I have seen a number of players say that some of their practice and study on virtual boards hasn't directly translated when they sat down to play in OTB tournaments. This seems plausible to me, based on how much I have had to relearn spatial relationships when moving to 2D boards. But I bet most of it carries over as long as you use both regularly.
Practice OTB vs virtual board
Sort:
Nov 25, 2015
0
#3
For difficult positions with long lines of analysis (provided by either yourself or the material) I prefer digital. Otherwise it's much more difficult to explore.
For anything with light annotations, I prefer a 3d board. Moving the physical pieces slows you down (so I end up thinking about different lines more) and somehow seems to help memory, maybe due to the added sensory input from kinesthesis.
OnceUponaCheckmate wrote:
See, that's exactly what I'm driving at. If a player practices mostly on a virtual platform, will it carry over entirely to games OTB? Will a virtual board help a player progress faster because of expedient analysis, or will it stunt growth in the long run because of the difference in visualization?
I prefer the virtual board. I see better in it. I have lost to 6 year olds on the real board too many times!
I prefer the virtual board if I am following a game with a ton of variations in the commentary. It is just far easier and more convenient.
For me, while OTB is great for its "realness", I find myself wasting precious mental energy on resetting the board to a previous position especially when a lot of capturing occurs. This is not an issue for me with the virtual board.
Luckily, I don't have a disconnect learning from either.
Nov 25, 2015
0
#6
LetTheW00kieeWin wrote:
OnceUponaCheckmate wrote:
I prefer the virtual board. I see better in it. I have lost to 6 year olds on the real board too many times!
See, that's exactly what I'm driving at. If a player practices mostly on a virtual platform, will it carry over entirely to games OTB? Will a virtual board help a player progress faster because of expedient analysis, or will it stunt growth in the long run because of the difference in visualization?
When you try to play a game on one you're not used to (3d or 2d) then your board vision will greatly suffer. It's not so much about lessons learned during practice carrying over, but you'll miss hanging pieces and simple tactics you almost never miss otherwise.
For me, starting out on the computer, 3d was very difficult at first. After acclimating to it, in my experience, a weekly game on a 3d board is enough to keep everything fluid.
After acclimating I don't know whether more or less practice would make a difference.
If you never plan to play at a park or OTB tournament, then it may be a waste of time to bother with a 3d board.
Hi all. I've been wondering, is there going to be a significant difference in improvement from practicing with a real board and pieces instead of just using the computer screen or smartphone? Some of the books I have (admittedly older) advocate setting up a physical board to run through the lessons. I find that although a virtual analysis board on my phone does not save much time when setting up each position, it is far more convenient than carrying even a small travel-sized board with me. In addition, the virtual board allows me to move forward and backward through variations at will, and even play positions against the computer. So my questions are thus: IS a virtual board an adequate substitute for a physical board when it comes to personal study? Or is there a real advantage to using a physical board to solve tactical problems, or play through annotated master games?