Why Calculation is Bad for You

We often use pairs of opposites when we talk about personality traits - kind or mean, generous or greedy. In What's Your Style in Chess?, we looked at some opposite pairs used to describe different styles in chess. This time, we'll dive into Calculation.

Calculating players tend to distrust or not paying attention to their intuition. They feel the need to calculate each and every line as deep as they possibly can, and as a consequence regularly end up in time trouble or fatigue. The main cause for time trouble is that they spend too much time on irrelevant lines. Lets do the maths: A standard position offers three plausible candidate moves on average. If each of those has three replies, we have nine different lines to calculate. After your next move, you have 27 positions to evaluate, but only one of them can actually happen in the game. So, if you spend one minute on each position, you have wasted 26 minutes on lines that didn't happen. How many times can you afford that in a single game?

All that calculation can also cause whatever intuition you have to wither and die, and that leaves you with calculation as the only tool in the box.

Intuitive players, on the other hand, tend to pick the candidate move that feels best, and just play it without further ado. Very soon they're half an hour ahead of their calculating opponent. However, this doesn't mean that intuitive players have an advantage. Intuition may provide quick answers to complicated questions, but they're not always right. Calculating players make fewer and less serious mistakes, so if they only succeed in managing their time, they can level the field.

In order to improve, both types of players must venture out of their comfort zone. Intuitive players must work on their calculation skills, and calculating players must learn how to trust and listen to their intuition.

Takeaway

We are what we are, but it's not a good idea to only play on your strengths. Every game requires both intuition and calculation, and to be a better player, you need to work on your weaknesses too. Intuitive players can work on their calculation abilities during their games, but it's harder the other way around. A good training practice for calculating players is to solve puzzles without calculating. Just stare at the position until a move presents itself. If it's the right move, move on to the next puzzle, and if it's not, take some time to figure out what went wrong.

 

The Perfect Play Syndrome

Last time, we saw that chess will not be solved by brute force methods anytime soon (if ever). Can Perfect Play provide a solution? 

Wikipedia says: In game theory, perfect play is the behaviour or strategy of a player that leads to the best possible outcome for that player regardless of the response by the opponent. Perfect play for a game is known when the game is solved.

That last sentence means that perfect play is unknown for unsolved games like chess, so trying to solve chess by perfect play is not possible. Still, that doesn't prevent some players, obsessed with the idea of perfect play, from spending oceans of time trying to solve at least the position they have in front of them. That's futile, because almost all positions are insolvable. We can solve mate puzzles, and endings with seven pieces or less, but that's about it.

Even ancient seafarers used navigational charts to arrive safely at their destination. In chess, we have opening manuals serving the same purpose. While navigation now can be considered solved, nearly all possible chess positions remain in uncharted territory as we saw in the previous article.

Before navigation was solved, some daring seafarers like Leif Eriksson or Christofer Columbus ventured off the map, even a the risk of perishing in unknown waters, and found America. Many others, unmentioned in the history books, went under trying.

It's tempting to view the main line in the manual as perfect play, but it's really just a well tested line with a good performance score. Any early deviation can lead to previously unknown positions, and some of them can actually be better than the main line (although most of the are rubbish).

Sometimes we see a TN mark after a move. A Theoretical Novelty is a move from a standard book position that is previously unknown to (or discarded by) established theory, a Columbus Move if you like. If the new move proves successful, it will replace the old move as the main line, if not, it will perish at sea.

Takeaway

Trying to achieve perfect play can be rewarding in many ways, but it will not help you to win your games.