Question for Daily Players

This is an analysis question, though a generic one, especially since the game that makes me ask it is ongoing. However, I will keep in very non-specific and hopefully it will be interesting, especially to some good daily players.

I've begun playing daily. Obviously, you can use anything except engines, meaning analysis boards are in play. Spend hours. Move the pieces around. Do whatever.

So I had a position. My opponent made a move I didn't sufficiently consider. It's not a disaster though, I'm still OK. I decide I have two possible continuations, but I'm not sure which is best. I explore both more deeply and decide he'll almost certainly make the same reply to both of my moves.

This is where the trouble starts. I have three in one case and four in the other case possible moves that seem decent (after the first two moves, which are simpler). He has two or three answers to each of those. In blitz you'd just pick a move that doesn't obviously lose and make it. In rapid, OK, there's more to do, but you have to find something concrete and go with it in just a minute or so (also, all in your head so it can only get so complicated). In daily, on the analysis board, I can have literally 15 lines mapped out, and all of them are unclear and could branch more.

Sure, go deeper. Or consider more factors. But eventually--and sooner rather than later--I'm just overwhelmed. One thing I think is clear. The situation has shifted from worrying about tactical misses to realizing I lack the strategic knowledge to really evaluate positions. So--especially for the good daily players--how do you handle this?

'In correspondence, he who goes to bed later wins.' - Friedrich Baumbach, 11th ICCF World Champion

Ha. That is kind of funny. I must say this is nerve-wracking and I am not sure I like it.

how do you handle this?

exactly the way you are doing it. you must exhaust all reasonable possibilities.

the pinnacle of success in daily, is to play the perfect game. because correspondence games give the time to do this, OTB GMs use correspondence chess as a reference to stay on the cutting edge of theory.

Whats great is when you spend hours considering a position after your opponent makes the only good move he has to make. Youre SURE there's a mating net after he does that move, but you can't crack it...and then he doesn't even make the move you were analyzing. He just blunders.

I always played at Daily time-control. Complex tactics? Branching lines? Nerve-wracking?

Try this one: Played at three days per move, in a Country vs Country match.

Since nobody can analyze all of the possible continuations, it is vitally important to choose the correct three-to-five candidate-moves to examine and deeply calculate. That process... of pruning the tree of analysis down to a managable number of candidate-branches but without pruning so aggressively that the best move gets discarded... is one of the key skills of Daily chess.

For me, the biggest key to daily games is not moving too quickly. I often look at my game for a while, then set it aside, and come back and look at it later with fresh eyes. That helps me find all kinds of possibilities that I didn't notice at first.
I don't try to discern the ultimate truth of the position. I just try to figure out which move is best this turn. In complex positions, I keep putting the game aside & revisiting it until I've come to a firm conclusion. Then I set the game aside another time or two, and if I still reach the same conclusion, I play the move.

Lol. That would work for me.

I have definitely put aside some games and come back later. It's crazy. Spending more time on a move than a whole game (and I don't even mean a blitz game).

Thanks Emu. That's close to what I'm trying to achieve, at least if I understand you. Like, I will say OK, I could do move a, b, or c... or even d. And then he can do 1,2,3 against each of those. But after than, I try NOT to have any branches in how I reply to his reply--it's too much, I just need to go with whichever move I think is best at that point (though I might switch to a different one if it's not working out). Then similarly, I might look at various replies for him, but I'll pick the one I think is best and continue that path without any additional branches. Then once I decide on my "pre-final" answer, I might look at the selected one a bit harder to see if I'm missing some resource he's got. I'm definitely spending more than an hour per move, which is crazy.

Good Positional Chess, Planning & Strategy Books for Beginners and Beyond...

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell/introduction-to-positional-chess-planning-strategy

https://www.chess.com/blog/RussBell

That's what I was getting at, yes.

And like you say, it simply isn't possible to calculate too deeply; allowing even just three alternatives at each half-move... to look only two moves deep (that's four half-moves) that's already EIGHTY-ONE different lines (3x3x3x3). So you have to "abstract" most of your opponent's replies, and only really analyze the move that you consider most likely.

This is where intuition and judgement come in. Fortunately both can be trained.

Some useful strategic considerations to choose between lines of play:

1.Which variation improves your centre.

2.If the centre is blocked, which flank are you looking to focus on.

3. Pawn structure: clean or fractured; open or closed.

4.Do you feel more at home in safe or risky positions.

5.Same question for your opponent, if you are familiar with their play.

Other contributors can suggest others.