Effective way to memorise chess patterns?

Because they can be too difficult to remember because I understand rules like opposition & opening lines easily but these sorts of endgame lines like the 1 in the diagram are just difficult...Can anyone help?

... and middlegame lines too because I can remember only 1 or 2 of the many traps I have learnt from memory alone

I guess that nobody can learn by heart middle and endgames . Indeed if you are able to memorise those types of patterns then you will know everything about chess ^^. I guess memorising openings and easy traps is necessary but the more you will progress the more you will have to use your intuition , you will have to have to analyse the position and try to see what is the best continuation for you . However if you know certain  postions and crucial moves recommands by theory ( which the main moves in this positon played by great position )it's fine but in the future i guess you will have to use your creativity,imagination and your calculations in order to see if what you saw is correct and then force your opponents to commit mistakes .

Some people have fantastic memories. Apparently you don't (nor do I). Memory skills, though, can be improved (up to a point) through practice and exercise.

For me, calculation is why I love to play chess. I am a thinker. That seems to be a rare and frowned upon trait. "Believe this"..."memorize that"... Bah!

Be a man. Learn to think! (If you can, of course.)

Edit: I see that you claim to have an IQ of 160. I doubt it...lol. Nonetheless, if you say so...I believe you. Use it or lose it!

@pawnwhacker with my IQ yeah well the actual IQ test said 160+ and most of that knowledge is due to me being a very logical thinker & I can remember facts easily (which could be why openings are my strong point) but outside of chess most of that knowledge is in maths and science because I was an A-grade student in both of those subjects at school and am currently hoping to do a degree in both maths and biochemical science but am currently doing A-level biochemical science ... as for the calculation & intuition they're actually good in my opinion it's just when I really analyse a position it can take up to 4 hours non-stop thinking on 1 move which can become tedious & mentally tiring

Uh-oh...that's called "paralysis by analysis".

I much prefer to analyze stuff. But only to a point. Yet far more than the average person. Then: "A stitch in time saves nine", "Plan your work and then work your plan", "sheet or get off the pot", and furthermore...

I just wonder if you were to do somethings spontaneously if it might help to balance the equation. Go to a dance and just improvise. Try juggling up to five balls or rings. Better yet, play bullet! Lots of it. 

I have played a few bullet & blitz & even rapid games because I can tell that speed isn't my strong point in chess (because I am Bullet:831, Blitz:1062 Rapid:1339 Correspondence:1609) but even in fast time controls 99% of bullet will be pattern memorisation whereas in correspondence that is where I am at my best because I have the time to really strip the position down to whatever is going on but that is all useless in quicker time controls because unless you're a master it's very difficult to see 1000 positions a second (as Carlsen claimed he could)

You and I have the same affliction...we are thinkers! 

Repetition and associating things.  Like losing a game makes a variation or idea more memorable.  As a good student you probably use a few memory tricks already.

I don't see a diagram by the way.

Lol.  Apparently the guy with the 160+ IQ, a guy smarter than 99.9968% of the population (http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/IQtable.aspx), needs help with basic pattern recognition and is rated 1000 Blitz.  Something seems off...

My guess is that he took one of those online IQ tests that he got from his facebook newsfeed and now thinks he's a genius.  Hilarious.

Shell_knight yeah I do know certain patterns and learn a lot from just playing e.g. I've found from my own play that in the sicilian najdorf and dragon variations generally speaking c4 is a great square for 1 of white's knights. deliveryman well if you believe me or not is irrelevant if you want my honest opinion it seems as though you've only joined in to troll because I said earlier in this thread that most of my knowledge is in maths and science and chess isn't 100% about IQ it's also pattern memorization so if you are just joining in to be a little argumentative troll then I'm not stooping to the level of getting into an argument but if all your doing is asking about my IQ I obviously don't write mensa's IQ tests I just took the test and that's what it said my IQ is

About "pattern recognition"...

I've played chess since a time before "pattern recognition" was cast about. It could be that this term was used going back to Morphy. But all that I am saying is that chess used to be considered a thinking man's game.

Look at standard tournament play: 2 hours per side. That's been the tradition well before I was born. Why all that time if chess is "pattern recogition"?

Don't misunderstand. I'm not saying that "pattern recognition" is invalid. I can't even describe how many thousands of hours I've devoted to enhancing my "pattern recognition".

In fact, current-day players emphasize "pattern recognion" and seem to place calculation in the lost or orphan category.

Oh, sure, I can readily see forks, pins, skewers, discovered attacks, etc. Not a problem.

But when "pattern recognition" comes to the fore, I am left with the understanding that through countless chess puzzles, one can see patterns...not just simple ones...but complex combinations.

I have to say that I, for one, am able to readily recognize simple patterns. Yet, since there are almost infinite board layouts, complex combinations require that I think.

My memory just doesn't allow me to see countless "patterns". But I can think (therefore I am?).

Today, blitz is the apparent de rigueur of chess. Don't spend time thinking. Hurry...hurry..."see" the pattern and jump on it.

Well, maybe. Yet although I prefer rapid chess (15 minutes per side), I feel hurried with blitz. I guess I should hang my head in shame...lol.

Hell, no! Perhaps GMs can recognize tremendous amounts of patterns through memorization developed through decades of play. Maybe even the myriad legion of patzer blitz players (most of whom have attention-deficit disorders and are horrified to spend more than 5 minutes in a game) have developed huge mental databases of patterns, too.

Meanwhile, I am not in the category of "sheep" who do what everyone else does...play knee-jerk chess. No...no...I am a thinking man first.

Therefore, I eschew all this balihoo about memorizing fuzzy-wuzzy, gigantuan and copious quantities of snuff.

My motto is: "Give me time to think (not all that much...but a modicum) or give me death!

Tom, I don't know what you'll make of what I just said. But, there it is. 

That's what I do. I don't need hours, though.

One can play 3-day games at bullet, blitz, rapid, traditional or correspondence speeds.

This does not seem to be fathomed by the ignorati who only play speed.

P.S.: Why would you construe from my post that I needed a "problem solved"? I was simply expressing my viewpoint to our friend, Tom.

Am I the only one that doesn't see a diagram?

"Pattern recognition" doesn't mean you're not thinking (maybe the term is misleading), as knowing vocabulary isn't enough to articulate your thoughts or write a meaningful essay.

Yet, without the adequate vocabulary, it becomes much more difficult to perform those tasks

Yes, now I see what you meant. Thanks for the clarification. 

You have to eat printed chess books. If you think they are too dry you can drink some water but not too much because that is just cheating. 

hicetnunc wrote:

Frequent review. Though I feel I know them cold, I review basic tactical patterns (12) and basic checkmating patterns (25) at least once a week.