120d
@mike69
I don't use any deliberate process to think about chess. I just like playing games casually and watching chess analysis videos.
I did work out why I don't want to spend time thinking about chess moves. My job is working in IT, so I spend all my working hours solving problems, and don't really want to spend my free time solving problems. So I'll just play whatever move looks ok.
I've played a lot of games and watched a lot of games, so I see patterns. And I'm surprisingly good at playing moves in my head, although I'd don't "see" a chess board. I just know where the pieces will end up. I have no idea how I developed the ability to do this.
For example, I can do problems where you have to walk a Knight around the board, avoiding certain squares and do it all in your head. But I don't see a chess board in my head when I do this.
I guess this is why my games are a mix of good moves and horrendous blunders.
@mike69 saidDo you use mathematics, how so, memorize moves, visualization, what do you see and any other ways?
As individuals what are the different ways our minds process the game internally to create the reality of the actual game seen without aids. Do you use mathematics, how so, memorize moves, visualization, what do you see and any other ways?
I struggled with this for a number of years, and finally decided the best way to think about chess is in terms of pattern recognition. The best way I found to develop this skill is daily program of tactics drills and chess competition. Susan Polgar's Chess Tactics for Champions, and The Woodpecker Method by GM's Smith and Tikkanen are both excellent choices. They've helped me more than anything. 🙂
- Joined
- 20 May 16
- Moves
- 41744
79d
@Wyn-Davies saidHi, I’m sorry for the delay. I was off my add meds for a few months when I started this and keep forgetting about it. I like playing fast and one thing I always notice is how long it takes people to figure out different scenarios, or miscalculating trades. This got me wondering about what the different ways are that our minds process the game as individuals…. For me I don’t use analyze board or other aids, I just work it out in my head combined with logic. Looking at the board already you don’t have to picture that, and I internalize the picture and create the pieces moving in my head like working a math problem on paper but not crystal clear.
@mike69
I don't use any deliberate process to think about chess. I just like playing games casually and watching chess analysis videos.
I did work out why I don't want to spend time thinking about chess moves. My job is working in IT, so I spend all my working hours solving problems, and don't really want to spend my free time solving problems. So I'll just play whatev ...[text shortened]... ead when I do this.
I guess this is why my games are a mix of good moves and horrendous blunders.
79d
@mike69 saidLooking at the board already you don’t have to picture that, and I internalize the picture and create the pieces moving in my head like working a math problem on paper but not crystal clear.
Hi, I’m sorry for the delay. I was off my add meds for a few months when I started this and keep forgetting about it. I like playing fast and one thing I always notice is how long it takes people to figure out different scenarios, or miscalculating trades. This got me wondering about what the different ways are that our minds process the game as individuals…. For me I don ...[text shortened]... and create the pieces moving in my head like working a math problem on paper but not crystal clear.
You can do that. Everyone has their own system. You might consider however that correspondence chess here at RHP gives you a built-in advantage that not everyone uses. That advantage is time control. With an average of 3 days (or longer) to ponder a move, you can keep a current game position on your computer, then set up your physical board and analyze each game position very deeply and choose the very best move you find. This gives you the chance to maximize the use of your skills. Players who operate this way will win games over superior opponents who move too fast, and in doing so, commit blunders, or play only the 2nd or 3rd best move, when better options were available. 🙂
- Joined
- 20 May 16
- Moves
- 41744
79d
@mchill saidSo are you saying you see a blank screen while thinking about the moves, having to set up additional boards etc to think? I guess the difference would be without the use of visual aids this process would be useless as in otb. For me taking a month or more to play a game takes the fun out of actually playing the game. Anyone can figure something out if they take long enough or other styles of aids used to assist oneself in playing.
Looking at the board already you don’t have to picture that, and I internalize the picture and create the pieces moving in my head like working a math problem on paper but not crystal clear.
You can do that. Everyone has their own system. You might consider however that correspondence chess here at RHP gives you a built-in advantage that not everyone uses. That advantage ...[text shortened]... so, commit blunders, or play only the 2nd or 3rd best move, when better options were available. 🙂
79d
4 edits
@mike69 saidSo are you saying you see a blank screen while thinking about the moves, having to set up additional boards etc. to think?
So are you saying you see a blank screen while thinking about the moves, having to set up additional boards etc to think? I guess the difference would be without the use of visual aids this process would be useless as in otb. For me taking a month or more to play a game takes the fun out of actually playing the game. Anyone can figure something out if they take long enough or other styles of aids used to assist oneself in playing.
No, I don't see a blank screen while thinking about the moves. I was trying to point out that correspondence chess at RHP gives you more time to make each move in your games. OTB and blitz have much faster time controls. You can use this longer time control to your advantage and analyze each position deeper because you have more time to do so (with or without a physical board) This is not required of course. You can play as fast as you wish, but generally speaking the faster one plays, the more blunders they tend to make - - - Finding good moves sometimes take time.
- Joined
- 20 May 16
- Moves
- 41744
78d
@mchill saidI understand as we all do on this concept. This just doesn’t work for me at the moment due to life situations and different things I’m dealing with internally. If I was able to slow down for a few moves I know I wouldn’t make it a whole game so it’s a waste of time to do this every move. I was more interested in how our individual minds compute the game and things we do alike and different, see don’t see.
So are you saying you see a blank screen while thinking about the moves, having to set up additional boards etc. to think?
No, I don't see a blank screen while thinking about the moves. I was trying to point out that correspondence chess at RHP gives you more time to make each move in your games. OTB and blitz have much faster time controls. You can use this longer time ...[text shortened]... faster one plays, the more blunders they tend to make - - - Finding good moves sometimes take time.
78d
4 edits
@mike69 saidThere is only one situation in which I use any thought process remotely mathematical in chess: that is calculating which pawn will promote first in a simplified endgame. Rather than trying to visualize 'I go here, then he goes there, then I go one step farther, and he goes one step farther, etc.' -- which is prone to errors, I count: one, two, three four, queen for me, one, two, three, four, five, queen for him. If it's one, two, three, four, queen for him, too, then I check whether one or the other of us promotes with a check.
As individuals what are the different ways our minds process the game internally to create the reality of the actual game seen without aids. Do you use mathematics, how so, memorize moves, visualization, what do you see and any other ways?
Otherwise, it's all about trying to optimize piece positions based on general principles (controlling the center, controlling squares near the opponent's king, getting bishops on open diagonals and rooks on (half-)open files, keeping the pawn-structure intact, etc.).
- Joined
- 20 May 16
- Moves
- 41744
77d
@moonbus saidYes, I do them same in that situation as it easier along with how they can be attacked while trying to promote. I don’t use math either, I had read people do but not really how so? As far as visualizing that’s just how I think so it’s not difficult to go a few moves in, just not going really deep. Besides what you mentioned I would say also not wasting moves in the opening, let your opponent capture advancing your back row to recapture and look at what’s logically coming out next and their plan.
There is only one situation in which I use any thought process remotely mathematical in chess: that is calculating which pawn will promote first in a simplified endgame. Rather than trying to visualize 'I go here, then he goes there, then I go one step farther, and he goes one step farther, etc.' -- which is prone to errors, I count: one, two, three four, queen for me, one, t ...[text shortened]... bishops on open diagonals and rooks on (half-)open files, keeping the pawn-structure intact, etc.).