If you have disabled Java for your browser, use the Site Map (linked in the header and footer).

Chessville
logo by
ChessPrints
 

Advertise
with
Chessville!!

Advertise to
thousands
of chess
fans for
as little
as $25.

Single insert:
$35
x4 insert:
@ $25 each.

From the
Chessville
Chess Store

From the
Chessville
Chess Store

Amatzia Avni is an Israeli psychologist who is an FIDE over-the-board master and a chess composition master.  He is also an international judge of chess studies, as well as a former editor of the Israeli chess magazine Schahmat and a contributor to Chess Monthly and Kingpin.  Avni has written in the area of chess psychology, having penned Creative Chess (1991, 1997); Danger in Chess : How to Avoid Making Blunders (1994, 2003); Surprise in Chess (1998); and Practical Chess Psychology: A Chess Player's Behavioral Guide  (2001).

In The Grandmaster’s Mind Avni presents an enlightening – and very enjoyable – look at how top chess players think.  He gathers his information the old fashioned way: he asks the grandmasters, themselves.

Early in the book, the author shows why it is good to understand not just chess thinking, but chess thinking by its best practitioners:

According to an old book by Birbrager, this (composed?) position was presented to four classes of players.  The weakest player chose 1.Rh2, threatening mate in one and preparing to meet 1...Nb3+ with 2.Qxb3 Qxb3 3.Ng6 mate (well, he was not that weak if he'd noticed this!).  However, he ignored his opponent's threats, and thus succumbed to 1...Qxb2+! 2.Qxb2 Nb3 mate.  A somewhat stronger player – but not strong enough -- identified Black's plot to exploit the pinned a- and b-pawns and proposed to parry his threats by, say, 1.Nc3 or 1.Na3.  The third player hit upon a winning continuation: 1.Ng6+ hxg6 2.Rh2+ Bxh2 3.Rxh2+ Qxh2 4.Qxh2 mate.  This is certainly good enough, but the best player found a shorter and more elegant solution: 1.Qxh7+ Kxh7 2.Rh2 mate.

Harkening back to the ground-breaking work done by de Groot in his Thought and Choice in Chess (1946, 1965), for The Grandmaster’s Mind Avni conducted 12 interviews: 9 with grandmasters, one with a chess coach, one with a chess study composer, and one with a top-level chess problem solver.  The interviews followed a general pattern.  He would first ask the subjects questions, like “What do you think of the role of knowledge in chess?” or “What kind of positions do you find the most difficult to handle?” or “What are your sources for getting fresh ideas?”  The author then would go through several of the players’ own games (or compositions) focusing questions on – how were the ideas found?  Finally, Avni would present a position unfamiliar to the interviewee, and ask him to speak aloud his thoughts as he worked through his analysis.  (For clarity’s sake, Avni followed up each interview with e-mail and phone contacts, and later let each subject review the chapter written about him and return comments, if necessary.)

Avni is clear about his enthusiasm for this kind of work: “I very much enjoyed conducting these interviews and felt that generally my interviewees shared in my delight.”

The results of the interviews make up the first 132 pages of the book, one chapter for each person.  The final 44 pages include 9 chapters on a variety of conclusions or reflections based on the protocols in the first half; a list of References; and an Index.

To illustrate, here is a portion of the interview with GM Yona Kosashvili, from when he was looking at an unfamiliar position.  The Grandmaster’s comments are in quotes; Avni’s remarks are in italics:

Ehlvest - Minasian
New York Open 1993

36.bxc5

"White's first rank is vulnerable... his pawn-structure is superior...bishops of opposite colour are good for the attacking side.  I must be active, energetic, because White possesses a static advantage.  Recapturing by 36...dc suggests itself but it leaves White with a dangerous pair of passed pawns.  I search for a tactical stroke, taking advantage of the first rank's weakness.  I'd contemplate crazy moves like 36...Bc1 and 36...Rf3, which are probably rubbish.  36...Nf3 37.gf seems too slow.  36...Ne2 is energetic and beautiful.  I notice that in an emergency, White may play Bf5.

"36...Ne2 (threatening 37...Qf1+) 37.Qd1 maybe 37...Bc1 38.Rxc1 Nxc1 39.Be6+ Kg7, does not look bad for Black.  (He proceeds to examine 37.Be6+ and 37.g3.)  On 36...Ne2 37.g3 Rf3 38.Be6+ Kh8 White has a problem. 36...Ne2 is my move."

36...Ne2 37.g3

"Wait a minute.  37...Rf3 can be met by 38.Rf1.  38...Rxd3 39.Rxf2, when Black is doomed.  38...Qxf1+ 39.Bxf1 Rxd3 40.Bxe2 Rc3 41.cd is also not too brilliant.  38...Nxg3+ is no good.

"I think I have exhausted the possibilities after 37...Rf3 -- I may return to it later but will try to check something else.  37...Bc1 38.Be6+ Kg7 39.Rxc1 Nxc1 40.Qc3+ Rf6 (or 40...Qf6) 41.Qxc1 Qf3+ 42.Kg1 Qf2+ draw."  (goes on to  examine 38.Rxc1 Nxc1 39.Qc3 Ne2 Be6+ Rf7)

Look again at 37...Rf3.

37...Rf3 38.Rf1... I don't see anything for Black.

37...Rf3 38.Rf1 Rxg3

(Astonished) “Wow!”

Why do you think you overlooked that? You were aware of the first ranks' vulnerability.

"The mate after 39.Rxf2 Rg1 mate does not fall into familiar patterns.  Had the black knight stood on f3 instead of e2, I would have easily spotted it.

“But I don't think 38...Rxg3 is all that strong.  As White, I'd love to punish Black.  You have made me angry now; this is a rude move...  I can play 39.Qb1 or 39.Qd1.  The latter seems to me natural, and it also threatens the knight.  39.Qd1 Rg1+ 40.Rxg1 Qf3+ 41.Bg2 Ng3+ 42.hg and there is no mate on h5.

"I choose 39.Qd1.  It seems that Black is lost after that."

39.Qd1 Qxc5 40.Be6+ Kh8 41.Qxe2 Rc3 42.Nb6 Qd4 43.Rd1 Rc1 44.Rxc1 (1-0,52)

I found all of the grandmaster interviews to be very interesting, and there was quite a variety of responses.  Although I am not much attracted to chess problems or compositions, I also was drawn into the discussions in those chapters.  The interview with the chess coach – whose role is to teach his students how to think properly – was also a good read.  For me, this was the meat of the book.

The second half of the book is a series of short chapters, applying what Avni has gathered and integrated from the interviews.

“The Thinking of GMs” chapter, for example, gives a brief summary of past chess psychology research, and an honest critique of some of its methodological shortfalls.  Avni then gives a half-dozen of his conclusions, some illustrated with game positions, about how GMs think.  Here is his list, but remember that getting there- i.e. reading the interviews - is more than half the fun:

1. Always put the question What before the question How.

2. Implement prophylactic thinking in a profound and systematic way.

3. Manage their thinking in a focused and economical way.

4. Employ logical reasoning.

5. Validate their assessments against a host of subjective criteria.

6. Adapt to changed circumstances quickly and effectively.

The next chapter is “A System for Problem-Solving.”  Of course not all GMs think the same, but the author has distilled some "noteworthy common characteristics."  (There is a small irony that, as one of his chapter illustrations, Avni uses a position from Purdy – Fryda, Sydney 1946; as C.J.S. Purdy, in his writings in the Australasian Chess Review in the 1930s and onward developed and popularized his own “Method of Thinking in Chess.”  Many Purdy articles have been reprinted in a series of books by Thinker’s Press, most notably The Search for Chess Perfection. [Ed. see also CJS Purdy's Fine Art of Chess Annotation and Other Thoughts Volume One, Revised Second Edition].)

There follows a chapter on “The Grand-Plan Approach” where Avni muses:

Leafing through the writings of leading players, one often wonders whether their retrospective commentary reflects the truth, or a wish to glorify themselves in the public eye…

“The Dilemma of an Impasse” and “The Attraction of Beautiful Ideas” are chapters that seem to contrast situations where the right idea cannot be found, with the problem of chasing a “solution” which is beautiful – but wrong. “Serendipity” and “The Pros and Cons of Experience” each share light looks at those related topics.

“Yes, They are Different” revolves around a position from Chesney – Gulko, U.S. Open, Somerset 1986:

20.Qd2 Nxe3 21.Nc5 Bxc5!! 22.b3 Be7 23.bc Nxc4 24.Qc2 g4

Black has only two bishops and a pawn in return for the queen and he has no concrete, immediate threats. However, his pieces control the whole board. White is at a loss for a positive plan, either now, or in the foreseeable future.

Avini’s conclusion:

To play 21…Bxc5!! You have to:

• Imagine that the two minor pieces can outclass a queen.

• Focus on abstract strategy, and minimize concrete analysis.

• Understand that time is not of the essence here, and that Black can deploy his forces leisurely.

• Identify that White will aim at opening the game or at exchanging rooks for bishops.

• Realize that Black can foil White’s plan.

• Know that in a practical game, prolonged passive play, while holding on to a (useless) material advantage, is bound to frustrate one’s opponent, lower his spirits, and consequently, affect the level of his play.

Put together, this may be the essence of the illusive concept “grandmaster thinking.”

The final chapter, “Critical Success Factors,” ends with a truth:

Thinking like a grandmaster may put one on the right track; but for actually becoming a formidable player, a host of other ingredients are required.

As Avni suggested, not just the research, but the product of the research itself, The Grandmaster’s Mind, is a delight.
 

Index of all reviews

search tips

The
Chessville
Chess Store
 

Reference
Center

The Chessville
 Weekly
The Best Free
Chess
Newsletter
On the Planet!

Subscribe
Today -
It's Free!!

The
Chessville
Weekly
Archives

Discussion
Forum

Chess Links

Chess Rules

Visit the
Chessville
Chess Store