Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 09:26:09 08/12/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 11, 2001 at 11:26:31, Oliver Roese wrote:
>On August 09, 2001 at 12:06:45, José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba wrote:
>
>>On August 09, 2001 at 05:25:37, Graham Laight wrote:
>>
>>>Here's the link:
>>>
>>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1480000/1480365.stm
>>>
>>>Seems the brain magnetic resonance scanning confirms what we've all suspected -
>>>that GMs tend to use their memory, wheras weak players have to do it by
>>>calculation (the chess computer method).
>>>
>>>The number of patterns a GM is said to be familiar with seems to have
>>>mysteriously risen from 50,000 ("Chess Skill In Man And Machine") to 100,000 -
>>>any idea how that happened, anyone?
>>>
>>>-g
>>
>>It is not clear to me what a "pattern" is, as long as it is not clearly defined
>>the number of patterns can be any number you want.
>>José.
>
>Good point.
>Those patterns probably exists just as dreams of some (bad?) scientists.
>Nevertheless if there is something out there who knows how to identify and
>count these patterns, please tell us about them.
>
>Oliver
I don't know anything about this cognitive stuff, but here is an example of a
pattern.
If you are watching a human play chess, and the human (white) has a bishop on
a4, the human will very rarely play b3, even if black has no b-pawn to trap the
bishop.
This is true all the way up the a-file. If the bishop is on a6, the human isn't
going to play b5.
When people say "pattern" they are thinking about sexy attack patterns on the
king-side, but there are plenty of little things they strive for or avoid
elsewhere.
bruce
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.