
"Random... I read all the books and I never... Just something came up my mind... No structure, it's a mess... in my head!"
www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5mg8uOjENg
@Sarg0n of course it's "random" after years of practice and developed intution.
It's like in any other sport. When you first start playing tennis, you are very focused on how you hold the racket, your foot positin before the strike, elbow hight in forehand and backhand, and so on. In the beginning you have a to-do list to make everything correct in order to achive that ball goes where you want it to go.
But after some practice you don't think about steps any more, you just know where you want your ball and do what you have to do to get it there. The same is with chess. In the beginning you try to organize your thinking, make to-do list, in order not to blunder or to miss something. As time goes on, one develops the intuition and doesn't have the need for to-do list. He just looks at the position and the ideas start to unfold.
It's like in any other sport. When you first start playing tennis, you are very focused on how you hold the racket, your foot positin before the strike, elbow hight in forehand and backhand, and so on. In the beginning you have a to-do list to make everything correct in order to achive that ball goes where you want it to go.
But after some practice you don't think about steps any more, you just know where you want your ball and do what you have to do to get it there. The same is with chess. In the beginning you try to organize your thinking, make to-do list, in order not to blunder or to miss something. As time goes on, one develops the intuition and doesn't have the need for to-do list. He just looks at the position and the ideas start to unfold.
@dboing
Thank you for your reply. It makes me rethink how to talk about my known and unknown areas in this topic.
Yes. I try to be exact in my language, simple but not simplistic. This has a background of cognitiv science, which has entered articles about AI meanwhile. So you will read some of its language in articles about chess programming.
You are right about the start of the topic. "Which steps are useful to train?" This depends on the individual level. This is knowledge and habits of thinking. So you should look at the personal status first. A good method is analyzing your mistakes to get the content. This is easy.
It is harder to remember the process leading to mistakes. Every time I try this it throws me far out of my comfort zone. This means I cannot even name the reason except: There is something I don't get. Having a trainer was the best I did for this.
I miss an experienced teacher discussing more. The Step Method, Stappenmethode is a good tool. I can recommend it from my chess courses.
Thank you for your reply. It makes me rethink how to talk about my known and unknown areas in this topic.
Yes. I try to be exact in my language, simple but not simplistic. This has a background of cognitiv science, which has entered articles about AI meanwhile. So you will read some of its language in articles about chess programming.
You are right about the start of the topic. "Which steps are useful to train?" This depends on the individual level. This is knowledge and habits of thinking. So you should look at the personal status first. A good method is analyzing your mistakes to get the content. This is easy.
It is harder to remember the process leading to mistakes. Every time I try this it throws me far out of my comfort zone. This means I cannot even name the reason except: There is something I don't get. Having a trainer was the best I did for this.
I miss an experienced teacher discussing more. The Step Method, Stappenmethode is a good tool. I can recommend it from my chess courses.
@Sarg0n Ok, thanks for the trouble to find this video again. If I stopped there, he really said he thinks his process is "random", but analysing it further, the interviewer tried to get more information, and Kraminik also said that he calculates first forcing lines, then the slow moves... so this is a hint for his real thought process. He is unaware of the "structure" of his calculation process, but this still doesn't mean that there aren't any. He "read all those books" about calculation process, and then "forgot about it", maybe he is simply not aware of the influence that those books had on him, if he "internalized" the information, maybe he doesn't need to think about it and he really think his process is random.
There was an old series available on youtube ( unfortunately not anymore) called "the masters game", by bbc, where you could "hear the thoughts" of the grandmasters while they were playing. Among the GMs was Karpov, and at least to me, his thought process seemes way more "structured" than the other player's. If you look for, there is a couple of videos left from this series, like Kortchnoi vs Byrne. You can see a bit of a simulation of how a GM think, it's quite interesting.
There was an old series available on youtube ( unfortunately not anymore) called "the masters game", by bbc, where you could "hear the thoughts" of the grandmasters while they were playing. Among the GMs was Karpov, and at least to me, his thought process seemes way more "structured" than the other player's. If you look for, there is a couple of videos left from this series, like Kortchnoi vs Byrne. You can see a bit of a simulation of how a GM think, it's quite interesting.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.