In this article:
Initial Candidate Moves
Brainstorming is a vital technique when analyzing the initial candidate moves in a position. This involves not rejecting moves simply because they appear "bad" or "crazy" at first glance. Instead, you must look at all possible moves coldly and detachedly.
By this process, you risk finding truly creative moves that you would not normally consider!
Example: A seemingly insignificant "crazy move" here is Qf6!
Can you see the implications?
Prioritising Candidate Moves
As human beings, we cannot see millions of moves per second. We must prioritize. Moves which should be given priority in analysis include:
- Forcing Moves: Checks, captures, and threats. These limit the opponent's responses, making calculation easier.
- Strategic Moves: Moves clearly linked to your plans (e.g., creating a passed pawn, removing a defender). These are "logical" tactics that support your overall goals.
In standard Over-the-Board (OTB) play, brute force calculation is impossible due to time constraints. You must filter candidate moves based on practical positional understanding and your strategic game plan.
Spotting Good Candidates
What should we invest our time in? The identification of tactical motifs (pins, king safety) provides the raison d'être for potentially good combinative moves.
However, we must also leave creative room to appreciate the significance of the seemingly insignificant.
If you want to be a good combinative player, you must be prepared to break the "rules." Think about giving up a Queen for a pawn! You might find it forces a mate in 5. Without this creative freedom, your calculation will always be restricted by habit.
One must develop an instinctive feel for subtle resources. A quiet pawn move might look insignificant but could open a crucial file that turns the game in your favor.
Beautiful Combinations
In calculating variations, beautiful hidden resources may be revealed. However, one should not go all out to find a combination in every position.
Warning: Only look for a combination if the position justifies it. If you try to force a combination in every game, you will find unexpected brilliance 5% of the time, but lose on time (or blunder) in 90% of games.
Why Computers Are Better Tactically
Humans filter moves based on experience and intuition. In 1 case out of 100, a seemingly random, "bad" move that we filter out might actually be the winning move.
This is where humans lose to computers.
Computers do not have prejudice. They use a brute force approach to analyze moves that a human would never consider. Our experience guides us quickly to good moves, but it also creates a "blind spot" that prevents us from seeing the exceptions to the rules.
We must accept that we are tactically weaker than machines, but we can learn from their detached, systematic approach.