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!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!ittatc!milford!bill
From: bill@milford.UUCP (bill)
Newsgroups: net.games.chess
Subject: Re: analysis (actually 'chunking')
Message-ID: <121@milford.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 27-Jan-86 12:15:52 EST
Article-I.D.: milford.121
Posted: Mon Jan 27 12:15:52 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 29-Jan-86 04:03:12 EST
References: <564@uwvax.UUCP> <1063@lsuc.UUCP>
Organization: Telecomp,Inc. , Milford Ct.
Lines: 26

> From: derek@uwvax.UUCP (Derek Zahn)
> > How do people analyze variation so far out?  Does one keep a mental
> > picture of the board in one's head, and make the necessary changes
> > on that board?  (I hope not).  How does this work?
> 
> I could be mistaken, but I think much of it relates to better "chunking",
> as was discussed recently in this newsgroup.
> 
 . . .
> 
> Dave Sherman
> The Law Society of Upper Canada
> Toronto
> -- 
> { ihnp4!utzoo  pesnta  utcs  hcr  decvax!utcsri  } !lsuc!dave

The last issue of Chess Life has an article on blindfold chess which
also supports the 'chunking' theory. (An aside: Trying a few games of
blindfold chess might help remembering and projecting chess positions.)

I wonder if Nimzovich's 'overprotection' is in fact, when all the
mysticism is removed, really based on moving as many pieces as possible
into the same 'chunk' so that combinations could be arrived at more
easily?  Has anyone tried this, for example, as a computer chess algorithm
(doing exhaustive searching only on pieces within a given strategic
'chunk' instead of the entire board?)?