Advice from Chapter One of Improve Your Chess Now
The first chapter of this book has some amazing tips on calculation. The main thesis is to trust your instincts and find the main or principal variation whether it is a tactical, strategic, or defensive position. Exploration of the main variation utilizing abstract thoughts and concrete analysis of important branches should follow naturally. This opposes Kotov's method calling for meticulous analysis of a large tree of moves and variations to the bitter end. I recommend you to read the entire chapter from the book to see his game examples and how Tisdall runs through his variation processing throughout.
Tisdall’s theory contends that a combination of the natural human approach to the position, tempered with some of the discipline advocated by Kotov, is most effective. The components of this technique are:
- To aim towards the choice of a single critical variation. Branches are dealt with when unavoidable, and primarily to navigate the chief variation
- The constant application of abstract assessment. (The key element)
- A scan for critical candidates.
A Single Variation
Of course boiling a position down to one critical variation is rare, and generally characteristic of tactical positions. But the way to search is one line at a time, and with luck, identifying the most critical line first. The tricky part is, as ever, the selection and limitation of candidate moves. Basically, one will try to eliminate branches and shape a main variation.
Contrary to Kotov, Tisdall says our reflex is often to go forward and work out one complete variation at a time. You gather abstract elements of the position that way and create your “chief variation” which you then use to check other things against.
Try to always start with the most direct line. If you reach natural branching off points while calculating and struggle to find which lines (example, your opponent is in check and has four possible king moves) to look at first, it’s best to save the most difficult for last. He is in agreement with Kotov here. So how to know which is the most difficult? Tisdall says it’s usually possible to sort them out before analyzing and he thinks this is best done by having a quick philosophical chat with yourself. Often you can turn down one or two moves pretty quickly and you will continue your chief variation with the most critical/testing move.
Another argument is that by examining the potentially weaker defenses first, one can actually get a clearer picture of the hurdles to be surmounted. If great difficulties arise breaking down apparently inferior lines, one has to examine the entire enterprise (your supposed chief variation) in a colder light.
There is often a point in calculating and analyzing your chief variation when “the efficient GM gets on with it” when they conclude that they are playing without risk and they’ve discovered the most promising variation. Play the move and get the opponent’s clock ticking. We don’t need to solve every aspect of the starting position.
Calculation in defense puts a slightly different spin on the approach. Now the search concentrates even more on aiming to pare down the candidates to the most critical, and to examine the most critical first. There isn’t really a point to checking possibly suspect variations except as a last resort when defending.
Abstract Assessment
Try to set down your full process of thought as closely as possible—try to capture the inner monologue of your problem solving. This means not only the more abstract bits of your reasoning (as opposed to concrete variations) but also a running commentary of what goes through your head, your internal conversations.
He often uses an abstract approach to a tactical position because it’s more efficient than sitting down and meticulously travelling the branches to the end (Kotov's technique, basically). Intuition plays a big role in that.
Constantly processing the information gleaned from concrete lines into verbal terms that can help us interpret the vital signs of the position is an essential part of the technique.
In Tisdall's words, he places added emphasis on the intuitive side of the game, and uses it to harness the scientific side of the brain. For others the emphasis may well need to be the other way round, finding a way to enhance a general approach with concrete calculating skills.
Candidates
The creation of candidate lists is never the primary task (it seems to be so in Kotov's method). By leaning towards an instinctive choice first, we activate our intuition (and experience), engage the practical aspect of play by preparing to make a decision, and initiate an examination of the abstract factors of a position. All of which in turn guide our concrete analysis and begins the process of sorting likely candidate moves.
* * * The entirety of the Chapter Summary is great advice.* * *
