I've always been told that chess is the recognition of patterns. The accumulation of knowledge from recognizing these patterns, either in the opening, middlegame or endgame, directly reflects on your strength. There are a couple books on this subject focusing on this. Terminology and the focus of "chess patterns" are more prevalent in literature in recent years. "Improve Your Chess Pattern Recognition" comes to mind.
In opening's many have learned to memorize a series of moves, with pattern recognition as an afterthought. For me, the focus was mainly on the moves and possibly the main ideas behind the move. The idea of recognizing and knowing the position (the recognition of a certain pattern, or setup as I regarded it) seemed secondary to the route memorization of reaching the end of an opening line or variation. (i.e. White to move has a slight advantage, Black is better, etc.) The idea of learning to recognize or working towards or with a specific pattern within an opening was (and still is in many cases) foreign to the way I learned the opening.
Learning the key positions and common patterns within the opening of your choice, being able to set up the position from a blank board, without having to play each move first, seems to me to be the best way to learn an opening. Can I set up a traditional Colle position without having to play through the moves? A French Burns variation? Can I tell you the main patterns that may result from that position that could be advantageous or be trying?
In middle games, we learn patterns from the start. forks, pins, doubling rooks on an open file, etc. Both positional awareness and tactics are primarily the recognition of patterns and being able to exploit them to our advantage and recognize them from our opponents. The more patterns we learn the better we play. Nothing new here.
The endgame is, without a doubt, the learning and exploitation of pattern recognition. Knowing that a King and Pawn ending leads to a draw or is an advantage for you or your opponent is crucial. The knowledge Lucena and Philidor positions in rook endings are crucial to timely play. Evaluation of middlegame positions and transposition into the final phase of the game. Mating patterns, Stalemate patterns, fortresses, etc.
Example Exercise: On an empty board.
Can you set up an ideal Philidor position?
Can you set up an ideal Lucena position?
Can you set up the Traditional Colle position, mainline?
I've always been told that chess is the recognition of patterns. The accumulation of knowledge from recognizing these patterns, either in the opening, middlegame or endgame, directly reflects on your strength. There are a couple books on this subject focusing on this. Terminology and the focus of "chess patterns" are more prevalent in literature in recent years. "Improve Your Chess Pattern Recognition" comes to mind.
In opening's many have learned to memorize a series of moves, with pattern recognition as an afterthought. For me, the focus was mainly on the moves and possibly the main ideas behind the move. The idea of recognizing and knowing the position (the recognition of a certain pattern, or setup as I regarded it) seemed secondary to the route memorization of reaching the end of an opening line or variation. (i.e. White to move has a slight advantage, Black is better, etc.) The idea of learning to recognize or working towards or with a specific pattern within an opening was (and still is in many cases) foreign to the way I learned the opening.
Learning the key positions and common patterns within the opening of your choice, being able to set up the position from a blank board, without having to play each move first, seems to me to be the best way to learn an opening. Can I set up a traditional Colle position without having to play through the moves? A French Burns variation? Can I tell you the main patterns that may result from that position that could be advantageous or be trying?
In middle games, we learn patterns from the start. forks, pins, doubling rooks on an open file, etc. Both positional awareness and tactics are primarily the recognition of patterns and being able to exploit them to our advantage and recognize them from our opponents. The more patterns we learn the better we play. Nothing new here.
The endgame is, without a doubt, the learning and exploitation of pattern recognition. Knowing that a King and Pawn ending leads to a draw or is an advantage for you or your opponent is crucial. The knowledge Lucena and Philidor positions in rook endings are crucial to timely play. Evaluation of middlegame positions and transposition into the final phase of the game. Mating patterns, Stalemate patterns, fortresses, etc.
Example Exercise: On an empty board.
Can you set up an ideal Philidor position?
Can you set up an ideal Lucena position?
Can you set up the Traditional Colle position, mainline?
Can you set up the Burns Variation of the French?