In the study room
Stage 1. Breaking down into chewable chunks
The first stage is braking down a position into chewable chunks. This is a typical system 2 activity.
The first stage is braking down a position into chewable chunks. This is a typical system 2 activity.
- gather a suitable problem set
- solve the problem
- analyse the positions
- break the position down into the 50 tactical elements
From a learning point of view, this is a waste of time. Since there is no transfer of knowledge to skill during this stage. Nothing will stick into system 1.
Chess prodigies don't need to do stage 1. They have chess coaches that do this for them. When you aren't a chess prodigy or you don't have a coach, you can save time and effort:
- Let a grandmaster gather a relevant problem set
- Let Stockfish analyse the position
- Minimize your efforts
- Let others do the work wherever you can
The quality of the chunks determine the end result. But there is no result in this stage for system 1
Stage 2. Absorption
This has been a black box for long. How do you inspire system 1 to absorb material? There seems to be no feedback. We know the following:
- system 1 does nothing by itself
- system 1 follows the light of attention
- system 2 guides the light of attention
- if system 2 is egotripping, system 1 doesn't absorb relevant material
- system 2 has to shut up and focus
- since system 2 is slow by its very nature, stage 2 has to be slow (Tai Chi)
I'm experimenting with the following method:
- play blindfold through the tree of analysis
By playing blindfold, you have the following advantages:
- system 2 is in the lead
- system 2 shuts up
- you are not literally SEEing geometrical patterns, but you manipulate their essence
- you don't worry about details but focus on the roles that the pieces play
- you don't waste time by worrying whether system 1 is awake. You don't need additional feedback
Repeat the position over and over again, until no noticeable system 2 activity is required.
In the tournament hall
Stage 3. Measuring the result
So far, everything that smells to speed has been taboo. This is because we need system 2 to be in the lead to guide your attention. And system 2 is notoriously slow. But in the tournament hall, speed is paramount when it comes to the determination whether knowledge has been absorbed into skill. With the clock we can determine which areas are insufficiently absorbed.
How do we guide the vultures eye? I don't belief in checklists anymore. They are just an invitation for system 2 to hijack all mental resources. I just keep my eye on the lines of attack. They tell me where my attention needs to go.
Isn't the tree of analysis a checklist of sorts ?
ReplyDeleteNo. Not at all. You can probably do without it and only visualize a main variation. After all it is about gaining a skill, not about being complete or finding the truth.
DeleteWe recommended seeing as the nec plus ultra for your training. But how do you know that you are finished seeing? (system 1, are you still awake?). Replace seeing with visualize before the minds eye, and what have you got? Blindfold chess where you see the roles in stead of the pieces and the moves. That is what I was trying to say.
DeletePART I:
ReplyDeletemake it stick: The Science of Successful Learning, Brown, Roediger II and McDaniel, © 2014.
“The study of habit formation provides an interesting view into neuroplasticity. The neural circuits we use when we take CONSCIOUS ACTION toward a goal are not the same ones we use when our actions have become automatic, the result of habit. The actions we take by habit are directed from a region located deeper in the brain, the basal ganglia. When we engage in EXTENDED TRAINING AND REPETITION of some kinds of learning, notably motor skills and sequential tasks, our learning is thought to be RECODED in this deeper region, the same area that controls SUBCONSCIOUS ACTION such as eye movements. As a part of this process of recoding, the brain is thought to CHUNK motor and cognitive action sequences together so that they can be performed as a single unit, that is, without requiring a series of conscious decisions, which would substantially slow our responses. These sequences become reflexive. That is, they may start as actions we teach ourselves [using System 2] to take in pursuit of a goal, but they become automatic responses to stimuli [using System 1]. Some researchers have used the word “macro” (a simple computer app) to describe how this CHUNKING FUNCTIONS AS A FORM OF HIGHLY EFFICIENT, CONSOLIDATED LEARNING. These theories about chunking as integral to the process of habit formation help explain the way in sports we develop the ability to respond to the rapid-fire unfolding of events faster than we’re able to think them through [System 2], the way a musician’s finger movements can outpace his conscious thoughts, or the way a chess player can learn to foresee the countless possible moves and implications presented by different configurations of the board. Most of us display the same talent when we type.”
Habits are formed as a result of repetition of a process over time. The usual time period to form a habit can take 28 days to 3 months. It does not occur overnight. If we repeat a sequence of actions for the needed time, we WILL develop a habit. The important issue is forming GOOD habits instead of bad ones.
One of my BAD habits is to focus on trying to solve tactics QUICKLY, often failing to SLOW DOWN when the solution does not spring immediately to mind like Athena from the forehead of Zeus. The process of slowing down is another part of the process that must be ingrained as a habit, without having to rely on System 2 to consciously monitor everything.
"One of my BAD habits is to focus on trying to solve tactics QUICKLY, often failing to SLOW DOWN when the solution does not spring immediately to mind like Athena from the forehead of Zeus."
DeleteThat is why a highly recommend to use the same problem set over and over again. The first rounds you can focus on the solution, which is irrelevant to the learning process. Later on you can focus on the absorption of the roles.
PART II:
ReplyDeleteAs an aside, I referenced this book (without attribution due to memory failure) regarding committing errors and consequently ingraining the errors into long-term memory. Here is a fuller description directly from the book.
“The theory of errorless learning gave rise to instructional techniques in which learners were spoonfed new material in small bites and immediately quizzed on them while they remained on the tongue, so to speak, fresh in short-term memory and easily spit out onto the test form. There was virtually no chance of making an error. Since those days, we’ve come to understand that retrieval from short-term memory is an ineffective learning strategy and that errors are an integral part of striving to increase one’s mastery over new material. Yet in our Western culture, where achievement is seen as an indicator of ability, many learners view errors as failure and do what they can to avoid committing them. The aversion to failure may be reinforced by instructors who labor under the belief that when learners are allowed to make errors it’s the errors that they will learn.”
“This is a misguided impulse. WHEN LEARNERS COMMIT ERRORS AND ARE GIVEN CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK, THE ERRORS ARE NOT LEARNED. Even strategies that are highly likely to result in errors, like asking someone to TRY TO SOLVE A PROBLEM BEFORE BEING SHOWN HOW TO DO IT, produce stronger learning and retention of the correct information than more passive learning strategies, PROVIDED there is corrective feedback.”
We need to develop many different habits; for example, spending at least 15 minutes every day solving tactical problems is a good habit. This is a totally different habit from actually working on the process of solving problems. Another essential habit is to SEE the solutions in terms of chunks (specific tactical patterns that have been ingrained [System 1]) rather than in terms of individual moves. This should also be done throughout the exploration of variations; the entire process of determining the next (or best) move should be built on SEEing the chunks (patterns), not only initially (on the surface at the vulture’s eye level) but throughout the entire process of calculation. If we are calculating using individual MOVES, then we do not have the requisite patterns ingrained in System 1. The reason that novices/beginners/club players MUST SEE in terms of individual moves is because they CANNOT SEE more abstract patterns/chunks that are salient in a specific position, whether at the starting point or further down in the Tree of Analysis. Everything must be SEEn in terms of patterns. If we are calculating and trying to SEE based on moves, that is a critical clue that we may be looking in the right place but using the wrong tools.
As Temposchlucker noted, System 2 must be used to cut up the “food” into edible bites. It is the building of good habits that shoves those bites down the gullet of System 1.