Hi All,
How deeply do you think I (approximately 1200) should be calculating before playing my move? Generally, I just consider all possible responses from my opponent without calculating deeper than that one ply. This seems insufficient, so I was wondering how many plies deep you would recommend someone at my rating level calculate before playing a move?
Thanks
When Richard Reti was asked how far ahead a person should try to calculate, he said: one move will do if it's the best one.
Most beginner-to-intermediate players have a different problem: choosing the right handful of moves to analyze.
We don't look at every possible move, usually we pick three to six "candidate move" possibilities and just analyze those. If the best move isn't included in that small group of candidate moves, then you won't end up playing it.
Generally, I just consider all possible responses from my opponent without calculating deeper than that one ply. This seems insufficient...
Are you saying that you compile list of all legal moves? In broad sense, besides what urk have said, main purpose of calculation, or rather analysis is to look for tactics. If you cannot see them, either you do not know them or do not look deep enough. So keep looking until you see something interesting, then test it.
Sure. Only computers look at all the possible moves. I typically only look at half a dozen, or less.
Also true that there's no point in trying to calculate in quiescent positions, it's a waste of time. Only dynamic positions require calculation. Quiescent positions require judgement.
Well time certainly will make a different. If you are playing a g/5 you can't spend as much time as you would during a g/30 or a corr game. I usually look at my oppont's move and see how it changes things. Then if i have time i look at both weaknesses on my side and on theirs and try to figure out how they can be exploited.Its always good to be doing this while you are waiting for your opponent to make their move in addition during your time. Usually i always try to have at least as much time left as my opponent which usually keeps me out of time trouble.Of course many moves are interconnected so that once you make a move you might already suspect what their response is likely to be, if it isn't you might take abit of more time for your next move to figure out why.When there are forcing moves you want to be able to figure out (as much as possible)until which time the forcing moves end.
Quite frankly 1200s aren't calculating at all. They're trying to calculate and failing horribly. That's why they're 1200. To progress in chess you don't ask yourself to calculate x number of moves ahead.. you ask yourself "What can my opponent do to me right now?" "How can he get an advantage?" "what is his plan?" and ONLY then start focusing on your own plans. You're 1200 mate, you need to learn proper development of pieces for the various pawn structures and to fully grasp the potential and "future potential" of pieces. For example when evaluating on whether to trade off a piece as white you ask yourself questions like "will this piece be more useful on the board later on? or will it be useless by force" The future potential you evaluate by what your piece will be capable of. "Should I spend this tempo moving my rook back? or can I a sacrifice it for positional compensation?" Anyone can look 10-20 moves ahead... it just takes some time to calculate if you don't have a memory bank of chess patterns to sift through the potentials more easily. I personally look 2-6 moves ahead depending on which pattern applies to the position. I can even see 10 moves ahead occasionally when I get into positions that I know patterns in and play alot (not consistently ofcourse.. just 1 forced variation purely because I know the pattern)
slaying? you're 1700 in 960 chess... lower than all your other ratings EDIT: OHHHHHHH you beat 1600 NM in 960 so that's why you're slaying.
Calculation is not overrated, but I agree with the last statement.
IMO a few misleading posts here. Most players above 1000 calculate a few moves deep to avoid losing to basic tactics in most positions. Really strong players can do it unconsciously, but if there are checks, captures, and threats in the position then you're required to calculate.
IIRC when I was around 1200 I was calculating 1 to 3 moves deep (2 to 6 ply) for most positions.
It's true though that some positions you don't need to calculate at all. In fact when there are no forcing moves it's sometimes a waste of time and energy. In those cases much more important to correctly conceptualize the position.
IMO a lot of misleading posts. Most players above 1000 calculate a few moves deep to avoid losing to basic tactics in most positions. Really strong players can do it unconsciously, but if there are checks, captures, and threats in the position then you're required to calculate.
IIRC when I was around 1200 I was calculating 1 to 3 moves deep (2 to 6 ply) for most positions.
It's true though that some positions you don't need to calculate at all. In fact when there are no forcing moves it's sometimes a waste of time and energy. In those cases much more important to correctly conceptualize the position.
Selecting moves through a poorly constructed and inherently flawed process definitely isn't calculating in my book. When I was 1200 I was playing random moves in the opening to get a position to play. 1200s lack ALOT of the essential information required to find the good moves to calculate. They should worry less about calculating deep variations and more about understanding the mechanics.
IMO a lot of misleading posts. Most players above 1000 calculate a few moves deep to avoid losing to basic tactics in most positions. Really strong players can do it unconsciously, but if there are checks, captures, and threats in the position then you're required to calculate.
IIRC when I was around 1200 I was calculating 1 to 3 moves deep (2 to 6 ply) for most positions.
It's true though that some positions you don't need to calculate at all. In fact when there are no forcing moves it's sometimes a waste of time and energy. In those cases much more important to correctly conceptualize the position.
Selecting moves through a poorly constructed and inherently flawed process definitely isn't calculating in my book. When I was 1200 I was playing random moves in the opening to get a position to play,,,
With the benefit of years of experience, it's pleasant to disparage poor moves as random, but even beginners have reasons and a method for their moves.
IMO a lot of misleading posts. Most players above 1000 calculate a few moves deep to avoid losing to basic tactics in most positions. Really strong players can do it unconsciously, but if there are checks, captures, and threats in the position then you're required to calculate.
IIRC when I was around 1200 I was calculating 1 to 3 moves deep (2 to 6 ply) for most positions.
It's true though that some positions you don't need to calculate at all. In fact when there are no forcing moves it's sometimes a waste of time and energy. In those cases much more important to correctly conceptualize the position.
Selecting moves through a poorly constructed and inherently flawed process definitely isn't calculating in my book. When I was 1200 I was playing random moves in the opening to get a position to play,,,
With the benefit of years of experience, it's pleasant to disparage poor moves as random, but even beginners have reasons and a method for their moves.
No distortion was given. I didn't take chess very seriously at the time as it was within months of beginning to play it and I found the opening really boring and dry. I just wanted to get out of the opening and have a position to play. Nevertheless I was 1200. obviously 1200s come in all shapes and sizes but a 1200s a 1200. It's safe to assume if such tactics worked they must have similar ways of thinking or my play would have been refuted and i'd cease to be 1200.
How deeply do you think I (approximately 1200) should be calculating before playing my move? Generally, I just consider all possible responses from my opponent without calculating deeper than that one ply. This seems insufficient, so I was wondering how many plies deep you would recommend someone at my rating level calculate before playing a move?
Thanks