Originally posted by zebanoThat's an interesting thought process.
About 20 seconds. After seeing the kings plight, I started looking for smother mates, then mates along the diagonals and when Be7+ didn't work I instantly looked for a way to remove the knight.
I think it's pretty clear that most people look for what's possible and then find out how to make it happen whether they consciously do so or not. I find that I first notice whether or not the king is stalemated or whether it can be, and then I look to whether or not I can apply a final check (and thus mate).
Originally posted by cmsMasterWell, to be honest, I found it in about that time or less. It's obvious I'm not saying that to be arrogant, because my rating doesn't support it. What I am saying is that I saw it that quick because I immediately saw the mate that occurred in the Immortal Game.
You guys are liars. 😛 Or maybe I should just get a stop watch, because it never feels like I find anything that quick.
Which was really the point of my thread, but I fear I'm being redundant at this point. I was originally under the impression that learning *specific* mates was of little value, and that the underlying abstractions of the puzzles was the more important part. I still think that, but clearly our memories "chunk" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chunking_(psychology)) a lot more. It just so happens that stronger players have chunked more than most (discussed more in "My Brilliant Brain": http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6378985927858479238).
Originally posted by ChesswickAnderssen and Kieseritzky are so two centuries ago! Probably at the beginning of my career I might have identified the game since all I studied was Morphy, Pillsbury, Chigorin, and Tartakower and DuMont's "500 Master Games of Chess." The important point here is not to reinvent the wheel. Still, you bring up an interesting point: Internalizing a massive amount of positions helps in pattern recognition over the board and illustrates why it is so important to be conversant in the history of chess and the games of the old masters.
Sorry to disappoint. 🙂 I agree it's simple, but I was curious whether or not people identified with the position from the Immortal Game or not.
Originally posted by ChesswickAbout 10 seconds.
[fen]2rk2n1/3p1pNp/3B3b/pp1NP3/q6p/P2P1Q1R/KP2n3/8 w - - 0 1[/fen]
White to move.
If/when you solve it, please specify what it was in the position that you recognized.
It was pretty easy to see that the King was stalemated, so any check would be mate. 2 possible checks were with the queen or with the bishop, with only the knight preventing both: an impossible job.
D
Originally posted by ChesswickThat's what's cool about studying classic games. I recently won a blitz game with the exact idea that Black should have found (instead of resigning!) at the end of:
Ok, well, I'm quite sure this will be anticlimactic to many of you, but schakuhr already hinted at it, so...
I too had seen almost this exact position (at least the same arrangement of mating material, king position, etc.). It's from Anderssen - Kieseritzky, London 1851, the so-called "Immortal Game." The actual position isn't of course, but as I sai ...[text shortened]... just surprised that the memory of the actual game took precedence over the position itself.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1099222
Originally posted by wormwoodOh yeah? Well it only took me 4 seconds. And it took so long only because after looking at it for 1.37 seconds, a bunch of ninja's attacked me from behind. It took me 2.14 seconds to kill all but one of them, question the remaining one, and then kill him too. And then another .49 seconds to see the mate. Beat that!
Q6+ Nxf6 Be7#
5 secs, and it took so long only because I thought it would be a hard one. these kind of elementary mates should be recognized instantly. the king is boxed, and just waiting for the final blow.
It took me about half a minute.The first thing I noticed was the weakened kings and the mass of attacking pieces next to each king. Secondly, I checked the safety of my own king and found that it is under enough pressure that a check or capture must be almost necessary in order to restrict Black's initiative against my king. Looking at his king, I found that it was mate if the Queen on f6 could not be captured. Noticing that the knight could capture, I looked further to Be7 after Nxf6 and noticed it was mate because no new escape squares were created.
Originally posted by cmsMasterI got it in a couple of seconds too. Not because I'm a genuis but because I recognised the mating pattern. Actually I thought it was the classic game mentioned until I realised the white king was in the wrong position.
You guys are liars. 😛 Or maybe I should just get a stop watch, because it never feels like I find anything that quick.
Chess Nerd Meets SciFi Nerd Alert...
This mating pattern was used for the basis of the chess scene in BladeRunner. It's hard to tell the exact position because you never get a good look at the board.
Originally posted by ChesswickIn case anybody's interested, I've written about My Brilliant Brain here...
... but clearly our memories "chunk" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chunking_(psychology)) a lot more. It just so happens that stronger players have chunked more than most (discussed more in "My Brilliant Brain": http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6378985927858479238).
http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.com/2006/10/susan-polgars-brilliant-brain.html
and from the same blog is a chess related pattern recognition test here...
http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.com/2007/07/pattern-recognition.html
follow-up to the pattern recognition test here
http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.com/2007/07/pattern-recognition.html
(though if you're going to do the test go to the other link first)
Originally posted by ChesswickLast post from me on this one...
... I was originally under the impression that learning *specific* mates was of little value, and that the underlying abstractions of the puzzles was the more important part ....
I'm not so sure about this. I have a very useful book (can't remember the exact name of the top of my head something like Chess in 21 Lessons) that recommends sitting at the board and just setting up mating patterns on the board. Not trying to solve a problem or analyse or anything just physically putting the pieces on the board in the final mate position.
The idea is to burn the 'chunk' into your brain (just looking at the diagram doesn't work)