I think so far it's the best answer. Because players like us are simply not very good. So I think his advice is the best because all those things should be done BEFORE worrying about calculating anything. What good is it to calculate some great series of moves that results in checkmate if you overlooked the fact the opponent will take a necessary piece in two moves?
When I was still somewhat new (playing for years, but still not very good) this was a turning point for me. Identifying my opponent's threat helped anchor my calculation. Instead of random sequences of threats and checks trying to find anything that works, I'd first spend a little while trying to find my opponent's biggest threat. The bigger it was, the easier subsequent calculation became because everything revolved around that. Sometimes you defend directly, sometimes you counter attack, but either way, positions in general started to feel like they made more sense to me.
Here is a structural approach to move selection I found out online. Let's hear from you all!
A. Update
1. Threat: every moved piece creates a threat (sooner or later). Look for it.
2. Drawbacks: the starting position is the perfect formation. Every move creates weaknesses. Look for it.
3. Imbalance: same as above. Look for it.
B. Select
1. Move scan: scan all the possible moves; most of them are dismissed as they are bad.
2. Candidate moves: among the 6-10 possible moves, there should be 1-3 good moves, as shown in engine variation list.
3. Move selection.
C. Verify
1. Reply scan
2. Candidate replies
3. Reply evaluation
Same as part B, but its the opponent's moves instead.
D. Check
1. Blunders
2. Imbalances
3. Overlooked replies
I think so far it's the best answer. Because players like us are simply not very good. So I think his advice is the best because all those things should be done BEFORE worrying about calculating anything. What good is it to calculate some great series of moves that results in checkmate if you overlooked the fact the opponent will take a necessary piece in two moves?
Well, some people only regard “calculation” as involving complex, deep lines. I don’t thing so. Beginners should start calculating very simple positions, one or two moves, and later continue with more complex things.
Actually everything is about learning useful chess patterns and able to calculate some moves in order to explore a superior knowledge on chess patterns.
I know IM Bacon means good, but I am fan from answering specific questions instead of pasting the same text to everybody.
Yes, the center is important, opening principle also etc etc, but nobody will learn just because a list of suggestions. Much useful is suggesting books or apps that can be useful for a specific level.
I think so far it's the best answer. Because players like us are simply not very good. So I think his advice is the best because all those things should be done BEFORE worrying about calculating anything. What good is it to calculate some great series of moves that results in checkmate if you overlooked the fact the opponent will take a necessary piece in two moves?
Well, some people only regard “calculation” as involving complex, deep lines. I don’t thing so. Beginners should start calculating very simple positions, one or two moves, and later continue with more complex things.
Actually everything is about learning useful chess patterns and able to calculate some moves in order to explore a superior knowledge on chess patterns.
I know IM Bacon means good, but I am fan from answering specific questions instead of pasting the same text to everybody.
Yes, the center is important, opening principle also etc etc, but nobody will learn just because a list of suggestions. Much useful is suggesting books or apps that can be useful for a specific level.
My advice is based on the OP's rating. You dont think i get tired of having to copy and paste that same thing over, and over, and over, and over, and over?
Obviously learning how to calculate properly, and efficiently is important, but! If you're not following opening principles, dropping pieces, and missing one move tactics? Your calculation needs to start at square one. Trying to calculate out lines, trying to remember what to do when you have a bishop vs. knight with pawns on both sides of the board, what to do with a weak square, figuring out what to do with more space, etc. Isnt going to help improve your game, if youre missing a one move mate.
I think so far it's the best answer. Because players like us are simply not very good. So I think his advice is the best because all those things should be done BEFORE worrying about calculating anything. What good is it to calculate some great series of moves that results in checkmate if you overlooked the fact the opponent will take a necessary piece in two moves?
Well, some people only regard “calculation” as involving complex, deep lines. I don’t thing so. Beginners should start calculating very simple positions, one or two moves, and later continue with more complex things.
Actually everything is about learning useful chess patterns and able to calculate some moves in order to explore a superior knowledge on chess patterns.
I know IM Bacon means good, but I am fan from answering specific questions instead of pasting the same text to everybody.
Yes, the center is important, opening principle also etc etc, but nobody will learn just because a list of suggestions. Much useful is suggesting books or apps that can be useful for a specific level.
My advice is based on the OP's rating. You dont think i get tired of having to copy and paste that same thing over, and over, and over, and over, and over?
Obviously learning how to calculate properly, and efficiently is important, but! If you're not following opening principles, dropping pieces, and missing one move tactics? Your calculation needs to start at square one. Trying to calculate out lines, trying to remember what to do when you have a bishop vs. knight with pawns on both sides of the board, what to do with a weak square, figuring out what to do with more space, etc. Isnt going to help improve your game, if youre missing a one move mate.
If the OP had been rated higher, then obviously my advice would have been different.
Basically I just play correspondence chess on this site ( 3 day ). I NEVER set a board to analyze anything just play it like you are playing OTB. you will have plenty of time to visualize and CALCULATE even very complicated positions, Good chess-players are looking more than just 2 or 3 moves ahead and evaluating their Final target positions. Sure you gonna lose quite a few games to people who are setting up boards for analysis but that is not the point, it doesn't matter how many books you read or chess principals you know ACCURATE visualization and calculation of at least 4 to 5 moves AHEAD will keep you in the game against some stronger opponents ! 
"Two and a half moves" rule introduced by Soltis in his book. Further calculation often produces inaccuracy or oversight.
yes and he cites a Karpov Kasparov game to prove it. An excellent book.
visualisation and calculation without evaluation is meaningless.
visualisation and calculation without evaluation is meaningless.
Someone asked once what that means?
I said: Youre driving.
You visualize seeing another car coming at you.
You calculate the other car is a half mile in front of you.
If you cant evaluate the situation, and understand you need to move out of the way. all the visualization, and calulation wont matter.
"Two and a half moves" rule introduced by Soltis in his book. Further calculation often produces inaccuracy or oversight.
yes and he cites a Karpov Kasparov game to prove it. An excellent book.
It is not that difficult to calculate 4 moves ahead for most experienced players. I will add this what separates the Experts from amatuers like most of us they know WHEN to break the rules !! NOTHING is written in stone.
visualisation and calculation without evaluation is meaningless.
I believe I said final target position otherwise what is the Point ?
"Two and a half moves" rule introduced by Soltis in his book. Further calculation often produces inaccuracy or oversight.
yes and he cites a Karpov Kasparov game to prove it. An excellent book.
It is not that difficult to calculate 4 moves ahead for most experienced players. I will add this what separates the Experts from amatuers like most of us they know WHEN to break the rules !! NOTHING is written in stone.
I won't take your words into consideration because Soltis proved it clearly in his book. He had evidence but you don't. And more importantly, he is a GM so at least, he knew what he talked about.
we cannot make hard and fast rules, chess is far too complicated for that. Sometimes there is nothing to calculate, sometimes there are multiple lines to calculate, sometimes there are long variations and sometimes there are little variations. It gets even more complicated than that because there is a symbiotic relationship between tactics and strategy. Probably its best to absorb and synthesize the position before calculating anything unless there are obvious and immediate forced continuations. I have lost hundreds of games trying to force matters when there was no advantage in doing so.
visualisation and calculation without evaluation is meaningless.
I believe I said final target position otherwise what is the Point ?
relax it wasn’t aimed at anyone. You did actually mention evaluation in your text.
"Two and a half moves" rule introduced by Soltis in his book. Further calculation often produces inaccuracy or oversight.
yes and he cites a Karpov Kasparov game to prove it. An excellent book.
It is not that difficult to calculate 4 moves ahead for most experienced players. I will add this what separates the Experts from amatuers like most of us they know WHEN to break the rules !! NOTHING is written in stone.
I won't take your words into consideration because Soltis proved it clearly in his book. He had evidence but you don't. And more importantly, he is a GM so at least, he knew what he talked about.
I could care less hey pal if you want to calculate 2 moves ahead that is fine. I would agree that you find only a couple of CANDIDATE moves if you know what those are, I have better things to do than argue with folks on the internet I gave the OP MY opinion and please tell GM soltis that ole Mateologist goal in his chess life is to find a Knight-Fork " SIX- DEEP"
"Two and a half moves" rule introduced by Soltis in his book. Further calculation often produces inaccuracy or oversight.
yes and he cites a Karpov Kasparov game to prove it. An excellent book.
It is not that difficult to calculate 4 moves ahead for most experienced players. I will add this what separates the Experts from amatuers like most of us they know WHEN to break the rules !! NOTHING is written in stone.
I won't take your words into consideration because Soltis proved it clearly in his book. He had evidence but you don't. And more importantly, he is a GM so at least, he knew what he talked about.
I could care less hey pal if you want to calculate 2 moves ahead that is fine. I would agree that you find only a couple of CANDIDATE moves if you know what those are, I have better things to do than argue with folks on the internet I gave the OP MY opinion and please tell GM soltis that ole Mateologist goal in his chess life is to find a Knight-Fork " SIX- DEEP"
You just went way off the topic. OP asked how to improve his calculation. It does not mean how many plies he should calculate. He wants to know how to improve the result of his calculation. Any one can calculate more than 5 moves; "But the trick is evaluating the position at the end of those calculations." (Magnus). So basically, you are telling us that we should be able to visualize the position after 5 moves and evaluate it at the same time? That kind of argument should not be discussed in a thread created by an amateur.
play a lot of blitz
I remember playing this one guy G/15 OTB.
He calculated more in 10 seconds than I did in 30-40 seconds.
But after that he was near his max. High acceleration, low top speed. I beat him without much trouble.
Blitz helps your acceleration, but not your top speed.
"Two and a half moves" rule introduced by Soltis in his book. Further calculation often produces inaccuracy or oversight.