How many moves ahead do you calculate

If i calculated 9,000,000,000,000,000 or 2.5*10^115 i would lose all games on time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"I normally think 8-9 moves ahead"......like my friend BrandonQDSH commented,that's unbelievable...

Is your Elo greater than 2600??

tonydal, your a rated master, in the most extreme game youve ever played otb or live about how many moves have you calculated and how many variations?  do you think someone could calculate 35 moves in advance like someone claimed earlier on this forum?  i cant fathom 20 let alone 35...alekhine was renowned for his calculational abilities (correct?), and i remember reading somewhere that he calculated a position 25 moves deep before revealing the shocking finale of the combination and he was very proud of that...

Kotov in Think Like a GM related the pride he felt when in his study to improve his thinking he once analyzed a line >20 moves deep. It was, he admitted, a straight-line variation.

He gives the position and the analysis. 20+ moves deep as I recall.

It depends on the position as certain games thinking 8-10 moves ahead is not difficult while in others thinking 2 moves ahead is proves too difficlt. I think I look at patterns (pawn structures,open lines) about 4-8 moves ahead but specific lines probably no more than 2 or 3 in most positions.

 Yeah, I know. More people don't believe I can. I've read some comments and I now see it's quite special, cause most of the people get stuck on the 4th or 5th move.

When I calculate that many moves ahead I need much time btw. Somewhat like 20 minutes. Not everytime it works out just like I wanted.

yes, its strange. i never think about this. usually, i play according to basic opening and responses. but if the board starts to get off hand, i start to plan traps and move further ahead. But, really....i only look ahead when necessary.

You're barely literate AND deluded.  Go home.

I calculate 8-9 moves ahead sometimes... it doesn't mean I've looked at every variation, and sure I've probably missed something. But I still do it. Leave rich alone, seriously.

Depence on the following things:

• Clock. If I have less then 3/4 of my opponent time, I'll try to think realy fast and manage my time ("20 seconds per move, not one millisecond more").
• Position. If I am leading with a rook, I'll think faster because even if I do make a mistake - the rook will cover up for it =]
• Phase. If its the opening, I'll probably think little (unless my opponent is white and 1. a3 e5 2. a4 ed5 then I'll stop thinking for like 30 seconds wondering why is someone like that on a tournament)

2-3 at most 4

I once did a chess problem that required  to see 7 moves ahead and I felt like my brain was trying to turn upside down, inside out, and flip.

(that wasn't a good feeling....)

Depends on the position but in a very open-complex position only about 2 at most three, so you can see 1 more than I can!

In correspondence chess it is a lot easier to think x moves ahead than in online chess because we can set up a chess board and play through the variations instead of having to hold multiple positions in our heads. In essence, this isn't really 'thinking' x moves ahead, rather it is just playing through x moves and seeing what happens. As such, it is not impossible for someone to play through 35 moves or whatever if they want to, and perhaps for them to be 35 decent moves.

That's one of the reasons why some people consider correspondence chess produces more 'perfect' games and move choices than OTB chess and why top players have a chance of beating computers on this site - we have the tools to think a long way into the future, but have the advantage of discarding the useless moves immediately and of having intuition to guide our strategic thinking (but are burdened by prejudice of why certain moves are 'better' or worse').

I'm not normally a fan of Rich's posts, but I don't see why he can't play through 8-9 moves each time he considers a move. Whether his choice of moves is good or bad is irrelevant to the topic - if he thinks through or plays through 8-9 moves then his answer is perfectly relevant and nobody can claim it to be nonsense because we can't prove otherwise. His rating reflects the quality of his move choice, not the quantity of moves he considers.

Depending on the postition will depend on whether or not I even "look ahead." In openings that I am used to I will just play. Later on the game though I look at least 3-5 moves ahead, sometimes up to about 10. I have looked ahead quite far, but it really depends upon my position.

I try not to do deep calculations if I don't have to. I try to read the position and see what it calls for. From my experience, a lot of times a simpler plan can emerge that doesn't take a lot of calculation.

The deepest I think I've calculated was 8 moves, I think. My calculations wound up working out like I'd planned, and I won 2 pawns as a result.

well i plan as many as i need to/as many that make sence

I'd move Kd6.

I see what you are saying about the quality of move being important and I agree that this is what calculation is all about. However, when you think ahead you will immediately discard several poor options, but this is because you have considered these options and calculated that they are poor choices. You will be much better at deciding which moves to discard than most of us.

It follows that weaker players may think several moves ahead, but have failed to discard poor options. They have still thought x moves ahead, even if the quality of move choice is poor.

Also, the point about being able to simply play through the moves holds true - with online chess people don't actually need to hold the moves in their head. Yes, this is mental dawdling, but it is still a form of calculation, although well below the level you would expect of yourself.

I agree completely with jonnyjupiter. In fact, I've often read of GMs' thought processes in a typical situation only requiring thinking three or four moves ahead. If those three moves result in a position that has a clear advantage, then there's usually no need to think further (if you don't want to, or for purposes of time management).

Also, a short calculation may result in a position where one can see that a well-practiced tactic will work. In that case I suppose you are calculating further, but it's almost automatic and the effort needed to think through the line is far less (since you're just applying a pattern) than if you need to hold numerous positions in your mind, and to try to see how each piece and its possible moves will impact on the position.

Of course, a GM has the capacity, if necessary, to calculate further into a complex position. It's just that in the majority of positions, a strong player will have the better understanding of the position and the game in general that is required to assess quickly that it is better without the need to embark on lengthy calculations. If you're a relatively weaker player, you might need to check variations that you haven't encountered before, or unfamiliar patterns. You might also not be playing with an overarching game plan, such that each new position is a new minefield of possibilities. Having a decent plan allows one to reduce the necessary calculations, since you are trying to guide the game down a particular avenue of possibility.

I think it's good to play blindfold to improve that skills, I played blindfold with my brother and now I don't get lost in variations and tactics.