Your network blocks the Lichess assets!

lichess.org
Donate

Insights into Chess Visualization Skills

Great post, the thing that shocked me was that around 60% of ppl my rating can "see" the color of the squares. I've just realized I've been calculating on a monochrome board this entire time lol

Great post, the thing that shocked me was that around 60% of ppl my rating can "see" the color of the squares. I've just realized I've been calculating on a monochrome board this entire time lol

I can see the color complementarity in mind's eye after playing a position, of both pieces and squares.. but I often will not remember which is which. so I would remember turn to play and spatially what is away from me but I would only remember the mutual spatial relationships on the board (pieces and squares I would have had to consider in previous calculations, not blindfold chess btw, just in correspondence, I often get to think away from computer, why i like to let positions simmer over the day, possibly until next day when in new territory).

So I would still have 2 color of pieces and 2 colors of squares, and the diagonals would be as preserve as my other vision skills and past attention engagement would have allowed, but I have this volatility about the color. Sometime I blame the fact that we see complementary colors when we blink, as the inversion of the signal, I don't know, for sure, but wonder. Does anyone has this spatial relationships preserving, color instability, or hears about it? I hope this is not off-topic.

I also invert polarity in more abstract contexts, so it may not be retina complementary signal interpretation upon cutting the real input. (just look at the sun, ok, the moon, if sensitive eyes, or health conscious, and close your eyes, with the sun, on the yellow, i think when i would accidentally have that in the face, closing eyes, would be something like purple, an electric incandescent bulb is also on the yellow side, it there exist any of those to experiment with). So, my thinking was that our minds eye, might have to deal with such.. more i think it might be more that the interactions matter more in our thinking, the spatial ones i mean, still respecting mobilities dimensions, and what matters is the alternance of color, not the colors themselves.. Does that makes sense.. It would bug though when communicating with someone else. .and would get collapsed back on the real alternance, upon revisit of the real board.. I should say, that this polarity being more important than the convention on what values are chosen at initial condition, is kind of ubiquitous thing in many reasoning, in some quantitative sciences like physics. (electric circuit). I also have instability there.

I can see the color complementarity in mind's eye after playing a position, of both pieces and squares.. but I often will not remember which is which. so I would remember turn to play and spatially what is away from me but I would only remember the mutual spatial relationships on the board (pieces and squares I would have had to consider in previous calculations, not blindfold chess btw, just in correspondence, I often get to think away from computer, why i like to let positions simmer over the day, possibly until next day when in new territory). So I would still have 2 color of pieces and 2 colors of squares, and the diagonals would be as preserve as my other vision skills and past attention engagement would have allowed, but I have this volatility about the color. Sometime I blame the fact that we see complementary colors when we blink, as the inversion of the signal, I don't know, for sure, but wonder. Does anyone has this spatial relationships preserving, color instability, or hears about it? I hope this is not off-topic. I also invert polarity in more abstract contexts, so it may not be retina complementary signal interpretation upon cutting the real input. (just look at the sun, ok, the moon, if sensitive eyes, or health conscious, and close your eyes, with the sun, on the yellow, i think when i would accidentally have that in the face, closing eyes, would be something like purple, an electric incandescent bulb is also on the yellow side, it there exist any of those to experiment with). So, my thinking was that our minds eye, might have to deal with such.. more i think it might be more that the interactions matter more in our thinking, the spatial ones i mean, still respecting mobilities dimensions, and what matters is the alternance of color, not the colors themselves.. Does that makes sense.. It would bug though when communicating with someone else. .and would get collapsed back on the real alternance, upon revisit of the real board.. I should say, that this polarity being more important than the convention on what values are chosen at initial condition, is kind of ubiquitous thing in many reasoning, in some quantitative sciences like physics. (electric circuit). I also have instability there.

The chessboard is divided into 4 squares. The bottom left is black. The bottom right is white.
The top left is white . The top right is black. Maintain that image and you will be able to build a chessboard in your mind.
The next step is giving them coordinates. Visualize the chessboard like you read a book.
You already know you are on the say 8th rank and the first square is black and you know the alphabet, so what's next is to say black, white, black, etc. ... as you call out the squares. Like reading out loud.

Work on it slowly and read through the chessboard. It takes conviction to visualize a chessboard.

I cannot focus on the whole chessboard. Only about 4 squares, like the center squares. Maybe it's like a phone number. Some have no problem visualizing patterns or remembering names. I guess the more we use it the easier it gets.

The chessboard is divided into 4 squares. The bottom left is black. The bottom right is white. The top left is white . The top right is black. Maintain that image and you will be able to build a chessboard in your mind. The next step is giving them coordinates. Visualize the chessboard like you read a book. You already know you are on the say 8th rank and the first square is black and you know the alphabet, so what's next is to say black, white, black, etc. ... as you call out the squares. Like reading out loud. Work on it slowly and read through the chessboard. It takes conviction to visualize a chessboard. I cannot focus on the whole chessboard. Only about 4 squares, like the center squares. Maybe it's like a phone number. Some have no problem visualizing patterns or remembering names. I guess the more we use it the easier it gets.

Some positions are easier for me to visualize than others. I really struggled with the second puzzle. I just don't have a great visualization of the color of the squares.

full disclosure - I saw the solution to the 1st puzzle before I took the test. But even had I not seen it, I could've figured it out within 1-2 minutes top. It's actually not as difficult for me to visualize the 1st set of moves. It gets more and more complicated when the position is unique. The second problem was far more difficult because I had to 1) figure out where the pieces are, try to figure out the color of the squares (relevant especially with a queen on the board). 2) and remember all of this. It probably took me a good 5 minutes or more to do this.

Some positions are easier for me to visualize than others. I really struggled with the second puzzle. I just don't have a great visualization of the color of the squares. full disclosure - I saw the solution to the 1st puzzle before I took the test. But even had I not seen it, I could've figured it out within 1-2 minutes top. It's actually not as difficult for me to visualize the 1st set of moves. It gets more and more complicated when the position is unique. The second problem was far more difficult because I had to 1) figure out where the pieces are, try to figure out the color of the squares (relevant especially with a queen on the board). 2) and remember all of this. It probably took me a good 5 minutes or more to do this.

Great post and tentative research. I'm flabbergasted that 10% of +2200 players so let's say 2000 fide and above cannot see the board in their head. I would love another column for IM/GMs to have a more detailed image of how the top players visualize the board.

Still good to know, so I'm crushing blindfold tactics diagramm on aimchess. Note that it would be a great addition to the already great lichess website.

Great post and tentative research. I'm flabbergasted that 10% of +2200 players so let's say 2000 fide and above cannot see the board in their head. I would love another column for IM/GMs to have a more detailed image of how the top players visualize the board. Still good to know, so I'm crushing blindfold tactics diagramm on aimchess. Note that it would be a great addition to the already great lichess website.