Author: Dan Andersson
Date: 12:51:18 03/24/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 23, 2004 at 23:38:36, Russell Reagan wrote: >On March 23, 2004 at 08:46:28, Dan Andersson wrote: > >> To me there is no real difference playing OTB or interface. I guess my board >>representation is such that the actual board is a mere input cue. The board >>would have to be pretty awful to distract me from such a distinct discrete >>event. We played a whole lot of blindfold chess at my club. So an auditory >>description is as significant to me as a visual one. >> >>MvH Dan Andersson > >When you play blindfold, or just analyze in your head, do you picture the board, >or do you just know where all of the pieces are and what they attack? In other >words, is it a visual thing for you, or is it a knowledge based thing? > I would say that it is more knowledge based for me. I don't have a complete visualization of the board. But as I work through variations, areas with high activity become completely known. One good example is when calculating pawn breaks. >I've heard some people say that it is better to "know" the board very well, and >know that (for example) a bishop on c2 attacks h7 and not g7. In other words, >you should know instantly what every piece on every square attacks. Do you use >knowledge of the board, or do you visualize the board? MvH Dan Andersson
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.