Thought processes on finding candidate moves.

There are tons of ways to find moves in chess... while at the board or looking at the screen. 

I have been playing chess for a little over 15 years now and I can remember the changing in my thinking as I evolved. From my first games in middle school to casual games against a master in a downtown hotel... from scholastic tournaments to circuit tournaments... over the years I have gone through different procedures, methods and 'styles' of finding good moves.

As a beginner I simply played with as much aggression as I could... trying to win no matter what. Finding candidate moves wasn't even a thought then... it was more like "DONT LOSE"!

As I learned some openings, like the Scotch Gambit; some defenses, like Queen's Gambit Declined... I found that there were different ways to approach the game. Attack, defend, counterattack, lure, etc. I then became a positional kind of player, now looking for moves that would keep my structures intact and my pieces able to execute moves.

Then, having discovered more openings, like Alekhine's Defense, or the Reti Opening... I blended tactics, positional ideas, and strategy into a new way to play for myself. 

I enjoyed king's knight openings and defenses so much that every once in a while I used them exclusively in tournaments. Just this year I played 4 out of the 5 games with king's knight. Game 5 was a Ruy Lopez on my part and I got a very good game. 

I came across a trainer who is helping me focus my candidate selection powers. Ask myself 3 questions in key positions (being lost in an opening, finding a break, or any situation where one is in thought) and they are

1. What are the worst-placed pieces for both sides?

2. Where are the weaknesses for both sides?

3. What is my opponent's plan? Question three should help with your own plan.

These three questions help focus the thought process and save energy by looking where it counts. Just a year ago my approach was more mechanical - where I played the opening by counting factors - finding moves that would allow me to develop faster, control more squares, and simply keep an initiative. However that wasn't enough, because I always neglected what the opponent's plan was.

Thoughts? 

Hello Jonathan 

Hmm...very interesting. You know, there are around 3 billion possible ways to play the game. The reason why there are what we call these 'openings' is because these are the most intricate, precise and accurate ways to win the game. While there are so many things to memorize, the purpose of the brain is not to store data like a hardrive, a brain is more of a processing chip, which makes you think logically or emotionally. Given these factors, sure you can memorize at least the first 20 moves of a given opening (or so to say), but have you actually tried to think what the purpose of those in the opening are rather than a 'creative' way to develop your pieces opt to your own game style?

Looking back at what you wrote, I see that you are a positional player, I know you like to do things carefully, and you dislike going head-on, playing suicidal or perhaps playing a gambit opening. I'd say this is the effect of your mechanical learning technique, while you get to memorize various positions in the board, I'm sure you will play uncomfortably once you ecounter an opening never used before on you? This is where being tactically adept applies. Not only you know the opening, but rather you know how to adapt when your opponent does something unfamilliar. I suggest sticking into one opening repertoire and keep on experimenting on it. This is where the benefit of knowing other opeings while other than mastering one- you know the positions the oppenent will be playing, and you can used what you have mastered to your advantage to win the game.

There are a lot of ways on how you can improve without actually memorizing anything, keep on solving chess problems, and keep on playing chess, prefferably people and not the computer because most of the time the computer will always use the same moves on you if you keep on using the same opening.

PS. It really depends on the opening of it's weakness

So I question you dear friend: How will you learn once you are blinded in your path?

GMCaptainSA,

I have been playing 1. e4, 1. Nf3, 1... Nf6 or 1... e5 depending on what happens. But those moves have always enchanted me. I love how messy the Alekhine games can get, and often that benefits me when I have a chance to complicate the game. You're right about my preference to positional play, but I do not resist the chance to attack either. 

I have a blog on the site, and when I post the games of my last tournament please take a look. 

I was playing too cautiously, to say the least, and according to my trainer I was not outplayed in any of the games, only made some overly cautious moves. 

But you're right, I rarely play any gambits, unless it is of course the Budapest . I tend to want the opening to remain calm until I find something to exploit. But,  as I only play one tournament a year OTB, my rating is not very reflective of my playing strength. On the other hand I don't practice quite enough anymore to deserve that kind of rating anyway.

Thanks a lot 

Alekhine is really risky, especially since when you are going against a high level player like a master. But yeah, I guess I can look at your games

Speaking of candidate moves, try this:

.

.

.

Did your list of candidate moves include Be2 winning a piece? That's what I played.

Why resign in that case? Seems like a dreadful way to play chess.

And Blueemu... can't Black just play ...Kd7 to escape the mating net? 

Kotov's Think like a grandmaster is perhaps the classic on this particular topic. Quite a heavy read and you need discipline to follow what he recommends to the letter but useful if not followed too slavishly. Read it in the old descriptive notation decades ago but I'm sure it'll be available in algebraic.

Black can escape the mating net at the cost of a piece... which is why the Bishop goes to e2 instead of f1. From f1, it couldn't reach the h5-e8 diagonal after 44. ... Kd7 45. Bg4+ Ke8 46. e6 when the threat of Bh5+ wins a piece.

i think analysing the position and then finding plans or moves which accomplish the short term or long term target is how thinking for a move starts....once there, if u see 2-3 moves which do se then simply calculate the opponents response after each candidate move and its possible Lines...this should bring about the decision to pick one i think....and most imp is awareness of the given position

i think analysing the position and then finding plans or moves which accomplish the short term or long term target is how thinking for a move starts....once there, if u see 2-3 moves which do se then simply calculate the opponents response after each candidate move and its possible Lines...this should bring about the decision to pick one i think....and most imp is awareness of the given position