Calculation vs Pattern Recognition

Someone should define what calculation is. How is it different from visualization? Those two are very much related, but not the same thing. To me, calculation means to be able to predict possible lines several moves in advance. That means to consider all of the opponents likely moves - recaptures, intermediate moves, likely defenses, move order, etc.. and not miss a possible response by the opponent that you may be surprised by.

In other words, it's the ability to consider multiple lines, and the game actually goes along the lines you considered. How far in advance (how many moves) of the line you can consider that line is the calculation "skill".

It's also the ability to prune the "unlikely" lines and not spend much time going down those branches.

Hen or egg?

@Sarg0n said in #12:
> Hen or egg?
Egg came first and there's scientific proof of same! Case closed!

#12:
> Hen or egg?

Rooster.

You cannot really distinguish, you calculate using your patterns. Even so there is no „tactics or strategy“.

On the Origin of Good Moves, Hendriks:

The above argument reminded me of a player I once heard claiming that, on the positional level, he was rated 300 points above his actual rating, but often, having gained the advantage, fell for some silly trick. ... It misses the point that correctly appreciating all those subtle (tactical) features is an essential part of positional understanding. Putting a rook on an open file is something we are all capable of.

Besides all those definitions are varying.
- Calculation can man either calculating forces or almost forced sequences or it can mean any forward looking analysis
- strategy can be same as positional play or as Aagard defines strategy involving planning i.e placing rook on open line while strategy would be something like use pawn break to open line then move rook there ans penetrate on 7th line with support of bishop. which would at the end requires some tactical analysis to make it work. Then again aagard may have considered them two different topics so that he could make two books into his "grand master preparation" series
- patterns/chunks no definition that people would agree exists. obvioyls thing like castled king-side., casteled king-side with fianchetted bishop exists. But there is also bigger position i.e combinations of the elements. and different people will mean different things

and as @Sarg0n said : They are all interconnected. calculation is process of analysis but you need starting point to start analysis. randomly working out variation gives result only if are a computer capable doing thousands of variations per second.

Does calculation precedes pattern discovery?
And does pattern recognition reduce calculation needs the more one accumulates experience. À way to calculate only when going in new territory. As even the greats must some times have to explore new chess
Maybe not as much as us here on lichess, or me. But still. They just don’t waste energy or time on things correct intuition dismisses at subconscious level.

Isn’t one complementing the other until little calculation needed?

I think they're aspects of the same thing. Pattern recognition tells you where to look, calculation lets you figure out if where you're looking is actually useful.

IMHO pattern recognition is probably better than raw calculation power. If you know good structures and attacking motifs, you'll be able to find good moves "intuitively". If you don't look deep, it's possible that sometimes it won't work, but you'll probably get pretty far this way, especially on short time controls. If you're playing a classical tournament game, yeah, you're going to need to be able to do deep calculation. But typical time controls online play, you're mostly relying on heuristics and patterns.

Carlsen once said in an interview, that he intuitively "sees" the moves he wants to play (which i would refer to pattern recognition) BUT ALSO afterwards he takes his time, to make sure what se saw would be tactically sound (calculation).

I think i do the same. I see the result in 2 ways:
1) I sometimes don't see a pattern, so i dont even recognize a given possibility and of course don't calculate in that direction
2) I see a pattern and then i calculate (more or less accurate), to see, if my idea may work in the end.

So in conclusion i think both are very important, because without intuition/pattern recognition one would have to calculate every single possibility on the board (extreme time consuming and exhausting) OR without calculation one would sooner or later play a intuitive but unsound move and simply lose because of a tactical oversight.
A lack of intuition, calculation or both you often see in the playing-style of weak players/beginners.

My coach often says to me: "If you know the pattern, you know what to look for/what to calculate/how to do something" - and it's true in my opinion...

Have fun.

This is a great topic for a post. I think certain Grandmaster's lean more slightly towards more calculation, and with other's it's pattern recognition, but I think Top Level GM's (Super GM's) are schewed toward pattern recognition and memory.

What's interesting with players like Carlsen and Fischer, was that they could see a board that was half way into a game, and immediately decipher what game it was and whose turn it was to move. We are talking out of ten's of thousands of games. (Carlen Demonstrates this below) Most really high level Grandmasters have ridiculous memories. .

Harry Pillsbury was one prime example. He was one of the greatest players of his generation his talent was on par with a Morphy or a Fischer.

Before his simultaneous chess exhibitions, Pillsbury would entertain his audience with feats of memory that involved accurately recalling long lists of words after hearing or looking at them just once. One such list, which Pillsbury repeated forward and backward, performing the same feat the next day, was:

Antiphlogistine, periosteum, takadiastase, plasmon, ambrosia, Threlkeld, streptococcus, staphylococcus, micrococcus, plasmodium, Mississippi, Freiheit, Philadelphia, Cincinnati, athletics, no war, Etchenberg, American, Russian, philosophy, Piet Potgelter's Rost, Salamagundi, Oomisillecootsi, Bangmamvate, Schlechter's Nek, Manzinyama, theosophy, catechism, Madjesoomalops[4]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=eC1BAcOzHyY