Re: Chess on ice
Dan, I'm getting from this that you are likely very good and experienced at chess and likely not either at curling. Which puts you ahead of me in both games :). But still, I'd like to give some input here if I may.
In chess, yes we look to see if our move works before playing it, and the skill of chess is first to know which moves to even consider (since time limits constrain us) and then how well we do visualize the ones we consider; that is, how many plies we can consider and still accurately visualize the entire board and tabulate the merits of the position(s).
We decide which moves to consider based on (primarily) pattern knowledge (or in the openings, book knowledge), this is where the learning of chess is involved.
I think Duncan has been saying that this is what goes on in curling, and I'll take his word for it since he's a curler. Pattern knowledge and experience guide a curler in what shots to consider, and then the curler uses extensive visualization to try and consider different static positions based on both perfect and less than perfect shots, as many plies ahead as s/he can.
I would say chess players are guessing just as much as curlers are, give or take some nominal amount. If you as a chess player know for sure once you decide on a move that that move works, then you are a very very good chess player. Maybe experienced curlers do have just as much certainty, but the physical execution tends to vary from the perfect shot they visualize.
I'm convinced from Duncan's description that visualization is just as extensive for a curler as it is for a chess player. But that's just me, maybe you are a curler and you don't use visualization so much as in chess.
Originally posted by Dan Scoones
View Post
In chess, yes we look to see if our move works before playing it, and the skill of chess is first to know which moves to even consider (since time limits constrain us) and then how well we do visualize the ones we consider; that is, how many plies we can consider and still accurately visualize the entire board and tabulate the merits of the position(s).
We decide which moves to consider based on (primarily) pattern knowledge (or in the openings, book knowledge), this is where the learning of chess is involved.
I think Duncan has been saying that this is what goes on in curling, and I'll take his word for it since he's a curler. Pattern knowledge and experience guide a curler in what shots to consider, and then the curler uses extensive visualization to try and consider different static positions based on both perfect and less than perfect shots, as many plies ahead as s/he can.
I would say chess players are guessing just as much as curlers are, give or take some nominal amount. If you as a chess player know for sure once you decide on a move that that move works, then you are a very very good chess player. Maybe experienced curlers do have just as much certainty, but the physical execution tends to vary from the perfect shot they visualize.
I'm convinced from Duncan's description that visualization is just as extensive for a curler as it is for a chess player. But that's just me, maybe you are a curler and you don't use visualization so much as in chess.
Comment