If Jesse’s light gets any brighter I’ll have to play blindfolded

This may be the most useful ChessDojo podcast because in chess it's so important and so hard to see things accurately.

One of the most interesting videos I've seen on youtube in a while, regardless of the topic

I loved the impartiality here. None of you were critical of each other's methodology, nor did any of you stray away from the reality of the weaknesses of each approach. Really fascinating stuff, and I love the intellectual synergy between the three of you! Thanks!

This was fascinating, thanks all - I hope you revisit this discussion at some stage!

David's memory of squares is quite impressive. The way he can just rattle off the squares that a knight attacks. I have some hyphantasia and I also mix up the notation squares all the time. I always say Rd1 when it might be Rd8 or Bf7 when it might be Bf2.

I'm with David on this and it is nice to hear of others - especially someone who achieved such a high level in chess, which on the surface would seem to require visualization. For me it's almost more conjuring the idea of a picture of an apple, rather than the apple itself. And while playing chess, I need to view the physical board to 'move the pieces in my head', which again is less visualizing pieces but the ideas of them. Hard to explain.

best podcast ever. Insane 0s an 1s

10:50 HOLY SH*T. I have a problem with visualizing, but I never thought of memorizing squares and what hits what where... how the hell do you even start memorizing that?? Hugely impressive!

I have aphantasia and my peak rating is just over 1500 OTB.

I struggle to “visualize” after a few moves. It’s difficult to remember which squares are attacked etc. Forcing / mating sequences are easier to follow along.

I managed to improve by pure pattern recognition and brute force tactics. In my first year of playing chess I did over 20,000 puzzles online and that’s the only way I could get ahead.

Instead of visualization, I recognize 2-5 move patterns that I stack together and get through the game in “memorized” chunks.

Since I can’t see or imagine the new pieces on the board I more or less have a spatial awareness of the board in the same way that you can walk around your house in the dark.

Aiden Rayner's "don't move until you see it" comes to mind. He prefers the term "conceptualization" over "visualization."

I was surprised to discover how much closer to David‘s visualization and calculation style. I am than others.

Now I have a better understanding of why I’m so terrible at blitz but much better at classical.

I think relationships -- as Jesse mentions -- is the anchor of conceptualization. I think this is related to the cognitive idea of "chunking." The King's Indian "home" position is a chunk. Several moves in common openings are chunks. Players with knowledge of the Ruy for example, probably have "chunks" representing things like "Marshal" or "Anti-Marshal or "Chigorin" or "Zaitsev" etc.

Memory is all about stories and relationships. Memory World Champions use that to do their apparent feats of superpowers of memorization.

I''ve always thought I have a vivid imagination and good visualization, but all I see is black when trying to picture something in my head and I had no idea people actually see things in their mind. The closest I came to seeing anything was picturing the aisles at the local super market I visit every day where I managed to get a flash of an image for a split second. I was running through the memory of picking an item off the shelf and I think it was the memory that flashed more so than actual visualization.

The way I see chess calculation/visualization is that it's just a sequence of actions and consequences. When a piece moves I don't see the board or the position, but I know the consequences of the move. I know it targets x squares and unprotects y squares etc. Calculating a sequence is like math equation where i'm constantly summing and evaluating the consequences of each order of operation. To me that feels like a logical and orderly way to do things and I don't really see it as something that handicaps my chess performance.

this was incredibly interesting

i'm a lot like david - i perceive the board mostly as a conceptual abstraction. although i will say that playing a bunch of chess does make things clearer. so i think there is still some visualization happening. this goes for non-chess things, too. familiarity allows your brain to build a model that you don't have to think about in order to evoke

As someone with aphantasia, I was smiling and nodding at many of David's explanations. I think in words, I store information in words and sentences. Many times, if I have not thought to myself "X has brown hair and green eyes", I cannot remember what their hair or eyes look like. If I have, I remember those words. I haven't attempted to do blindfold chess or do complex chess calculations with my eyes closed. Luckily you can play chess with your eyes open, so I don't have to.

When I can look at the board, I can follow lines of movement and calculate. I don't see pieces where they are not physically, I just look at a square and see that my bishop can move there. With enough games, I've developed what I can only call intuition or pattern recognition, where I immediately know where pieces can move in somewhat common structures without "manually" tracing lines for each piece. I remember sequences (of numbers, or words, or moves, or whatever) easily, and combined with pattern recognition that eventually allowed me to play blitz and bullet without constantly flagging (started learning at 10-15min rapid).

Out of interest, I bought an opening course on chessable. Seems my memory for sequences (combined with explanations and reasons, "stories", for the moves) means opening theory would be easy to memorize. But at my current rating (around1400 rapid on chess.com) nobody plays more than 5% of those complex lines, so that's not where I should focus at the moment.

Anyway, very interesting to hear how different minds handle something like chess.

That was a beautiful podcast, very interesting and informative and surprising.

I thought there would be discussions of things like running your imaginary fingers over your imaginary chessboard to confirm the texture and therefore the color of your squares, and if the color stays the same that means your bishop hasn't wandered off and it is still on the same diagonal as it should be, but for strong players it's not like that at all.

I could never see a board as a kid and teen in my imagination, or my mum's face, but since I started analysing my games, I now get momentary 'flashbulb memories' of my mistakes. I can see it fairly quickly after the game too. The anxiety, to use Jesse's word, seems to help. It gets tagged.

I find having my eyes open to imagine helps too. It feels like I 'steal' surrounding sensory info to build it, but with my eyes closed it's much harder and often just black. But after analysing I think. I'm getting better.

I am also mind blind, no images, I calculate by knowing in ideas and language. I calculate on the board but I can come up with ideas while walking around away from the board.  I used to think when asked to visualise something that it was a figure of speech, in my 40's to my shock I learnt that people can actually see things in their mind. It's still hard for me to conceptualise this idea.