Quote about calculation

Some games just don't require much if any deep calculating.  Contrary to popular belief, not every chess game involves deep calculations, or having to "see" 6+ moves ahead.

Let me give you an example of what im talking about.  I played this in Reno a week and a half ago.  I got lucky and had a game that didnt require any real calculation.  Everything was there n the board, just waiting.

Looks like you killed a man in Reno just to watch him die! Very nice game. I think I'm just being overly literally minded. It's the distinction between calculating at all and calculating deeply that I was hung up on. Like obviously in that game there is some small amount of calculation going on. I'm sure you looked at 24...Nf6+ 25 Rxf6 gxf6 26 Qxd5 and rejected that line as a result, opting to defend the d pawn with 24...Rd8. Still, there is a lot to be said for playing on general principle and being able to have simple verbal explanation for your moves, rather than using reams of variations the way a computer would play.

Usually if a GM (or other player) says they didn't calculate anything for a move, they mean nothing beyond what happens automatically just by looking at the position. So it's rare that nothing is calculated for a move, but it happens.

Even if there was a big complicated attack, sometimes what's complicated to us has been studied years ago, in depth, by the GM. I don't mean the specific position of course, more like standard mechanisms of attack, and common sacrifices for certain structures or configuration of pieces.

So yeah, the more experience and study a player has, the more believable it is that they calculated very little during a game.

I mean... that's why it would be really easy for two top 10 players to play a 3 minute game of higher quality (in every regard) than something I could produce in a 5 hour OTB game.

Of course some of their 3 minute games may have big blunders, but some of them are very high quality (compared to what I could do OTB). This quality doesn't come from calculation, it comes from an enormous amount of knowledge.

Yeah, I mean, even for me, lets say my opponent walks into a pet line of mine and gets into a tough position, and then (eventually) I win. I'm just going through the motions, they're the one having to calculate a lot and work hard.

I think Stiggling probably has the right of it. There are many positions where a low rated amateur might need to calculate like crazy, but someone higher rated just knows automatically. For example, it is well know that a Rook, by itself cannot defeat two connected passed pawns on the 6th or 7th rank. So you might have a position where you can sacrifice to get such a position. A low rated player probably wouldn't play it because they would have trouble calculating the consequences, and even if they could, very well might not trust their calculation. The high rated player just goes for the sac without any calculation whatsoever. It is a known win. Just do it.

I know the song of Johny Cash and I think Bc4 in combination with Nxc6 looks a bit strange to me. The d5 move is in the air and the bishop is attacked and have to go. Sicilian is Always difficult but I think this is corn on the mill for black. And I agree if you know many concepts and known wins, endgames, combinations by experience and training you have to calculate less and also can do it much faster.

It's driving me a little crazy that i cant find the quote. Can't say I'm sure it was Nunn but it's a hunch. Could have been a more positional player. And beauty is not necessarily mutually exclusive with not needing to work so hard at the board. My impression was that it was just a very logical game where an idea was taken to its conclusion. I appreciate all the thoughts. I'll report back if i can find it.

Reti was asked how many moves he typically calculated ahead, and he answered

"As a rule, not a single one".

This, I suspect, is the real explanation.

Yeah.

I watched that video where Nakamura takes the chess personality quiz (or whatever it's called).

And on two different questions that asks would you either calculate this opportunity or would you look at how the pieces are placed and choose a plan by general feel. Both times he goes into an explanation... and then chooses the opposite of what it sounded like he just said.

So yeah, I think to beginners calculation is something you literally sometimes don't do... at all. But GMs ALWAYS calculate, so to them the word might have more than one meaning. Sometimes meaning cursory calculation, and sometimes meaning what we might call in depth analysis. That's why Hikaru can say "I'd just play by feel" and then click on "I'd calculate some lines."

Times are 2:06 and 7:09