Re: Ping Dirk....add on for anw

On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 01:13:06 +0100, Andy Walker <news@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

abelard wrote:
i once asked an im (international master) just what was the essential
difference between him and a gm(grand master--top divisional
ranking)....he said it was simply memory....that the gm had seen/
remembered more patterns...

Two different potential meanings of "memory", as your "/" shows.
The GM has much more experience than the average player; this is just
professional expertise. [S]he may also have a better [at least, better
organised] memory. I don't think it's possible to become a GM without
an excellent memory -- unlike a top lawyer or doctor, the chess GM has
no access to books or colleagues during play. OTOH, memory alone is
definitely not sufficient; talent is also required.

perhaps i'm not being sufficiently clear....
what i'm trying to communicate is that *all* complex human tasks
are mediated by memory....
as all such tasks are time limited....

if you are engaged in a complex task.....the great preponderance of
your functioning is memory based....

even the perceptually 'new' elements are resolved via the memorised
algorithms you have previously learned/imbibed.....

if you reach a problem that is beyond the immediate time available
...eg in a consultation or when the chess clock is ticking...
then you will 'fail', get lucky...or have to go away and put in some
serious study....
if the study resources run out....
you will have to do serious head work or 'research' if you hope
to 'solve' 'the' difficulty

[...]
Motivation is, of course, vital throughout education. Sadly,
even when taken seriously, it is often confused with applicability
["You should want to study X because it's important in Y."].
i can't interpret your intention with the term 'sadly'
help please

I mean that I regret the fact. Many teachers do not even try
to motivate students; some think they do, but are deceived by the
above confusion. If the student *wants* to know about the above "Y",
then the applicability of "X" is motivating; if the student couldn't
care less about "Y", then it's even demotivating -- "We're only doing
this so that we can do boring Y next year.".

ok...i think

do you memorise formulae or know how to derive them....
Professionals need both. Life is too short to re-derive things
when you need them; it's also too short to memorise all the things you
need to know. Knowing where to find things when you need them is also
an important skill.
but in real life you often only have what you know right now...
eg at a chess board...or driving...

It's actually quite rare in either case that you have only what
is in your memory. At the chess board, you usually have time to work
out, however imperfectly, solutions to new problems. The important
skill is the ability to analyse rapidly and accurately, a large part of
which is the ability to recognise fuzzy matches to relevant patterns,
via "chunking" and all that jazz. You need the memory/experience *and*
the analytical skills. [Driving examples left on the table ATM.]

[...] if you don't have that move in your openings
book....you can get seriously discommoded)

There are many moves not in my openings book, even in the
openings I play regularly.

i was here particularly referring to the openings book of not having
'idiot does a u turn immediately ahead of you on a major road
without warning'....in your present experience....
that example highlights your dependence on the 'book' and ever
present time limitations

I would obviously be a better player if
I didn't have these gaps; but it has never been a serious problem
for me. If I were playing professionally, I would need both to fill
the gaps and to widen my repertoire; but I'm not, so I don't. I do
have opponents who know more about how I play openings than I myself
do ["You played this in your game vs Bloggs, but then you varied on
move 17 with ...." "Did I? How interesting."]; it doesn't seem to
help them.

that depends on just how advanced they are...
and maybe particular data regarding that position/pattern....

as a chess player you must be aware that those who take the
job seriously spend much time looking for 'improvements'
in common positions....
in preparation for throwing such innovations at those unprepared..
often after examining the oppositions favourite opening patterns

likewise in some exams...and even if you have the books, if you are
unfamiliar with details you may not be able to keep up...

In such cases, books are for accuracy, not for concepts. You
need to have all the concepts at your fingertips, and use the books
only to check the details.

You seem to be edging towards [ISTM] an extreme position on
memory. Personally, I find it more important to understand things
than to remember them. Well, of course there are things that are
just facts, and beyond understanding except via memorisation; but
the things that make us professionals in our chosen areas are more
usually conceptual. You can learn a chess opening by memorising
every line in a book; or by understanding the basic plans and
supplementing those by memorising a few key lines, and esp the cases
when the basic plans don't apply. The second approach is better;
it's more resilient against devious opposition, but also for a given
quantity of memory it means you can learn/understand several books,
not just the one.

i have no argument with that para....
i'm mostly responding here because it seems i'm not making
myself clear somewhere above....

(your comment about 'an extreme position on memory')

regards

--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc 1,552,396 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Hugh Edward Myers
    ... chess books. ... difficult for us to know what is what (I haven't played chess since I ... American chess player Hugh Myers has ... From his 1968 New Strategy in the Chess Openings, ...
    (rec.games.chess.misc)
  • Re: Ping Dirk
    ... organised] memory. ... no access to books or colleagues during play. ... eg at a chess board...or driving... ... You can learn a chess opening by memorising ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: help : chess opening books
    ... This is a modern, easy-to-read overview of all the major, and some ... Behind the Chess Openings',...but with up-to-date analysis and ... haven't read all of Collins 'Understanding the Chess Openings', ... I don't think ANY of these books can beat having a good coach ...
    (rec.games.chess.analysis)
  • Re: Grand Prix Attack (was: Desert Island Chess)
    ... Chess), looks to be so huge in openings that not ... a lot of books will be written on it. ... I think it's inevitable that any interesting game of skill will have ...
    (rec.games.chess.misc)
  • Re: help : chess opening books
    ... Ray Gordon wrote: ... Of the other books on the market, you'd do best with a single-volume ... "Ideas Behind The Chess Openings" by Fine ... "How To Open A Chess Game" edited by Evans ...
    (rec.games.chess.analysis)