|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
Chessville
Advertise to Single insert:
|
The role of intuition in chess has been dealt extensively in recent decades. GM Gufeld and trainer IM Dvoretsky have written articles about it, while GMs Beliavsky & Mikhalchisin dedicated a whole book to the subject (Secrets of Chess Intuition / Gambit, 2002). Russian psychologist Viktor Malkin, cited in the aforementioned book, reached the conclusion that grandmasters narrow their search for candidate moves to no more than three or four, relying on their ‘feeling’ to discard other, irrelevant moves out of hand. The stronger the player - asserted Malkin - the less he calculates. Returning to my personal recollection, my mature self would not invest any time exploring the 4.e4 d5 variation in advance. If it came to it, I would avoid this line altogether because Black’s position after eight moves looks without prospects, even though I cannot explain exactly why. It appears that Malkin’s rule applies, at least for me. In the following space I’d like to add some observations about the role of intuition in chess. With the exception of born geniuses like Capablanca and T. Petrosian, young players cannot rely too heavily on their intuition, since their knowledge and understanding of the game are still insufficient. Trusting their intuition at this stage will inevitably lead to many erroneous decisions. Intuition becomes a valuable, helpful tool, only after years of practice. If we accept this notion, then two things that differentiate a strong, experienced player from a novice are: the order in the stages of his chess thinking and the amount of time he devotes to each stage. A novice focuses on calculating variations; then he compares his calculations with the principles he is familiar with; and finally he makes a decision (= executes a move). A strong player starts with using his intuition, namely his feeling as to what is ‘right’ to do in certain positions. Only then does he conduct a brief calculation to back up his conclusions. [This is naturally a generalization. There are grandmasters who remain calculators in their summit]. In other words, with strong players intuition usually precedes calculation, and the proportion of time devoted to both is clearly in favor of the intuitive part. Interviewing top players for my book “The Grandmaster’s Mind” (Gambit, 2004), I observed, time and again, grandmasters making major decisions on the sole basis of their feeling. “I knew that this was the (right) move - the justifications were found in retrospect” (GM Alik Gershon); “It was clear to me that (this move) improved my position... There are some moves, which you cannot explain. Either you feel them or you don’t” (GM Lev Psakhis). “I think intuitively... sometimes I think with my hand... I do rely on my intuition without making deep calculations” (GM Zvulon Gofshtein). I suggest that the role of intuition in one’s games may be helpful in diagnosing the maturity level of a player. “Calculating too little” has always been regarded as an error. Now, “calculating too much” should probably be seen as a sign of another kind of problem - the need to find constant proof because general guidelines are amiss. Another interesting point regarding intuition is this: when we talk of knowledge, we have in mind an objective criterion. For example, when we say “this player is unfamiliar with the Najdorf Sicilian”, we have a rough estimate of what constitutes decent “knowledge” and “understanding” of an opening line. However, when discussing intuition, the matter is frequently subjective. What may ‘feel right’ for one player, might ‘feel utterly wrong’ for another. Morozevich - Avruch
I presume that the majority of viewers will be appalled by the idea of transferring their most influential piece to a square where it is ostensibly without play. Nevertheless, one of the strongest players in the world chose this sequence of moves, and his opponent, analyzing the game in “New in Chess” 5/2006, appends exclamation marks to two of White’s last three moves. White intends Bg3-f4-:h6 and he consequently got sufficient counter-chances. His loss at the end was due to later mistakes. Evidently, what was considered an unnatural, outlandish idea for common players, was in fact normal for Morozevic. So, when the books urge us to use our intuition, they are in effect not referring to something tangible, but to a subjective, mental concept, varying from player to player. Gaining victories by intuition alone is quite rare. As a rule, good intuition may assist us in obtaining good positions, but to actually cash the point it is vital to perform an accurate analytical calculation.
The black queen, x-rayed by the white-Rd1 and relatively short of flight squares, is precariously positioned. White is justified in believing that he can exploit this fact. Still, he goes the wrong way because he falters tactically: 16.Nd5? 16.Bc1! gains material after both 16...Ba4 17.Qxa4! Or 16...Bxc3 17.Rxd4 Bxd4 18.Be2. 16...exd5 17.Bxb4 Qxd1+! 18.Qxd1 Bf5+ 19.Kc1 After 19.Ka1 a:b4, white is faced with the threat 20...R:a2+!, mating. 19...axb4 20.Qd4 Rxa2! 21.Qxc5 dxc4 0-1 So intuition and calculation are really two complementary skills; one is useless without the other. © Amatzia Avni and Chessville |
The
|
||||||||
|
||||||||||
Amatzia
Avni is an Israeli psychologist. He is a
FIDE
Master in both
game and composition, a former editor of the Israeli magazine
Schahmat and a regular contributor to Chess Monthly.
His latest book "
