posted by Blue Devil Knight at 9/12/2007 01:22:00 PM
This is how I play. You will lose when you overlook mate in 1, mate in 2, and hang minors. When you are fortunate enough to avoid these mistakes you will play very interesting an competitive chess.
Jeff: yes, but that doesn't help find a move when there are no threats. Sometimes strategery is needed.
I don't disagree. I've posted about my thought process before and how it is similar to yours. Actually I believe heavily in the thinking process I outlined in my post. Its following it every move of every game that I struggle with. When you focus on your plan to the exclusion of your opponent's plan is when you fall into what I believe Dan Hiesman term's "hope chess".
Yours looks similar, though as you point out you don't focus on threats first. I now put them at the forefront every step of the way (ideally: as you say it is very hard to think well every move of a game!).
can you reduce it to 1 step?I have a short memory :P
how about:1: find the winning moves and play them.
This is what I used to do. But it is too meagre for complex positions.
Tempo: what aspects of a complex (middlegame) position doesn't it cover?
I just wrote a post about it.
Tempo: I don't see it. The stuff in 'analysis paralysis' seems to be a case of having trouble doing number 2, which is the step where you would look ahead in the game tree to determine which move to play.Your question in the post is about how to do this most efficiently, which would be a particular means of doing step 2 well. So I guess I don't see what it can't handle, other than not giving details about how to look for threats, increase activity, or figure out the consequences of candidate moves. That's why it's the abridged version! :O
Well, if you don't see it then probably nobody sees it. So I will try to explain it in a new post.
Post a Comment