what the ''FORk'' lol
You have not heard of the dark side of the fork?
(I am not the first to write about it, but I relish in it, with some background music in the mind's ear).
Also, more seriously, that would not be the first time honored chess advice to have some recursive or circular logic to it.
It is loaded with assumptions rarely made explicit. But here you have a good case of probably circular impossible.
But even more seriously (yes there may be degrees.... and vice-versa), I think it refers to self-doubt, some hygienic self-awareness. It might just mean look at more than one candidate... or if candidate looks juicy for some reason just think more. There was another blog asking a question related to this one, but more general. About when to stop thinking.
(I am not the first to write about it, but I relish in it, with some background music in the mind's ear).
Also, more seriously, that would not be the first time honored chess advice to have some recursive or circular logic to it.
It is loaded with assumptions rarely made explicit. But here you have a good case of probably circular impossible.
But even more seriously (yes there may be degrees.... and vice-versa), I think it refers to self-doubt, some hygienic self-awareness. It might just mean look at more than one candidate... or if candidate looks juicy for some reason just think more. There was another blog asking a question related to this one, but more general. About when to stop thinking.
saluuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut
I like the suggested method for a number of reasons.
1. It is actionable.
2. It's not reaching too far, so is achievable.
3. It takes into account that the end purpose of training this is to make it subconscious.
4.It can be expanded on as our playing strength improves.
For instance 'What is my opponents last move intending in two moves time?' Or is there a two move way to exploit my opponents last move?
5.When we reduce blunders chess becomes more enjoyable.
1. It is actionable.
2. It's not reaching too far, so is achievable.
3. It takes into account that the end purpose of training this is to make it subconscious.
4.It can be expanded on as our playing strength improves.
For instance 'What is my opponents last move intending in two moves time?' Or is there a two move way to exploit my opponents last move?
5.When we reduce blunders chess becomes more enjoyable.
How else can these questions be formulated?
In static terms. On could look for clues on the board about features that are visible that correlate with better odds.
I thought the article was going to be about checking opponent and blundering at the same time.
@professionalpatzer1 said in #9:
> I thought the article was going to be about checking opponent and blundering at the same time.
thats exactly what i thought too
> I thought the article was going to be about checking opponent and blundering at the same time.
thats exactly what i thought too
у меня 3000