Your network blocks the Lichess assets!

lichess.org
Donate

Logistic Growth of Chess

Although this blog post focuses on strategy games, let's remember that people also play and share other skill-based games:
https://youtu.be/bvmWzjO53YA

Suddenly, learning strategy games looks feasible!

Although this blog post focuses on strategy games, let's remember that people also play and share other skill-based games: https://youtu.be/bvmWzjO53YA Suddenly, learning strategy games looks feasible!

only if I knew shogi, I would have written shogi -> LLM translation software like how Im doing with chess. I think if I learned a thing or two it would not be that hard since chess and shogi are like similar I think

only if I knew shogi, I would have written shogi -> LLM translation software like how Im doing with chess. I think if I learned a thing or two it would not be that hard since chess and shogi are like similar I think

@Noobmasterplayer123 said in #3:

only if I knew shogi, I would have written shogi -> LLM translation software like how Im doing with chess. I think if I learned a thing or two it would not be that hard since chess and shogi are like similar I think

No worries! It's only a matter of time before someone figures out how to do this, to provide advice for beginners who are too afraid to ask real people for it. If someday you are interested, https://lishogi.org/learn showcases the basic rules.

@Noobmasterplayer123 said in #3: > only if I knew shogi, I would have written shogi -> LLM translation software like how Im doing with chess. I think if I learned a thing or two it would not be that hard since chess and shogi are like similar I think No worries! It's only a matter of time before someone figures out how to do this, to provide advice for beginners who are too afraid to ask real people for it. If someday you are interested, https://lishogi.org/learn showcases the basic rules.

3 reasons I think chess has "succeeded" while other gams have "failed" (speaking extremely relatively) :

  • simplicity: piece movement is pretty intuitive except the knight. special rules (castling/en passant) are a major problem, but many complete beginners play without even using these.

  • ability to understand why you lost, and the belief that you might fix this. unless somebody is just grossly outmatched a chess game is usually going to feel close, or you can at least understand where you screwed up. in something like go it's often not even entirely clear who won at the end of a game. in chess results feel natural and deserved.

  • relatively easy to 'level up.' if you work at chess you will regularly improve. this is true of most games to some degree, but I find chess in particular has this somewhat unique feeling that the next huge leap is just a bit of work away. you never feel like you know much about the game, well at least not once you get passed the ~1800 ego era. even Carlsen regularly remarks how little he knows about the game, and I don't think he's being especially ironic.

3 reasons I think chess has "succeeded" while other gams have "failed" (speaking extremely relatively) : - simplicity: piece movement is pretty intuitive except the knight. special rules (castling/en passant) are a major problem, but many complete beginners play without even using these. - ability to understand why you lost, and the belief that you might fix this. unless somebody is just grossly outmatched a chess game is usually going to feel close, or you can at least understand where you screwed up. in something like go it's often not even entirely clear who won at the end of a game. in chess results feel natural and deserved. - relatively easy to 'level up.' if you work at chess you will regularly improve. this is true of most games to some degree, but I find chess in particular has this somewhat unique feeling that the next *huge* leap is just a bit of work away. you never feel like you know much about the game, well at least not once you get passed the ~1800 ego era. even Carlsen regularly remarks how little he knows about the game, and I don't think he's being especially ironic.

BA1DF552-63B7-42C1-A419-6110FC14CC46.png

![BA1DF552-63B7-42C1-A419-6110FC14CC46.png](https://image.lichess1.org/display?fmt=png&h=0&op=resize&path=forumPostBody:ghpnTHp04vEF:IEGZBM9K.png&w=864&sig=dfe0fbfe8b74dd4c7a5c50e012c1975596435426)

@OhNoMyPants said in #5:

3 reasons I think chess has "succeeded" while other gams have "failed" (speaking extremely relatively) :

Indeed, ease of recognizing the pieces and learning the game rules is a large advantage.

Regarding "ease of understanding why you lost" I think this is somewhat dependent upon having access to stronger players (at a club) or a computer that you can trust and some scientific know-how. Regardless, it's easy to believe that you are learning from a loss, whether or not what you learned is actually relevant to improving performance.

Indeed, learning tactics and simple openings and endgames can carry a player quite far, as players only need to outperform their peers. It isn't until late in learning that the uphill grind becomes exhausting and risky (immediate performance improvement not guaranteed).

@OhNoMyPants said in #5: > 3 reasons I think chess has "succeeded" while other gams have "failed" (speaking extremely relatively) : Indeed, ease of recognizing the pieces and learning the game rules is a large advantage. Regarding "ease of understanding why you lost" I think this is somewhat dependent upon having access to stronger players (at a club) or a computer that you can trust and some scientific know-how. Regardless, it's easy to believe that you are learning from a loss, whether or not what you learned is actually relevant to improving performance. Indeed, learning tactics and simple openings and endgames can carry a player quite far, as players only need to outperform their peers. It isn't until late in learning that the uphill grind becomes exhausting and risky (immediate performance improvement not guaranteed).