Thought and Choice in Chess (DeGroot, 1978)

Thought and Choice in Chess (DeGroot, 1978)

What does a chessmaster think while he is preparing his next move? How is his thinking organized, which are the heuristics he employs: his methods, his strategies for solving the choice problem? How does he arrive at a decision and how deeply has he foreseen the possible consequences of his move? Why do masters find the good moves that underlings overlook?

In order to answer questions like these by the author, back in 1938, undertook an experimental study in which distinguished masters of the game served as subjects: Alekhine, Euwe, Keres, Fine, Flohr, Tartakower and others. The present book is a revised English edition of Dr. de Groot's study, Het Denken van den Schaker, in which the results of his thorough protocol analyses were originally published.

The book has proved to be of fundamental interest to modern students of human thinking, decision making and artificial intelligence - not to mention chessplayers of all ranks, who may want to see for themselves how grandmasters think.

[JLJ - My big criticism of De Groot's method is that he apparently ignores the fact that much cognitive effort in finding moves in a game is guided by subconscious scripts that the players themselves might not even be aware of. Therefore, asking the players to describe what is going on in their minds (when selecting a move) might overlook the Tacit and subconscious methods implored by the players.

p.101 the thought process considers plausible move sequences without any consideration of how these sequences "pop" into the mind. We see the subjects in Appendiz II using plausible move sequences to form the core of their analyses.]

[Preface] The main difference between grandmasters and players of average strength is the speed of recognizing the central issue in each position.

p.13 The purpose of the investigations described in this study is first of all to carry out an experimentally based psychological analysis of chess thinking... Only by analyzing the thought process can one arrive at a thorough insight into the demands the game makes on its practitioners... A systematic empirical analysis of the chess player's thinking therefore forms a sound basis for practically every psychological study in the field of chess.

p.254 Type, core problem, estimated value, each plan, each goal-setting and problem formulation, each solution proposal that is more than a blind stab, each alternative grouping, each shade of favoritism, each hunch about necessity or desirability of certain actions, etc. - all of these components of the total goal conception may, at any moment, exert a decisive influence on the course of the thought process.

p.255 Via the schematic anticipation(s) in which the components of the total goal conception become operative, the components determine the general direction of the investigation, especially the selection of moves and plans to be considered.

p.257 Wilhelm Steinitz, who laid the foundation of the modern positional game, speaks of the 'accumulation of small advantages' as the aim in a positional game. (STEINITZ 1889 and 1895).

p.338-340 The serious nature of chess as well as the necessity for a good player to be grounded in what is called the theory of chess have led many people to ask if chess is really a game. Is it not some sort of applied science?... It would seem that neither position is tenable... the game of chess occupies its own exceptional position. The only heading under which it can be suitably subsumed is that of a serious game of combat possessing a number of specific features that are markedly different from those of both the arts and sciences... There was a time when what we now call the scientific conception of chess did not exist. Largely as a result of the work of Wilhelm Steinitz (1836-1900) - and not before - chess began to develop so-called scientific traits. Steinitz analyzed deeper, more systematically, and more objectively than his predecessors did; his theory demanded a search for the truth, for the objectively best move and not for the most courageous, most brilliant, or most exotic move. He was the first to connect strategic planning with a systematic position investigation in terms of the features of the position; he was the first to base explicitly the choice of moves and plans on an integrated quantitative assessment of each position... Nowadays, nearly 70 years later, a battle no longer rages around the theory of Steinitz. In general sense it has been completely accepted: in a modernized and much more elaborated form it is part of the technical knowledge that every chessmaster is assumed to possess.

Nonetheless the game of chess has not become a science... the proof supporting the move that the subject chooses generally appears to be incomplete; there is no question of scientific certainty, only of a practical decision based on general considerations and a selection of calculated variations. The argument in favor of the decision to be taken is often completed by an obviously intuitive preference for a certain move... only rarely can the problem [of choosing the best move] be objectively solved. Even when the choice-of-move problem turns out to be objectively solvable in analysis, the time limit and the prescribed fixedness of the pieces on the board make it impossible for the player to attain more than an incomplete proof in a normal match or tournament game.

p.344 Under Bishop Odo Sully (who died in 1208) it was even interdicted [forbidden] for a clergyman to have a board and [chess] pieces in his dwelling; and Louis the Holy outlawed the game of chess completely in the year 1254. Another interesting example of the hazardous status that the game of chess enjoyed in bygone ages is afforded by Savonarola: in the city of Florence, in the year 1497, one year before he himself was burned at the stake, Savonarola publicly burned a number of chess sets along with other sin inspiring objects. In a pamphlet that appeared circa 1500 a Russian Orthodox priest went to the extremes of eternally damning chess players along with gamblers, card players, and checker players.