.
.
.
.
I'm able to build a logical reasoning. I only don't do it when it comes to chess. Why not? Automatic thinking has taken over. Since automatic thinking is only semi-intelligent, it doesn't adapt to the details in the position. So I fail in the details. You can play chess only with a great deal of automatic thinking. For the reason there is no time to think consciously. Conscious thinking ist just way too slow during a game. So you can't use real intelligence in a game. I exaggerate to make it more clear.
This means that we depend on the quality of our semi-intelligence. That's why we plateau in chess at a certain level. No matter how much conscious intelligence we possess. In life this means that when we grow older we start to rely more and more on automatic intelligence. Even if it isn't very well suited for reality.
The task at hand is to improve the quality of our semi-intelligence. With the checklist I have introduced an intelligent search-strategy. I have added conscious intelligence. Now I must automate it. So that it becomes semi-intelligent. But now at a higher level. As long as it is not automated, the task at hand is just too daunting to do it consciously. But during the process of automation you simply have to bear it.
5 comments:
Alternately, focus on (very) slow games to use more of your conscious thought process and full intelligence.
That's the advice I often see, anyway. Personally, I only have time for speed games these days, but I know that I'm getting more entertainment than improvement from them...
I do not know if you can put chess in defenite rules. To many exceptions.
I rather think that you more have to study positions so that you know what to do in a certain position instead of trying to find the ultimate thought proces, which to my believe, does not excist.
you gave the remedy several times in previous posts: Stoyko/Kotov calculation excersises! You pointed me to an excellent article on chessbase on the benefits to unconsious performance of calculation excersises, like Kotov excersises. And I am so much curious what would happen if you put as much energy in it as you did in your other experiments
Chesstiges said:
"I rather think that you more have to study positions so that you know what to do in a certain position instead of trying to find the ultimate thought proces, which to my believe, does not excist. "
GM Igor Smirnov is talking a lot about the "right" thought process and ICS to.
As longer you think, as better the move. With a "thought process" you can prevent "loops" and faults.
But i dont think that a <2000 will get many points by this
@CT,
Writing this blog is just another way to procrastinate real chess study, so you should not take it too seriously:)
@papablanca,
actually I'm training pretty hard lately. The course is clear and my approach is pretty Stoyko-like, besides that I focus on tactical positions solely.
And I have become very curious which is helpful too.
Post a Comment