Originally posted by wedgehead2a good sence of logic can help you to more efficiently complete new tasks like a difficult check mate, but memory refines logic to make the logical thinking processes more efficient.
I you're practicing the same thing. When in chess ALMOST every game is different.
Although I concede the scenario you constructed does support your argument.
Originally posted by joe shmoyes. It is wrong to say either memory OR logic- as you need both, at least to do well against strong opponents.
a good sence of logic can help you to more efficiently complete new tasks like a difficult check mate, but memory refines logic to make the logical thinking processes more efficient.
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
Originally posted by joe shmoYou mean possible endgame checkmates?
has anyone figured out how many possibilities there are in every check mate?
They have actually solved the endgame when there are something like 5 pieces on board, (6?) all possible moves held in it, and what are the best moves.
They use them in chess software like Fritz, they call them tablebases.
Don't use them when you are playing in your games though, it is considered cheating here.
Originally posted by Bad wolfyou'll have to pardon my chess vocab, you see I haven't played very many games. so if you would, could you define an endgame check mate vs a checkmate. I thought they were one and the same. what I was looking for when I asked that, was ridculusly large number.
You mean possible endgame checkmates?
They have actually solved the endgame when there are something like 5 pieces on board, (6?) all possible moves held in it, and what are the best moves.
They use them in chess software like Fritz, they call them tablebases.
Don't use them when you are playing in your games though, it is considered cheating here.
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
1 edit
Originally posted by joe shmoAn endgame checkmate is a checkmate in the endgame, the endgame itself is when there are few pieces left on the board, i.e. rook and pawns.
you'll have to pardon my chess vocab, you see I haven't played very many games. so if you would, could you define an endgame check mate vs a checkmate. I thought they were one and the same. what I was looking for when I asked that, was ridculusly large number.
I would imagine that the total amount of all possible checkmate positions would be quite high, but substantially higher if you factor in getting to a such position.
Consider this: the number of legal positions in chess is estimated to be between 10^43 and 10^50, and a game-tree complexity of approximately 10^123 (i.e number of possible games with different move orders, etc).
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
2 edits
Originally posted by joe shmoMemory plays a huge role when there are only a few pieces on the board, the different possible moves available diminishes a lot as pieces are taken off the board. There are also times when pieces can be ignored when they are locked and totally unimportant.
so isn't there to many possibilities even with a few pieces on the board for memory to play a large role?
When I say this I'm thinking about:
rook and king vs lone king
queen and king vs lone king
ect, ect.
The beauty of our memory is that we don't need to remember exact sequences of moves, we can just use our experience of what we should be generally doing, and apply that to the board.
With few pieces on the board, memory is hugely important.
So, I think you guys are arguing that it's only memory and logical skills that really matter in chess, and different positions require different amounts of both.
But is that it?
It seems to me like some people have a sort of pattern matching ability to recognize weaknesses quickly. Or is that just a form of trained memory?
IOriginally posted by joneschrYeah! only I wouldn't call it arguing, it's more like me apprehensivly listining to bad wolf and others
So, I think you guys are arguing that it's only memory and logical skills that really matter in chess, and different positions require different amounts of both.
But is that it?
It seems to me like some people have a sort of pattern matching ability to recognize weaknesses quickly. Or is that just a form of trained memory?
😕
as far as pattern matching abilities, I think they would be hard to classify
Originally posted by Bad wolfThey can't get the estimate to better than 10^7?? Seems like that math should be doable. If I wasn't so sick I'd try it.
An endgame checkmate is a checkmate in the endgame, the endgame itself is when there are few pieces left on the board, i.e. rook and pawns.
I would imagine that the total amount of all possible checkmate positions would be quite high, but [b]substantially higher if you factor in getting to a such position.
Consider this: the number of legal posi ...[text shortened]... mplexity of approximately 10^123 (i.e number of possible games with different move orders, etc).[/b]
returning to IQ, it is only relevant to modern society. a kalahari bushman, being able to find water anywhere is considered to be a genius by his people. but when given an iq test he will score enough to be classified a retard(mentally challenged, special person for those offendable)
iq test only measure our perception on intelligence. that is why there are a bunch of different kinds of intelligence: logical, mathematical, artistic, lingvistic, manual dexterity etc.
a guy who will solve complex calculus problems might be an idiot when it comes to fixing his car, or painting a work of art.