Styles and methods of decision making
Positional and combinational styles
Styles and methods of decision making were elaborated by the founder of Predispositioning Theory, Aron Katsenelinboigen. In his analysis on styles and methods Katsenelinboigen referred to the game of chess, saying that “chess does
disclose various methods of operation, notably the creation of predisposition—methods which may be applicable to other,
more complex systems.”[1] In his book Katsenelinboigen states that apart from the methods (reactive and selective) and sub-methods (randomization,
predispositioning, programming), there are two major styles – positional and combinational. Both styles are utilized
in the game of chess. According to Katsenelinboigen, the two styles reflect two basic approaches to the uncertainty: deterministic
(combinational style) and indeterministic (positional style). Katsenelinboigen’s definition of the two styles are the
following.
The combinational style is characterized by
- a very narrow, clearly defined, primarily material goal, and
- a program that links the initial position with the final outcome.
In defining the combinational style in chess, Katsenelinboigen writes:
The combinational style features a clearly formulated limited objective, namely the capture of material (the main
constituent element of a chess position). The objective is implemented via a well defined and in some cases in a unique sequence
of moves aimed at reaching the set goal. As a rule, this sequence leaves no options for the opponent. Finding a combinational
objective allows the player to focus all his energies on efficient execution, that is, the player’s analysis may be
limited to the pieces directly partaking in the combination. This approach is the crux of the combination and the combinational
style of play.[1]
The positional style is distinguished by
- a positional goal and
- a formation of semi-complete linkages between the initial step and final outcome.
“Unlike the combinational player, the positional player is occupied, first and foremost, with the elaboration
of the position that will allow him to develop in the unknown future. In playing the positional style, the player must evaluate
relational and material parameters as independent variables. (… ) The positional style gives the player the opportunity
to develop a position until it becomes pregnant with a combination. However, the combination is not the final goal of the
positional player—it helps him to achieve the desirable, keeping in mind a predisposition for the future development.
The Pyrrhic victory is the best example of one’s inability to think positionally.”[2]
The positional style serves to
a) create a predisposition to the future development of the position;
b) induce the environment in a certain
way;
c) absorb an unexpected outcome in one’s favor;
d) avoid the negative aspects of unexpected outcomes.
The positional style gives the player the opportunity to develop a position until it becomes pregnant with a combination.
Katsenelinboigen writes:
“As the game progressed and defense became more sophisticated the combinational style of
play declined. . . . The positional style of chess does not eliminate the combinational one with its attempt to see the entire
program of action in advance. The positional style merely prepares the transformation to a combination when the latter becomes
feasible.”[3]
