chess is memorization

???
Top players literally make new strategies and moves in the middle of the game all the time. If you don't believe me, watch agadmator's Chess Channel on youtube (an example video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIfxAyTl0cY). He does recaps of major chess games, and each game he specifies which move both players enter a completely new game that is not in the database of top chess games. This usually happens around move 8-12, however I have seen new games occur as early as move 4 and as late as move 20. Or if you are Hikaru you can have a new game start on move 3 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwTH8-DsF3w). When you make a new move you don't have other games to fall back on, both players have to make moves on their own. When GM chess player spend 30+ minutes on a single move, what is that you think they are doing?

Fair enough. But the point still stands - during a game, once the position becomes unique, a player needs to assess things, to determine what kind of action plan to employ, going forward.

That's not a strict act of recalling memorized patterns - that's more about logic, thinking ahead, and problem-solving. It's actually utilizing a different region of the brain ...

It's a bit of both, to be true.

The issue is 700000 positions is such a small fraction that you still have to use creativity ....

It's part memorization but it's also part of using what you learned to make educated guesses

Apparently, it is not only doable, but a "retard" could do it! Gotta love it when stupidity and political incorrectness intersect.

Well at least you kept it short this time. That is a good rule of thumb for you, roger. When you don't have anything of value to say, but feel compelled to offer us another of your 'word vomits' at least do us te favor of keeping it short.

The greatest chess players are not just memorization masters, but also experts of creativity and geniuses of logic.

Is what we call "problem-solving" not recognition of something that has already happened so you can accordingly respond to it? When you recall patterns, you don't mindlessly reproduce a move you did in a game 2 weeks ago, you adapt it to the corresponding situation of the game.

I agree, thinking ahead is a big part, yet doesn't thinking ahead rely on the player's prior games or experiences and the recognition of patterns that causes them to be able to predict their opponents next move, is this not "thinking ahead"

If all games were truly at random, with no patterns to recognize, every move would be unpredictable. Therefore, "predicting" your opponents next moves would becomes pointless.

How we say "pre moves" and "predicting an opponent's next move" only becomes valid if there exists pattern within games that can be recognized, study of these patterns gives one the ability to reach gm.

If we assume everything is at random then every move would be equally viable.

It's only real chess if both opponent's have permanent brain damage and can only remember the last move they made on the board.

I didn't respond to your first post cause I considered it ape and dim witted, and since you weren't insulting in your message I just decided to let you speak your mind without interrupting.

You've built a position that I should not comment on how chess works and that memorization is only valid for people like me, who haven't reached a "high enough level" yet

Idk wtf this logic is, considering my elo is higher than most people in this thread including yours. By this, should i then also say you are not in a position to claim chess does not require memorization given my elo is higher than yours.?

Also saying only players of a "higher level" understand the game while those at lower elo are stuck to memorization is quite ape logic, hope you can reflect on that.

Memory plays a huge role in chess, it is not a coincidence that top players have ridiculously good memory and can recall positions from 50 years ago or some random game they played themselves 10 or so years ago, it is mostly pattern recognition and memory, no one also mentions ever that all the top players started out 5-6 or even younger, pounding at different positions from games of other players for hours on end every day for decades, that is essential memorization, yes you need understanding of the position but ever onyl get that having gone thru hours and hours of analyzing lines etc, there is nothing genius or magical about chess, even in the Fischer random, what basically happens during a game, is that top players tend to navigate the game towards a regular chess position, which they recognise thru pattern recognition to be winning or losing or drawish

It's a problem solving game :/ unless you memorize every single line In chess unfortunately for you you need to be able to problem solve and be creative (at least for chess not necessarily other things like art ) being good at chess doesn't necessarily equate to being good at something else but you could say the exact same thing for math even tho problem solving arguably needs creativity to your using prior knowledge to create something new in a different position you can't do that by just "memorizing "

Otherwise puzzles would be key but there are 1200s that are 2400+ at puzzles...

I'd say a comparable analogy would be a sport. Let's take a martial art, for example.

In martial arts training, a fighter practices various strikes, throws, submissions holds, etc (depending on whichever fighting style it is). This kind of practice is certainly repetitive - the fighter hopes to reach a point where "muscle memory" takes over, and they can perform these specific maneuvers without much conscious thought at all.

During an actual fight, these memorized sequences will certainly be used. A boxer throws the same combinations he has practiced a thousand times before. A Tae Kwon Do expert delivers the same roundhouse kick that he can do in his sleep. A chess player jumps on a Greek Gift sacrifice the instant he spots it on the board.

But what about all the moments in between? Are all MMA fights pure memorization, from beginning to end? Is a Soccer game entirely memorized, due to the players practicing the same kicks and passes hundreds of times before?

If two people have a conversation - aren't they simply recalling memorized patterns - words and expressions that they've already learned, and arranging them into sentences to represent their thoughts?

I suppose we could say so. But I also would call a conversation more than just memorized words and phrases ... just as I think of a chess game as more than just memorized patterns and moves.