98 ( +1 | -1 )
On my level the depth of calculations is very limited I would guess. Personally I rarely calculate deeper then let say 4 moves or so.
It would be interesting to hear how deep you calculate when you play on GK. It of course depends on the position at hand but it would be enlightening to hear how you carry out the calculations.
I guess that higher rated players calculate much deeper then lower rated players. On the other hand is it very easy to carry out the calculations at GK (or any CC) as time and “blind” calculations do not complicate the situation as in OTB. I guess most people at GK do there calculations on the virtual or physical chess board and not just in there head as in OTB, or am I wrong?
The reason that I do not calculate deeper then I do is because I can not predict/see/understand what my opponent will do. And then an 8 move calculation is almost stupid as the chance/risk that that position is going to show up is minimal.
So do you calculate numerous of deep combinations and write them up or how do you carry out the calculations here at GK?
72 ( +1 | -1 )
Importance of being pragmatic
A good question. I believe, the depth of calculation largely depends on the position. As Botvinnik once noted the specific position gives the exact solution what to do: calculate in-depth or play based on your positional understanding, common sense evaluation, etc. If the position is acute and tactical one has to calculate much not to miss something important. In my personal game practice there were games when I calculated for 12 or 15 moves with 5 to seven different branch lines. Sometimes a position shaped needs only brief evaluation about the positional factors, strong and weak fields, etc. Therefore, it is your own practice that helps you to take actions about the specific position.
30 ( +1 | -1 )
book on this issue is Kotov's book: "Think like a grandmaster". It descriebes in detail the best (according to the author...A russian grandmater) way to analyze and the best way to find the right moves to analyze (which btw is importent, as you can't analyze everything). I can very much recommend that book.
79 ( +1 | -1 )
I teach a number of chess classes at our local chess clubs, and one basic recommendation I always make is to think three half moves ahead. 1. Your immediate move. 2. The move you most likely think your opponent will make and 3. your response to that move. Many players simply look at whether their proposed move will "get them in trouble" and if not, then they commit. All this talk about thinking 8, 10, 12 moves ahead is fine at GM or IM level. My suggestion may seem a bit simplistic, and I won't argue that. But feedback from my students has been that this simple technique has made a significant improvement in their game. This includes players at USCF ratings of up to 1600. Try it. Regards. Oliver
86 ( +1 | -1 )
question and a lot of good feedback as well. This is worth taking after folks!
The Danish GM Bent Larsen once said that: the longer your analyses/calculations is, the poorer quality you can expect.
I prefer to concentrate on a plan, right after the opening and then how to execute this plan. This indicate the significants of the first 2-3 moves, which I will be concentrate more on. In many cases one has to realise, that your opponent will deviate, (good or bad) from your gameplan anyway!
If one have surrender so far in the game, it is essential to transfer as much positional advantage as possible, over to the endgame and hopefully your skills in the endgame, are better then your opponent!
Good "skullhunting" out there :-))
212 ( +1 | -1 )
Planning is the key ...
heuretisk, I have to agree with Cairo about the planning aspect. That tells you what type of moves to be looking for. Those that help reach your objective(s). At the same time, your understanding of the position should lead you to ask "What would my plan be if I were my Opponent?" And "What other reasonable plans exist for him". Once this is figured out, its easier to find the type of moves he will use to further his plan, or to try to disrupt and hinder yours.
.....If you experience difficulty in discovering plans, you could start study with one of 2 things. (Of course to be a GM, you'll need to know both eventually, is my best guess 8-) But starting with either one will give you a good basis for plan formulation
. Either to study the dynamics and imbalances such as Silman presents to well in his "Amateurs Mind" Book. Or you can study Structure. Pawn formations, weak squares, etc. Covered in such texts as Nimzovich's "My System" or the book by Kmoch or Seirawan on it. Other's can preobably tell you of more ecent texts.
.........Like winner1, I am also a big fan of the "Think like a Grandmaster" book by Kotov. Which covers some of both. And will really help when you get into heavy duty, deep aor broad analysis. In fact, the Silman followed by the Kotov would be a very good primer on your analysis & planning skills.
......Seems to me I saw another similar thread where Jstack mentioned another bookthat sounded good on analysis. Believe it was by Soltis.
....If I wanted to find that, I'd go to the Chess Forum Search box and type in
.... < jstack Soltis > and it would find the thread(s). I'm just learning to use the thing and its so Neat, to me. For some reason tho, the whole Nik has had to be typed in, not a partial, or it was not taking my second word ?!
Maybe just me, finding a new way to crash again, I hope not !? .....[&)
173 ( +1 | -1 )
Planning is the key...
I posted this in another thread about calculating moves and thought it would help here also...
Often when a player has a fair understanding of the principles of chess and can make quite pretty combinations, two or three moves deep, he suddenly notices, as he meets stronger players, that his development of improvement has come to a standstill... He starts losing games without being able to assess the cause... He works out a series of moves as far ahead as he possibly can and then notices that his opponent has planned and thought in an entirely different direction... In short, he loses his grip on the game at hand...
Even after learning many opening variations by heart, it still means nothing without accurately knowing the characteristics of the positions that come from the openings... The people that try the memory method often find themselves in totally unfamiliar positions after three moves out of book are played... Positions which might even be favorable though he has no idea why they are so nor the knowledge as to how to turn them to his advantage...
A new element enters the chess battle at this stage, namely "positional understanding"... It does not grow of itself but must be developed by the process of drawing conclusions in practical play... It represents the increasing ability to form a judgement on any position whatever without going into details of exact calculations... Just like a doctor, who first has to gain a clear picture of the disease condition in order afterwards to plan the process of the cure (diagnoses / treatment) the chess player must make a plan on the basis of such characteristics as he has found in the examination of a given position...
I hope this helps again...