Temposchlucker

 When you ask yourself "what is this position about?" you might get a logical answer. This is your salient logical cue. Triggered by the logical pattern that you recognize. For instance: Black to move 4r2k/1p4bp/p2p2p1/3P4/P1R2p2/1P3Q1P/3qNPP1/6K1 b - - 0 28 Lalith, B, vs. Rathnakaran, K., Sharjah 2017 The problem is, you would love to grab Ne2 which is BPDO (Bad Pieces Drop Off). But you have a vulnerable backrank. So the logical question arises: can I take Ne2 in such way that I keep my back rank protected? As you see, the logic prunes your tree of analysis before you even start to think about moves. The move you are looking for must have an "additional punch" or in other words, must come with tempo. That is CCT, but now restrained beforehand by the logical conditions you have set. 28 ... Qe1+ puts the queen on the e-line, thus protecting e8 from a distance. And the check is the additional punch. Notice how much more fun solving puzzles has become!

 Back in 2000 I realized that when a 14 year old kid starts to beat up chess players who have 50 year or more experience under their belt, there must be some sort of trick that they apply. When Susan Polgar set her simul record in 2005, I did the math and came to the conclusion that whatever the trick was, it had to be subconscious. She used 2.6 second per move at average, including walking from one table to another, and there is no way that someone can think in such short amount of time. Hence I started my blog in 2005. Many red herrings were thrown at me by all kinds of chess authors, and I catched them all. In 2023 I ran out of red herrings, and I concocted some sort of method to educate my subconscious. It kind of worked, although it was obvious that it was far from efficient. At May 5th, 2026, finally all pieces of the puzzle fell into their place. In order to obtain the trick, you must absorb the logical patterns of a position, not so much the geometrical patterns. Since logi...

 When you learn the Trick, you get some Additional Capabilities for free: you start to see the beauty of chess you can visualize a variation once you have formulated the logical narrative you prune the tree of analysis which leads to speeding up your thinking dramatically All without any extra effort. I refrained from adding examples, since chess diagrams tend to distract chess players from the essence of what is being said. UPDATE I realized that it is not so easy to copy the Trick. After all, it took me 26 years to rid myself of all confusion. We talk about educating System 1. And System 1 and System 2 don't speak the same language. They don't communicate directly. Furthermore, there are a lot of methods out there that worked for their inventor, but not for almost everybody else. Since the inventors left out some crucial information concerning System 1, while their Systems 2 added confusing and redundant extra ideas. So is often visualization added, and the necessity to find...

In search for salient cues, I stumble again on my PoPLoAFun system. PoP = point of pressure LoA = line of attack Fun = function Take the following position. Diagram 1. White to move r1b2rk1/1pq1bppp/p3pn2/3n2N1/3R4/2N1B1P1/PPQ1PPBP/R5K1 w - - 0 15 Ni H. vs. Adly, A., Shenzen 2011 Let us first have a look on the balance of the points of pressure. Diagram 2. Same position. PoPs. White to move Then have a look at the lines of attack. Diagram 3. Same position. LoAs. White to move And the Functions (defenders, overloaded pieces etc.) Diagram 4. Same position. Functions. White to move And here you have it. Way too much information. And somewhere in this mess there a few essential salient cues. Less is more. When we can find a methodology to restrict the mind to the essential information, we might come further. Where to start? If there are any forcible imbalances in the position, then I suppose that the overloaded defenders should lead us the way.

 I have a set of 100 tactical problems. I use this to get a better idea of what salient cues I need to solve the problems. While investigating them I noticed different categories in which to divide the logic that is exposed by the problems. One such category is counting. Diagram 1. Black to move 5rk1/2p4p/1p1p1qpb/p1nPp3/2P1P3/1PN1B1Pb/P3B2P/2Q1R1K1 b - - 0 26 Pinho, P. vs. Gallagher, J., Gibraltar 2013 Attacking is about invasion. In order to decide where to invade, I need an overview of the focal points on the board. Diagram 2. Same position. Black to move  Red digits indicate the squares where white has the upper hand. Green digits indicate where black has the upperhand. The logic that I want to develop revolves around the invasion squares. Luring and trading and clearing and chasing etc. are the tools in the box to change the balance on the invasion squares. The salient cues are: a Queen on g2 or f1 is mate. Although black has the upperhand on f3, he cannot make use of it ...

 The Trick is learning the chess language. But once you speak it fluently, what are you going to write? The Trick is the most decisive element from novice to super grandmaster. But how much more do you need? How important is the story you are going to tell with the language?

  It is tricky to use Stockfish for positional assessments. Because when Stockfish deems your position somewhere between - 0.5 and + 0.5 it can mean the following: Your opponent has several acceptable possibilities and the position is easy to play Your opponent has only one correct move, and the position is difficult to play What we actually want to know is point 2. We want to steer our games in the direction where the computer says that it is equal, but that are difficult to play for humans. But Stockfish doesn't tell you that.