-- chess psychology phenomenon

Sort:
Avatar of brettregan1


A couple of questions ---this is question #1---- how is it that if a chess player plays on a board or plays on a computer.

( I regret using this word computer as it had distracted some people from the line of thought I was hoping people could think about and offer some insight to me-- instead of using the "phrase- plays on a computer- I wish I would have typed "playing on-line"=== computer or no computer is irrelevent -- making a chess move mistake is irrelevent == I only refer to that situation where a player makes a move and then INSTANTLY thinks "DOH" )

he can make a move -- and as "instantly" as soon as his "finger is off the piece" he realizes he made a big , huge , giant obvious mistake. --- well I ask you if the brain could comprehend the mistake, why didn't the brain draw attention to it in the moments before the fellow was formulating the "final" move. -- and why concerning that move does the mind seem to be "blank" but once the move is made the mistake instant becomes the obvious dominant thought? -------- and how can I post this question on a forum?
----# I am mainly interested in the mental process this represents or reflects---- I personally believe this is unique to chess --- I do not believe this -- aberation happens in any other endeavour --" like you will never buy an ice cream cone and then "instantly think" ouch I never should have paid one thousand dollars for this ice cream cone when the booth beside this one sells them for two dollars. -- thoughts and choices and decisions will be flying around before and during the final decision---- if I am wrong and this chess "phenomenon" happens in other human situations could you give me an example? example would be answer to question 2
---- question three --- if the human mind is like a computer --- and some people can program by talking and walking their way through the program as the computer would "see the program" well if someone could see the flow chart of this "chess mistake phenomenon" what would this flow chart look like.
----- question four ----- some one who studies the mind and though processes must have made note of this chess move thingy. --- what would the consumate accepted name for this chess mistake phenomenon be called--- bearing in mind this situation does not happen every time a mistake is made but is in fact a unique situation.

Avatar of JPF917

Brett,

Interesting thought pattern that brought you to ask the questions.  However, the human mind is not at all like a computer so the underlying assumption puts the fallacy to the entire line.  The comparison stops when the human mind makes the decison to count to 3. [Or two for the binary folks as in 0, 1, 2]  Put a different way (because my mind has that capacity) it has the capacity for more than deciding between yes or no in each instance in a series. 

The computer does not.   It doesn't imagine.  It doesn't conceptualize.  It doesn't think.  It justs searches two digits at a time in accordance with instructions and does it very fast.   It "learns" only by finding series of two numbers that don't fit it's instructions.  Nothing more.  Nothing less.

The ability to imagine is probably the fly in the ointment you describe.  Can't think of anything else.  But then, the instruction manual tells humans to keep it simple and we don't.  Computers keep it totally simple but at a rapid rate.

Regards,

John F.

Avatar of orangehonda

I've experienced this (as I'm sure most players have) and sometimes it is very surprising.

For example even in analysis I've sometimes thought long and hard about how to save a position for white... finally I come up with a maneuver that works, I play this 2-3 move sequence and immediately after reaching the position on the board I see black can refute it... what?!  I see instantly a move that I hadn't considered...

I think a large part of it is pattern recognition.  During calculation/visualization we're somewhat selective about what moves we consider as response, but once the current position arrives (after the move is made) without really "thinking" the pattern recognition immediately recognizes a possibility that our analytical side missed.  Our analytical side asks, if I play here what can my opponent do?  And we look at some logical tries of a refutation... then some other logical response... if the move still looks good, we go for it, and once we reach it I believe the instant regret is pure pattern recognition spotting a tactic or maneuver by linking it up with past positions and training such as tactical drills.

This is why blitz is even possible.  How can a GM give me 30:1 time odds and beat me every time?  How can a GM play a 50 person simul and win 98-100% of the games?  His/her hand will will reach for a strong move every time without need of calculation.  So from a chess player's perspective that's where this phenomenon comes from, the difference between a calculative/analytical decision and a pure pattern recognition -- although in practice the player tires to mix the two to minimize errors.

Avatar of brettregan1

dear chess connoisseurs,  I really appreciate your answers. if I were to answer my own question. I am sure I never would have thought about the points you have made and I appreciate being made aware of and then being able to consider this different perspectives. thank you