how many number of moves ahead can an average player think ?

hi !

HOW MANY NUMBER OF MOVES AHEAD CAN AN AVERAGE PLAYER, OR ADVANCED PLAYER , OR GRANDMASTER CAN THINK IN A CHESS GAME ?

WHAT DO U THINK?  PLEASE REPLY.

TNX.

I play bullet at depth 0. This is the deepest I can think forward in bullet.

In standard I can see as far as depth 3.

I don't look too far ahead either. one thing I learned is few players need to 'think moves ahead' if you watch a good player playing several boards simultaneously you can realise that kind of calculation is not necessary. play for positional familiarity, develop pieces to good places where they will be useful, often the rest falls into place.

thanks friends!

for giving your valuable opinions.

1) but chess is a game to think in advance and ahead. this way tactics and postions of playing gets developed.

2) whenever a move is made, there has some logic behind it.

3) the more u can predict the moves, the more powerful is the player's game.

thanks.

I agree with all points but I still think the idea of thinking many moves ahead is perhaps misleading.

I think because I play positional game style (I think?) generally 2-3 will do but even then, the first aim is to get in a comfortable familiar position with a few options and then look at where oppertunities are on the board.

and that you can look for opponents weakness, a way through their defense or something.

well that's for me anyways, I admit I'm a little out of practice in club play that I used to do until a couple of years ago but I used to do quite well. possible I forget some things or explain badly.

It depends on what you mean by think ahead. If I choose an opening system that tends to lead to an endgame advantage, does that count as thinking ahead to the endgame? If you mean how far can the average player calculate, then the answer is probably a whole game. Of course this doesn't mean that they are calculating the correct line. Even grandmasters can't predict how their opponent will respond to 1. e4.

With a 1500 bullet rating I think you're seeing a few ply ahead at least.  Otherwise you'd drop pieces all the time and be rated close to 1000 points lower.

My bullet rating is surprisingly high here ( since 2m+1s is allowed which is almost not bullet ). At an other site (where bullet is basically 1m+0s) I play the role of a punch bag. There I really look like someone playing at depth 0.

It depends on the position.  In a position with forcing moves (threats that must be defended) it's possible (and actually necessary) to calculate until there are no more forcing moves.  In a position with no threats and little contact between the pieces, it's not possible to see very far ahead, and players (even GMs) will just focus on the ideas in the position.

It may also be interesting to know that strong GMs (like Anand and Carlsen) can play multiple games blindfolded at the same time.  So while us amateurs can get confused and lose track of a position while we calculate, these GMs (and probably many other strong players) don't make visualization errors.  So strong players are looking as deeply as they believe is necessary.  If it's 100 moves or 1,000 moves, no problem.  However in real games I would guess not much more than 20 or 30 moves, and only then in very forcing positions like certain types of endgames.

That's sneaky   I didn't realize 2/1 was considered bullet.

I think a player can calculate till he reaches his plan of winning a material or threatening mate... (when he has a plan)

heres how I calculate, 

in my brain " this position seems like (X player, vs Y player, Z year, some result) maybe I can use this feature to my advantage by building up preasure on this weak square by attacking it with more pieces."

"or this open file is aimed at my opponents king, I can load up my Major pieces and bear down maybe throw a bishop and knight into the mix"

I think that there is a misnomer about this subject.  Being able to see further ahead doesn't make you better.  Being able to formulate a correct plan, followed by accurately calculating does.

In other words, let's say that you can see ahead 12 ply and your opponent only five ply (for those who aren't familiar with the term a ply is a half move - i.e. you move, then your opponent moves is two ply, not one move) but your opponent is forming a good plan and then calculating accurately so that generally the position they see at the end of their calculation is accurate whereas you are spending time calculating 12 ply ahead but you make a lot of mistakes because you're not always calculating the best moves.  You are able to see further ahead, but your lines are full of poor moves so your opponent has a better chance of winning.

It's also very important to distinguish between forcing and non-forcing calculation.  If you are calculating a forcing sequence such as a sacrifice it is much easier to calculate than if you are calculating a non-forcing series of moves where there is a much greater chance you will overlook something.

Lastly, it's not about how far ahead you can calculate.  It's about how accurately you can evaluate the position at the end of your calculations.  It doesn't do you any good to be able to see a position ten ply ahead accurately if you aren't able to evaluate it properly.  The better you learn to evaluate positions you can mentally see at the end of lines you are considering the stronger you will be.

Horowitz and Reinfeld wrote a book called How to See Three Moves Ahead in Chess which focuses on being able to see three ply ahead and then accurately evaluate what you are seeing.

Accuracy, not depth, is the key to the highway...

whenever I try to think ahead, my opponent makes a move I didn't consider- so all that thinking time was wasted. Now I just try to make the best move I can find for the position.

That's the real danger in trying to see further ahead.  You spend a lot of time that you didn't need to if you are not able to accurately look deeper into a position.

I can only see one move, but it's not the move ahead of me, it's the one I just made... and I am usually mumbling "OOPS..."

In the past I've noticed that Karpov, when it was his turn, nodded his heads a few times a second. It looks like he is checking his calculations. So... is each nod a move, or something more impressive? (Or is he nodding for a completely different reason?)

Could just be a "nervous tick".