Visualization and patterns
Tactical patterns are the endpoints of your calculation. They are forced. You must absorb as many patterns as you can. But most moves in chess aren't forced. You must be able to visualize those series of moves. Those moves cannot be represented by definite patterns. Since they are not forced.
If you have insufficient patterns absorbed, your visualizations of future positions have no endpoints. If your visualization is short of an endpoint, you cannot be sure whether you are on the right track. So you tend to repeat your visualisations over and over again. Which is the surest way to end up in time trouble.
Now I start to build up the basic patterns, it begins to show that my visualization skills are insufficiently developed. So I searched for a method that promises to develop my visualization skills. I think I have found one (five) at Chessable
My first two games with the French defense: a win and a draw. I'm pretty excited about this clever repertoire. As if I have finally landed on my definite opening repertoire with black. Let's see whether I'm still euphoric over a few months.
https://listudy.org/en/blind-tactics/398
ReplyDeleteThere are two common end patterns to this puzzle: (1) the Dovetail Mate, and (2) the Escalator Mate (or a variation on that theme). The 'clues' to the first are the Black pawns (g6-f7) and the control of h8 by the White Rook. The 'clues' to the second are the restricted space created by the Black pawns (e6-f7-g6) leaving a single 'escape' square (f5), the control of the third rank by the White Rook AND the control of d4 by the White King. Slouching forward toward the White side of the board to escape the wrath of the White Queen should be seen as a 'death march' by the Black King. Nothing good can come of marching into a cul-de-sac controlled by two major White pieces.
DeleteI have come to believe that the recognition of common patterns must occur at each step of the solution, not just seen once in the starting position. 'SEEing' the patterns and moving the variation(s) along using the patterns as guides is what counts (without 'counting' per se). SEE the prerequisites for the potential pattern(s) in the initial position, find a forcing move that moves toward those pattern(s), then look for the next forcing move that brings the final pattern(s) into sharper focus. Lather, rinse, repeat. Sometimes (usually), the final pattern(s) may not be clearly seen initially, but there should be recognition of the dynamic potential for pattern(s) that guides the choices for further exploration of the variations.
This should apply to games as well as to tactical problems.
WE CAN'T PLAY WHAT WE CAN'T SEE!.
YMMV.
BTW, The Chess Improver article "Sac or No Sac? (3)" by Valer Eugen Demian covers similar ground regarding "SEEing" the conditions (potential) for the Greek Gift sacrifice.
DeleteThe link was meant to be a free of cost substitute for Visualise
ReplyDeleteThx for the link
DeleteI try to distinguish between the different things I observe during training. There are tactical end patterns, there is a path towards the end pattern. The essence of the path can be visualized. The aura's of the pieces play a role here. The path has its own patterns. And there is guidance in the form of a logical narrative. System 1 looks over the shoulder of system 2. Where the attention of system 2 goes, there system 1 must follow. It are different trainings. Absorb the endpoint patterns, absorb the patterns while visualizing the path, and developing a logical narrative. Without a logical narrative, there is just trial and error. Which has been the bane of my thoughts for decades.
ReplyDeleteWE CAN'T PLAY WHAT WE CAN'T SEE!.
ReplyDeleteThat is very true. But what we can't SEE, we will try to reconstruct with the aid of system 2. Deceiving ourselves, believing that we SEE what is actually reconstructed.