Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site milford.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ittatc!milford!bill
From: bill@milford.UUCP (bill)
Newsgroups: net.games.chess
Subject: Re: The Secret of being a Chess Master
Message-ID: <117@milford.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 7-Jan-86 11:06:41 EST
Article-I.D.: milford.117
Posted: Tue Jan  7 11:06:41 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 8-Jan-86 20:15:50 EST
References: <269@ihlpf.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Telecomp,Inc. , Milford Ct.
Lines: 18

> the phrase "innate chess skill" is a grievous misnomer. People are not
> born with skills, with predispositions perhaps, but not with skills.

I vaguely remember some psychological studies which indicated some 
unlearned traits which good masters possess but are relatively lacking
in the rest of us. The term I remember is "eidetic memory" and the
test was how well the subjects could reconstruct chess positions after
examining it for a short time. It's seemingly obvious that this should
correlate with the ability to mentally calculate variations and imagine
possible 'successors' to a given position.
How could someone 'learn' this except through repetition by playing
again and again?

> The one common denominator among masters is motivation.

The classical counter example given is that of T. Petrosian, although
some other early grandmasters like Schlechter might also be termed
'unmotivated'. True, these would have to be considered very wierd birds.