Watching Chessexplained and Jon Bartholomew on youtube has really shown me how flawed the whole "moves ahead" topic is.
You have a position. And in that position you have ideas. You play to bring those ideas to life. Yes, there is raw calculation, but that doesn't make the player.
Depth of calculation depends on the position.
Fiveofswords wrote:
i dunno about this grandmaster 18 moves claim thing. i have seen grandmasters right in front of me fail to calculate 3 moves ahead.
Any player worth their salt can calculate five to eight moves ahead. Today I was doing my tactical study and did not realize I was calculate eight move deep, it was very straightforward and not complicated. For grandmaster ten to twenty move deep some position, it is very possible; even weak grandmaster can calculate very deep. That is why they are grandmasters, I remember GM Larry Christensen said, "The difference between a IM and a GM is tactics; GM see all the opportunities to those who are blind to the opportunities.
good think
good think
good think
good think
Fiveofswords wrote:
Fiveofswords wrote:
i dunno about this grandmaster 18 moves claim thing. i have seen grandmasters right in front of me fail to calculate 3 moves ahead.
Any player worth their salt can calculate five to eight moves ahead. Today I was doing my tactical study and did not realize I was calculate eight move deep, it was very straightforward and not complicated. For grandmaster ten to twenty move deep some position, it is very possible; even weak grandmaster can calculate very deep. That is why they are grandmasters, I remember GM Larry Christensen said, "The difference between a IM and a GM is tactics; GM see all the opportunities to those who are blind to the opportunities.
well again it depends on the position. if nothing is really forced then you are talking about evaluating trillions of trillions of positions just to see 3 moves ahead. if if all extremely force like some aolve for mate sequence then urs much more should be no problem. i dont think ive ever seen a mating sequence that actually lasts 20 moves that would be a unicorn.
Fiveofswords wrote: in case you werent aware some very strong gms were tested with their ability to mate a computer in pawnless queen vs rook. they were generally unable to. even though its usually mate in 9 to 15 moves.
I believe it was GM Walter Browne, he fail to mate a computer. Give grandmaster a position they know well and they see very deep. My friend give me this book on how GMs analyze a position, some are more intuitive and others just calculate; I believe all GMs use a combination of calculation and intuition to undertstand a position, I remember a grandmaster will say, I can feel their something in this position or my opponent did something incorrect, it like their intuition is telling them something or alerting them there is something there.
I think it depends.If you want to embark on a tactic you have to calculate more moves ahead to make sure it works unless of course you just want to take a risk and see how it goes.I think it spoils the game not wanting at least an hour each on the clock. Interesting things get missed.
Amateurs (1300-1599) usually see aboout two to three moves perfect, intermdiate strenth (1600-1800) four to five moves deep and strong amateur ( 1900-1999-2000-2199) can see five to ten moves deep.
Well I'm playing in some engines-on correspondence games on another server. Letting my engine churn I was able to look at the top line and easily follow it for 9 moves in my head. This of course is somewhat different than being able to calculate the lines in your head without the benefit of being able to read notation.
I play bullet at depth 0. This is the deepest I can think forward in bullet.
Woah no need to brag man
I play bullet at depth 0. This is the deepest I can think forward in bullet.
Woah no need to brag man
Your clever reply is only 9 years too late.
I think one of the problems with thinking too deep into a line that is not necessarily forced, is by going over and over the analysis you can convince yourself that this is what your opponent has to play. With each further response and counter response intermezzo moves become harder to identify and the possibilities of sequences of the moves. Go with what you know and play chess. Everyone gets surprised, even gms.
I have calculated forced or best moves to a 15 move mate in a endgame.