Human variability and chess minutia

This forum is for general discussions and questions, including Collectors Corner and anything to do with Computer chess.

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
User avatar
Fernando
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Santiago de Chile

Human variability and chess minutia

Post by Fernando »

Player of really low level are always bad players; chess players of high level tend to be almost always the same in strength. But more or less intermediate players like me, more or less in the expert category, tend to be very variable. And variability has a great effect in chess playing.
I can play and win a 2200 machine in a good day and lose to a 1600 machine in another, a bad day. Why? Because a little bit of more or less concentration and a little bit of more or fewer inaccuracies produce great effects. In many endeavors that do not happen. I can write an article in an excellent level one day and another day just a good article, but both perform OK for the editor. In chess, the difference of even minor degrees produces a great effect. You lose, draw or win.
You play with 80% concentration and you have an enormous difference in chess quality compared with playing at full strength. I have experienced that many years. Only a GM has already such stock of experience that he can more or less compensate that, BUT only if not playing anther GM

variable strength regards
Fern
Festina Lente
Larry
Senior Member
Posts: 2269
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 8:42 am
Location: Gosford, NSW Australia

Re: Human variability and chess minutia

Post by Larry »

Fernando wrote:Player of really low level are always bad players; chess players of high level tend to be almost always the same in strength. But more or less intermediate players like me, more or less in the expert category, tend to be very variable. And variability has a great effect in chess playing.
I can play and win a 2200 machine in a good day and lose to a 1600 machine in another, a bad day. Why? Because a little bit of more or less concentration and a little bit of more or fewer inaccuracies produce great effects. In many endeavors that do not happen. I can write an article in an excellent level one day and another day just a good article, but both perform OK for the editor. In chess, the difference of even minor degrees produces a great effect. You lose, draw or win.
You play with 80% concentration and you have an enormous difference in chess quality compared with playing at full strength. I have experienced that many years. Only a GM has already such stock of experience that he can more or less compensate that, BUT only if not playing anther GM

variable strength regards
Fern
You are not alone. Most here are also intermediate, and we can perform
ok on a given day, woeful the very next day. I get slaughtered by the
Fidelity Champion, then a few days later score a good victory over the
Montreux. As you know, when you lose a chess game, the loss can be
easily blamed on a single move. The rest of the game you played ok.
You mentioned GMs being more consistent. Well if your reputation was
at stake, and invitations to future chess events and therefore profits was
also at stake, you would make sure every move was accurate.
We have been playing chess for many years, and it's normal to become
jaded with the game, but just keep on playing out of force of habit. It's
an addiction, but for the most part a harmless addiction.
L
User avatar
Fernando
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Santiago de Chile

Re: Human variability and chess minutia

Post by Fernando »

Larry wrote:
Fernando wrote:Player of really low level are always bad players; chess players of high level tend to be almost always the same in strength. But more or less intermediate players like me, more or less in the expert category, tend to be very variable. And variability has a great effect in chess playing.
I can play and win a 2200 machine in a good day and lose to a 1600 machine in another, a bad day. Why? Because a little bit of more or less concentration and a little bit of more or fewer inaccuracies produce great effects. In many endeavors that do not happen. I can write an article in an excellent level one day and another day just a good article, but both perform OK for the editor. In chess, the difference of even minor degrees produces a great effect. You lose, draw or win.
You play with 80% concentration and you have an enormous difference in chess quality compared with playing at full strength. I have experienced that many years. Only a GM has already such stock of experience that he can more or less compensate that, BUT only if not playing anther GM

variable strength regards
Fern
You are not alone. Most here are also intermediate, and we can perform
ok on a given day, woeful the very next day. I get slaughtered by the
Fidelity Champion, then a few days later score a good victory over the
Montreux. As you know, when you lose a chess game, the loss can be
easily blamed on a single move. The rest of the game you played ok.
You mentioned GMs being more consistent. Well if your reputation was
at stake, and invitations to future chess events and therefore profits was
also at stake, you would make sure every move was accurate.
We have been playing chess for many years, and it's normal to become
jaded with the game, but just keep on playing out of force of habit. It's
an addiction, but for the most part a harmless addiction.
L
Years take a toll too. Yesterday I played a great game against Chessfriend, a positional victory, attacking his king side, everything right, he was stuck, but at the end, I was so tired that I let him get a draw by repetition because I did not find the killing move, which I found next day easily because I was fresh.
Festina Lente
Post Reply