Chess vocabulary
Now I train in a rather consistent way, I can't help to think about my method a little deeper. The more I think about it, the more I see the analogy with learning a language. We talked a lot about this in the past of course, but we never reached a definite conclusion. A few spirals of contemplation further, I see things much clearer now though.
B1q2rk1/5ppp/4p3/p1Q5/8/6P1/Pb2PP1P/2RR2K1 b - - 0 21
What are words in chess? Words are patterns.
- 1. Bxa8 Bxc1 (tit for tat)
- 2. Qxc8 Rxc8 (direct exchange)
We all know these patterns well. But then there is a new word we need to learn. Why is this position winning?:
The problem lies in the fact that blacks rook c8 isn't free. It has a duty to fulfil. Its function is to guard the back rank. Leaving Bc1 unprotected. Because of that, white can save his bishop and gain a tempo at the same time with 3. Bb7. Black has to save his rook. But he can't do so and save the black bishop at the same time due to his obligation to guard the back rank..
The analogy of learning a language
What is the difference between a child and an adult? The most significant is the amount of words known.
|
age |
# words |
Chess prowess |
|
2.5 |
600 |
Firewood |
|
5 |
8,000 |
1700 |
|
12 |
24,000 |
Expert |
|
Adult bad |
27,000 |
Master |
|
Adult average |
42,000 |
GM |
|
Adult erudite |
52,000 |
Super GM |
As you can see, most of us got stuck in our infancy, when it comes to chess. Why is that? There are a few reasons for that:
- low rated opponents
- we replace vocabulary by description
- no one tells us there are new words to learn
Low rated opponents
I learned to play chess when I was 3 years old. Within 3 years, I could beat my two older brothers and my father. A few years later I could beat all my friends. When I entered a chess club at age 26, my entrance level was 1528. So in my youth, the rating of my opponents must have been lower than 1600. Meaning my vocabulary was lower than 8000 and my chess age was still below 5 years old.
You can't expect to make progress when everyone around you has a vocabulary of less than 8000 words.
We replace vocabulary by description
When you travel abroad, and try to speak a foreign language with a small vocabulary, you will find yourself time and again describing the words you don't know. The same is true in chess. When we don't know a pattern, we will try to simulate it with trial and error in combination with logical thinking. Of course this action by system 2 is slow and error prone. But we can deceive our self by it, making us to belief that we know the words, while we don't.
If we think we have a rich vocabulary while we don't, we will lack the inclination and the motivation to learn new words. This is the main reason why we plateau. It is not so much laziness, but mere ignorance
No one tells us there are new words to learn
In the diagrams above, I tried to learn you a new word. If you think that you know the word already because you know the letters, you might miss the necessity to learn the word.
Chess prodigies have chess coaches and adults around them which make clear that they must learn a new word.
We must have the discipline to identify and to learn new words ourselves. But before that, we must get rid of our ignorance that being able to concoct a description of a word is the same as knowing the word.
How far can we come as adults?
There is no reason why an adult can't learn a (foreign) language in about the same time as a child. We have a disadvantage that we are not a blanc page. So it takes more energy and focus to overwrite our memory with new stuff. But since we already know the words in our own language, we don't need to learn the actual meaning of the word.
In chess, that is a bit different. The new word I learned you above, is probably really new to you. Yet you need the extra focus and energy to overwrite your old chess habits of trial and error and logical thinking.
If you do that in a controlled and systematic way, you must be able to make progress in due time. If you look at the table above, people learn words at a speed of 2270 words per year or 6.24 per day. To make it from our level to master, we need about 19,000 words. Nowadays it is no problem is to get a database with enough usable problems. The main problem is to identify the words we don't know. I don't consider the learning capacity to be the problem. My memory is still pretty good. But identifying the words I don't know takes a considerable time.
We won't get rid of our accent, though.
This may be the most insightful and usable post you’ve ever written!
ReplyDeleteThe pattern (“word”) to be learned from this (and similar examples) does not have a chess-specific name (like fork, pin, skewer, etc.), but it IS very common.
“I don’t know what it is [verbal description], but I know it when I see it.”
Historical trivia:
The phrase "I know it when I see it" is a colloquial expression by which a speaker attempts to categorize an observable fact or event, although the category is subjective or lacks clearly defined parameters. The phrase was used in 1964 by United States Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart to describe his threshold test for obscenity.
The goal is to “SEE” the pattern holistically (with all associated moves/nuances) without wasting time categorizing it or describing it. An “exactly the same thing” pattern does NOT infer that the pieces-on-squares are in exactly the same position. Instead, it is at an abstracted conceptual level that makes two (or more) positions “exactly the same thing” IN ESSENCE. The pieces can be different and on different squares, and yet we perceive two (or more) positions to be “exactly the same thing” [in a conceptual sense] – if we have the pattern in our vocabulary.
For a more in-depth discussion of “the same thing” [based on analogies] in two chess positions that (on the surface level) have nothing in common, refer to the following paper:
"Understanding Our Understanding of Strategic Scenarios: What Role Do Chunks Play?" - Alexandre Linhares and Paolo Brum
It may prove useful (when searching for further examples of “exactly the same thing”) to explicitly categorize it, even if we do not give the category a formal name. A name is merely a shorthand for the essence that must be absorbed into System 1.
Given the number of patterns [“words”] required to advance to various levels (we are woefully inadequate if we have less than 8,000 “words total), it is NOT surprising that it may take 10 years or 10,000 hours of intensely focused study to reach a fairly advanced level of skill (master, at a minimum). It also is obvious why having a coach with a virtually complete vocabulary (either internalized or in his training notebooks) who can be consulted to provide a training regimen that will result in the desired outcome in the shortest possible time is a virtual necessity.
I completely agree with the analogy. Learning how to play a musical instrument is also a similar complex skill. Mastery levels are achieved first through conscious, slow practice. Then with a sufficient level of learning comes more automatic pattern recognition and intuitive play. Having to think mechanically about word-for-word translation in a foreign language is a low level of skill and eventually the practice will hold you back from achieving mastery; instead, you need to think in terms of concepts and then let the appropriate language "suggest itself" - just like looking at a board and seeing potential moves leap out at you.
ReplyDeleteThe table shows implicit that 100 rating points per year is the maximum progress an adult can make. So you must be patient to wait for objective proof. Or you must DIY, since subjective proof is much faster.
ReplyDelete