- Logical thinking takes too much time and should be minimized.
- I wander too long at level 1 and 2 (individual moves and individual tactical motifs)
- I have oversights at level 3 (combination, how the pieces work together)
- Guiding my attention to find the oversights at level 3 has proven to be elusive so far.
- Decision between different choices takes much time
- Confusion increases time usage in an exponential way
- Creating a formal thought process.
- Applying a formal thought process.
- Slow post mortem to ingrain the geometrical patterns into the brain.
- Slow post mortem to ingrain the logical patterns into the brain.
- Solving at the highest possible speed.
- Guiding the attention at level 3.
- Categorizing the problems
- Analyzing the time consumers
- Focussing on the squares where attackers converge
- Focussing on the defenders
- Slow problem solving
- I might have forgotten a few experiments
- Random trial and error can be replaced by logical thinking
- I can prevent almost all oversights by taking more time. The effect is that both the red (error) and the green (correct) colours at the summary of my performance statistics at CT turn into yellow (correct but too slow).
- The best metaphor found so far is that of the lost keys which lie on your bed. The problem is not that you do not recognize your keys, but that you forget to look in the bedroom.
- Confusion is highly personal. It is related to complexity. It causes a memory overload due to processing high numbers. The high numbers might be the result of roaming at a too low level. There are more letters than words in a text, so processing letters causes a memory overload.
- The nett result of 51 days training is close to zero, if I don't reckon with an initial improvement the first days due to adaptation of the exercises.
- I have got more knowledge and understanding of certain positions. But not more speed.
- You can't find something at level 3 by looking at level 1 and 2 only. Only by accident will that happen.
Given the amount of remedies that have been tried, finding a remedy is not so easy as it looks. None of the experiments gave me a definite feeling or even a hint to be on the right track. Robert Coble has given a few beautiful examples of training pilots and karateka's which hint to how we can go from serial to parallel processing, but is not clear how that exactly should translate to chess tactics.
Somehow, the solution has probably to be sought in visual patterns. Maybe, the fusiform face area has something to do with it. But some critical knowledge about tactical improvement is still hidden in the dark.
There are a lot of different positions which can be categorized in certain types. Not every type needs the same remedy. But there is one category that stands out: the one where you fail to see the final combination because you look only at the lower levels. Below you find a perfect example of that.
|Black to move|
During investigation of this position, I overlooked how the black attackers converge on certain squares where they attack the enemy targets. After 5:34 min I saw the essence of the combination. How to speed that up? How should the attention be guided towards d1, where the black queen executes a duple attack on the white king and knight?