Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Chess Architecture (Read 1410 times)
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 2917
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #26 - 01/27/19 at 03:29:03
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 01/27/19 at 02:52:15:
Stigma wrote on 01/27/19 at 02:01:46:
Skilled blitz players spot candidate moves virtually instantly. I'm not going to put a number on it, but we're talking milliseconds, not seconds.

I need to think faster.

Smiley

Blitz is largely intuition though? Especially the selection of candidate moves? I'm sure you've got plenty of fast intuition.

Of course even blitz requires some calculation to check the candidate moves further in sharp positions, but only what little the time control allows.
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
Senior Member
****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 376
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #25 - 01/27/19 at 02:52:15
Post Tools
Stigma wrote on 01/27/19 at 02:01:46:
Skilled blitz players spot candidate moves virtually instantly. I'm not going to put a number on it, but we're talking milliseconds, not seconds.

I need to think faster.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stigma
God Member
*****
Offline


There is a crack in everything.

Posts: 2917
Joined: 11/07/06
Gender: Male
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #24 - 01/27/19 at 02:01:46
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 01/27/19 at 00:50:26:
curmudgeon39 wrote on 01/26/19 at 18:28:10:
regarding my claims of saving time calculating moves.


Skilled Blitz players can spot candidate moves within 5 to 30 seconds. With time to spare you try to sort the wheat from the chaff.

That can't be right. Skilled blitz players spot candidate moves virtually instantly. I'm not going to put a number on it, but we're talking milliseconds, not seconds.
  

Improvement begins at the edge of your comfort zone. -Jonathan Rowson
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 810
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #23 - 01/27/19 at 00:50:26
Post Tools
curmudgeon39 wrote on 01/26/19 at 18:28:10:
regarding my claims of saving time calculating moves.


Skilled Blitz players can spot candidate moves within 5 to 30 seconds. With time to spare you try to sort the wheat from the chaff.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jupp53
God Member
*****
Online


be

Posts: 819
Location: Frankfurt/Main
Joined: 01/04/09
Gender: Male
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #22 - 01/27/19 at 00:15:32
Post Tools
Now I have read it and give my thoughts:

1. If Norman's model is a good as promising, why isn't it the center of applied psychological research and practise?

The model is one of many based on the simpler model of Miller, Gallanter and Pribram. This integrated memory research and added new ideas not coming from behaviorism and was one of the starting points of cognitive psychology.

T(est) O(perate) T(est) E(xit)

Test over the situation. Do an operation. Test again - if you are not content operate again, if you are content Exit.

Now this model gets 70 next year and there is a lot of knowledge gained. The advantage of the model was its empirical character. People do act, thinking is a way to act, in this way often. As it has it constraints by nature - models are always simplifications of the reality - there were soon several ideas trying to expand the model. Some of this tries were successfully in helping to create new research ideas. But over all they are a part of psychological history today. "Ahh, another flow chart. That's what we waited for." This sentence was said at my side when someone introduced his new integrational model of cognitive psychology. They are today more a way to represent ideas.

2. Normative models lack of evidence

Positive is the idea of creating good habits.

Negative is the at will selection of processes. There is a fit to human thinking but no evidence why to take this steps. Especially problematic is the missing link to human short  term or working memory. There is a note about automatic thinking, but there is no strong link to the knowledge about it.

So there is a complete lack of empirical evidence why to walk this steps in this order. There is some logic behind it. So you can go this way to observe yourself. Maybe you find some nuggets, maybe you find only cat's gold.

"• But to create a good habit it is best to go through the entire cycle on each move."
Really? There are positions where you do a tactical operation for three or four moves and restart then with checking your evaluation. So I would bet you will find positions where a good habit should branch, at least to prevent Zeitnot.

Resumee 1

There is a good or bad habit in enterprise seminars held about psychology. The teacher is a economist or a lawyer. Seldom a psychologist. The reason is the psychologists education. S/he tells that there are constraints, which spoils the fun.

Resumee 2

I have my own experience with those models. If you work through them goal oriented you will find something good. But there is a very good reason putting them away after this. Let's take Kotow. Looking for candidate moves and calculation economical is reasonable. Doing this exactly in the proposed way will make you a loser after some time of growth.

At the level of 1800-1900 in tactical problems on chess.com I made an experiment with myself. To build up better thinking habits I started 7 weeks solving 6 days 15 minutes positions with searching possible checks first. The seven weeks were based on psychological research about habit creating. I jumped up to my personal top of around 2200. Now five years later this helps me calculating in puzzles and games. For health reasons I cannot tell anything about otb games. I told this in several fora and when meeting chess players. To my knowledge no one has tried to check out, if this works for him. As a psychologist I see several problems. There is no guarantee this works for you. Probably the effect will be lower if you are a stronger player. Maybe the Polgar book with checkmates has been worked through at the beginning of your chess studies and this is only spoiling time, etc., etc.

My assumption is, that you, Keith McCaughin, want to give something back to the chess community. You had a lot of fun and put good work into this paper. So I hope someone has a good use for it. But I assume too, it will be similar to my experience. Maybe a good trainer detects and uses an aspect of your work. Maybe four weeks are enough in my case. We will not see what happens in 20 years.
  

Medical textbooks say I should be dead since April 2002.
Dum spiro spero. Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
curmudgeon39
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline



Posts: 6
Joined: 01/15/19
Gender: Male
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #21 - 01/26/19 at 18:28:10
Post Tools
Here is my response to “an ordinary chess player” regarding my claims of saving time calculating moves. I cite GM Igor Smirnov and Yury Markushin as the source of these claims but I agree. Here’s how. If the strategy is:
•      Capture then you only need to calculate moves that capture in forcing move order.
•      Attack then you only need to calculate attacking moves in forcing move order.
•      Maximize Activity (usually of your least active piece) you need only calculate moves for your weakest piece or pieces.    
All other moves have been eliminated at the goal or strategic levels. I hope this helps.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
curmudgeon39
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline



Posts: 6
Joined: 01/15/19
Gender: Male
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #20 - 01/26/19 at 17:41:04
Post Tools
Here is research supporting the Chess Architecture requested by “an ordinary chess player.” Barbara Oakley’s book, A Mind for Numbers, concludes that only when we go back and forth between both modes (of thinking: focused and diffused) are we really learning.  The four levels of the Chess Architecture shift from focus at the operational level through less focused modes at the tactical and strategic levels to a diffused focus at the Goal level. This is going back and forth between both modes on every chess move. The diffused mode(s) without the focused mode is limited as we do not have a firm foundation in which to build knowledge.  The focused mode without diffused mode(s) severely limits our ability to progress as it doesn’t allow us to think creatively, nor does it allow us to find and connect concepts and neural pathways.
In a study conducted by Northwestern researchers, participants with diffused attention scored much higher on the Creativity Achievement Questionnaire than participants in a focused attention mode, with IQ being the controlling variable. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ReneDescartes
God Member
*****
Offline


Qu'est-ce donc que je
suis? Une chose qui pense.

Posts: 986
Joined: 05/17/10
Gender: Male
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #19 - 01/25/19 at 21:51:33
Post Tools
Sorry for the misunderstanding; I was talking to Tony. I have no comment on your piece.
« Last Edit: 01/26/19 at 02:46:21 by ReneDescartes »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
curmudgeon39
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline



Posts: 6
Joined: 01/15/19
Gender: Male
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #18 - 01/25/19 at 21:46:51
Post Tools
My paper is about learning a way of thinking that builds good chess habits and may help break bad ones. It helps me. I am 80 years old and no longer play tournament chess but play online. All of the chess information in my paper is standard material available from any number of other sources. My paper is not about learning to play chess. It is about learning to think in a clear and unambiguous way while playing chess. The Action Plan demonstrates how it can be used in play. The Short Plan is a memory aid during the learning-to-think process. There are no chess diagrams, just graphics to illustrate the thinking process within the context of an architecture.
A Google search on Kotov, Purdy, Avni, Aagard, Heisman, Nunn, Dvoretsky, Beim, Soltis, Dorfmann, Tisdall, Yusupov, and Shereshevsk found no reference to “architecture."
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
ReneDescartes
God Member
*****
Offline


Qu'est-ce donc que je
suis? Une chose qui pense.

Posts: 986
Joined: 05/17/10
Gender: Male
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #17 - 01/25/19 at 17:53:27
Post Tools
Kotov, Purdy, Avni, Aagard, Heisman, Nunn, Dvoretsky, Beim, Soltis, Dorfmann, Tisdall, Yusupov, and and Shereshevsky have all written on this topic, I think all usefully for the practical player (all are at least FIDE masters, by the way).

I have a feeling that frustration when nothing's working followed by forgetting your analysis and plonking down a rejected move is also what just happened to Anand against Carlsen in Wijk (2019, round 10). Doesn't everyone do that when they're tired?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
Senior Member
****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 376
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #16 - 01/25/19 at 17:50:55
Post Tools
I have previously looked at Yury Markushin's https://thechessworld.com site, and generally find it well done. Some of the articles are clearly not aimed at my level, but others I find quite interesting. Much of the free content is by titled players, and I suppose most of the paid content as well.

It would be a shame to have the Chess Architecture thread derailed by a tangent on Yury's qualifications. The quoted "Principles of Chess Strategy" I infer came from a paid course by GM Igor Smirnov obtained via Yury Markushin. So a slip-up here on chesspub identifying Yury Markushin as GM should not matter, the principles could still be relevant. I have no objection to what I could see of the "Principles", in fact I would be interested to read the originals. But I was concerned about the claims made in Chess Architecture for how they would improve calculation. Those claims might also be correct, but in my view this needs supporting evidence.

Lots of thinking systems get proposed in chess as well as in other domains. To my mind part of the charm of chess is that there is no systematic thought process which will always arrive at the best move. Different positions require different means to the end:
  • brute force - sometimes width and sometimes depth
  • flight of fancy - the aha!
  • recalling a theme
  • balancing of conflicting positional factors

and so on.

Elaborating a little on my original comment in Reply #6... If someone puts forward a system, they need to show how it actually works for chess, otherwise I am not interested. If they make claims for results from adopting the system, they need to provide at least some evidence that those claims are correct, otherwise at best it's just wishful thinking. My 2 cents.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
GMTonyKosten
YaBB Administrator
*****
Offline


Mr Dynamic?

Posts: 2990
Location: Clermont-Ferrand
Joined: 12/19/02
Gender: Male
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #15 - 01/25/19 at 11:20:16
Post Tools
RdC wrote on 01/25/19 at 10:13:21:
GMs by no means all think the same way.

I sometimes think that my thought processes can be very inefficient. In one game in the Cap D'Agde tournament last November I realised that my planned variation only led to a drawn rook endgame. I rejected the other obvious variation because it lost immediately, then looked around for other moves to keep the game alive. Nothing was any good so I decided to play the losing line to keep the game going!! Of course, I had forgotten that I'd already rejected it, until the instant I actually played it!
I remember reading Kotov when I was young, and trying to 'think like a GM' but it didn't work for me. Still, I'm open to any ideas to help improve our way of playing chess, even if it is almost certainly too late for me! Sad
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 810
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #14 - 01/25/19 at 10:13:21
Post Tools
msiipola wrote on 01/25/19 at 07:20:44:
Do a 1900-player know this?


You might think that if you did have a valid insight into how GMs think, that the author could get to FM standard (2300) at the very least.

This is the link
https://thechessworld.com/articles/training-techniques/5-ways-to-start-thinking-...

Something not mentioned is the concept of "making it work". In other words the idea mentioned by some GMs of trying little skeleton tactics, finding where they fail and improving the move order or piece placement so they succeed.

GMs by no means all think the same way.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
msiipola
Junior Member
**
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 75
Joined: 10/04/09
Gender: Male
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #13 - 01/25/19 at 07:20:44
Post Tools
Yury Markushin is writing articles on chessworld.com.
Like "5 Ways to Start Thinking Like a Grandmaster".
Do a 1900-player know this?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
RdC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 810
Joined: 05/17/08
Re: Chess Architecture
Reply #12 - 01/24/19 at 23:02:29
Post Tools
curmudgeon39 wrote on 01/24/19 at 14:42:30:
He is a USCF rated National Elo 1949.


I'm sure there are readers of this forum who would only take his opinions and judgements seriously if he were rated 400 to 800 points higher.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo