If experience was so important, Korchnoi would be trashing Carlsen for fun. Chess is mainly about cognitive power.
My counter is that I don't think Korchnoi learned as much from his experience as Carlsen did. Moreover, the effects of any learning become less apparent as you move up to 2600+.
Just because experience forms the basis of improvement doesn't mean that it doesn't have to be well-learned.
You would think calculating moves is only about cognitive power, but my experience might suggest otherwise! Visualizing the board started out really hard, but it simply got easier, and easier, and easier, and easier, and it continues to get easier, as I kept practicing it. It feels so much less than superhuman now to calculate 8-10 moves ahead. Maybe the practice just built my cognitive power, though.
[Quote=ciljettu]The politically incorrect truth is that great chess players are all very intelligent and no lefty liberal doublespeak can change this fact.[/quote]
Politics has nothing to do with it.
Politics has everything to do with it. Anything which is not an empirically measurable scientific truth ultimately becomes political, in the broadest sense of the term.
I've known people who were very gifted in one area, but were ordinary in everything else. Besides, how do explain idiot savants if being good at one thing requires you to be good in everything?
But intuition is calculation. Intuition is calculation on steroids.
When you consider that intuition helps one extract the truth, intuition is the result of the brain calculating much faster than the conscious mind can process.
Perhaps, but I don't think so. When I look at a board and say, "If I take the knight, he will take the bishop, and then I can pin the queen, and....." that's what I mean by calculation.
From what I have been reading, that's not what chess masters do. They look at a board, see one, or perhaps a handful, of moves that look good. That's what I mean by intuition.
I don't think that the intuitive process is just a very fast version of the calculation process. I think it's fundamentally different. I think it's more of a recognition proces than a calculation process. In what I have been reading about masters, they then use calculation to verify their intuitive recognition of the move or moves that they spotted, but I think that verification is completely different, and even occurs in a different portion of the brain. I don't think the initial recognintion is "too fast" for the conscious mind to process. I think it's outside the scope of what the consciou mind does. It's more like recognizing a familiar face.
Of course, it goes without saying that this is somewhat speculative. Much is unkown about the workings of the brain, but that is my opinion, informed by my reading about psychological and neurological studies of how people think when playing Chess.
There is a certain lack of exactness to intuition; if one were to, extremely broadly, classify it as a type of calculation, it would be a substantially soft calculation -- that's why it takes no work. Intuition doesn't go through the process of actually proving anything it believes, it just summarizes everything in the position in a very general way, and takes a guess. As said, I think to call intuition a form of calculation is such a broad interpretation to the point that it's sickening.
Here is an article citing numerous studies showing the positive effects of chess on brain function in countless areas. It is indisputable scientific fact that chess enhances brain function in more ways than we can even know. I play because I love chess, but I don't mind the benefits either.
Yep. and the bonus is that you can still play when you are too old to get out of your chair; so you can spend your "golden" years on chess.com instead of sitting in a nursing home drooling on yourself.
Yep. and the bonus is that you can still play when you are too old to get out of your chair; so you can spend your "golden" years on chess.com instead of sitting in a nursing home drooling on yourself.
What? Are those our only 2 choices? I'd been so looking forward to drooling on others.....
! See? You don't really hate feminists! --- 'cuz I Are One!
Also, I'm an actual, guaranteed, biological female, whose biological daughter just gave birth to a beautiful biological baby boy 2 days ago! (His name is "Will" and his birth weight was 10 lbs. 8 oz.!) I have a grandson! Yay!!!
Some of us feminists really DO love males, of any age!
The attacks and the nastiness in the forums needs to stop!
Terms of service which all members agreed to abide by when they joined the site
Member Conduct
You agree to not use the Service to:
upload, post, email, transmit or otherwise make available any Content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically or otherwise objectionable;
Chess.com is a friendly community. We try to keep it that way by following a common set of rules for posting. The following topics are not allowed in the main public forums or chat rooms:
If experience was so important, Korchnoi would be trashing Carlsen for fun. Chess is mainly about cognitive power.
My counter is that I don't think Korchnoi learned as much from his experience as Carlsen did. Moreover, the effects of any learning become less apparent as you move up to 2600+.
Just because experience forms the basis of improvement doesn't mean that it doesn't have to be well-learned.
You would think calculating moves is only about cognitive power, but my experience might suggest otherwise! Visualizing the board started out really hard, but it simply got easier, and easier, and easier, and easier, and it continues to get easier, as I kept practicing it. It feels so much less than superhuman now to calculate 8-10 moves ahead. Maybe the practice just built my cognitive power, though.
[Quote=ciljettu]The politically incorrect truth is that great chess players are all very intelligent and no lefty liberal doublespeak can change this fact.[/quote]
Politics has nothing to do with it.
Politics has everything to do with it. Anything which is not an empirically measurable scientific truth ultimately becomes political, in the broadest sense of the term.
I've known people who were very gifted in one area, but were ordinary in everything else. Besides, how do explain idiot savants if being good at one thing requires you to be good in everything?
But intuition is calculation. Intuition is calculation on steroids.
When you consider that intuition helps one extract the truth, intuition is the result of the brain calculating much faster than the conscious mind can process.
Perhaps, but I don't think so. When I look at a board and say, "If I take the knight, he will take the bishop, and then I can pin the queen, and....." that's what I mean by calculation.
From what I have been reading, that's not what chess masters do. They look at a board, see one, or perhaps a handful, of moves that look good. That's what I mean by intuition.
I don't think that the intuitive process is just a very fast version of the calculation process. I think it's fundamentally different. I think it's more of a recognition proces than a calculation process. In what I have been reading about masters, they then use calculation to verify their intuitive recognition of the move or moves that they spotted, but I think that verification is completely different, and even occurs in a different portion of the brain. I don't think the initial recognintion is "too fast" for the conscious mind to process. I think it's outside the scope of what the consciou mind does. It's more like recognizing a familiar face.
Of course, it goes without saying that this is somewhat speculative. Much is unkown about the workings of the brain, but that is my opinion, informed by my reading about psychological and neurological studies of how people think when playing Chess.
There is a certain lack of exactness to intuition; if one were to, extremely broadly, classify it as a type of calculation, it would be a substantially soft calculation -- that's why it takes no work. Intuition doesn't go through the process of actually proving anything it believes, it just summarizes everything in the position in a very general way, and takes a guess. As said, I think to call intuition a form of calculation is such a broad interpretation to the point that it's sickening.
Here is an article citing numerous studies showing the positive effects of chess on brain function in countless areas. It is indisputable scientific fact that chess enhances brain function in more ways than we can even know. I play because I love chess, but I don't mind the benefits either.
http://www.quadcitychess.com/benefits_of_chess.html
Yep. and the bonus is that you can still play when you are too old to get out of your chair; so you can spend your "golden" years on chess.com instead of sitting in a nursing home drooling on yourself.![Yell]( "Yell")
![Yell]( "Yell")
Yep. and the bonus is that you can still play when you are too old to get out of your chair; so you can spend your "golden" years on chess.com instead of sitting in a nursing home drooling on yourself.
What?![Surprised]( "Surprised")
Are those our only 2 choices? ![Frown]( "Frown")
I'd been so looking forward to drooling on others.....
nope, those are the only 2 choices
Also, I'm an actual, guaranteed, biological female, whose biological daughter just gave birth to a beautiful biological baby boy 2 days ago! (His name is "Will" and his birth weight was 10 lbs. 8 oz.!) I have a grandson! Yay!!!
Some of us feminists really DO love males, of any age!![Smile]( "Smile")
![Kiss]( "Kiss")
Congrats, motherinlaw.
Thanks!
The attacks and the nastiness in the forums needs to stop!
Terms of service which all members agreed to abide by when they joined the site
Member Conduct
You agree to not use the Service to:
Chess.com posting rules
Chess.com is a friendly community. We try to keep it that way by following a common set of rules for posting. The following topics are not allowed in the main public forums or chat rooms: