♡ 39 ( +1 | -1 ) depth of analysis - number of moves carried forwarFor those who can analyse at a depth of past three - how many moves do you carry forward.
e.g. do you consider the three most likely moves your opponent might make and then consider the three moves you might make in response to those so you carry 9 moves forward. Or do you consider the most likely move and only carry one move forward in your planning?
♡ 48 ( +1 | -1 ) Despite my 'impressive' rating, i tend to analyze in lines rather than webs. I'll consider my opponent's most likely move(s) and try to dismiss as many options as i can to save time. Then i'll do the same for my move, and so on. Of course sometimes i do sometimes consider quite a few possible variations, but not to the extent of other 2000 people, because of this i do tend to miss quite a lot. I can see quite far ahead (8 moves+) but it's the depth rather than the length of my analysis where i can struggle.
♡ 26 ( +1 | -1 ) Quality over quantity?It's better to look two moves ahead thoroughly than looking five moves ahead, missing something your opponent could do after your first move. But in (semi-)forced lines, of course you can look deeper and deeper ...
♡ 29 ( +1 | -1 ) Yeah, i am better in forced and semi-forced posiotions, and in end-games, because you don't need to think with so much depth. Trouble is i tend to focus too much time on trying to find killer combos. I even occasionaly commit the unspeakable crime of not developing properly...
♡ 48 ( +1 | -1 ) It depends. I generally analyze in several phases: first I identify candidate moves, then I review them in more detail, then I review my top candidate even more carefully before actually making the move. The idea is to discard unproductive lines as quickly as possible, and to analyze important lines as deeply as time allows.
To answer your question, then, the number of lines I carry forward varies. "As many as necessary, but no more."
♡ 51 ( +1 | -1 ) I do it similar to kewms. But often I do not carry forward more than 2 to 3 lines. If my opponent has a lot of good options, then I usually wait until he decides before I analyse the line any further. I don't waste my time; and once he makes the decision, then I will have plenty of time to respond.
The key is picking your candidate moves. That has a lot to do with pattern recognition and experience.
♡ 75 ( +1 | -1 ) >>If my opponent has a lot of good options, then I usually wait until he decides before I analyse the line any further. I don't waste my time; and once he makes the decision, then I will have plenty of time to respond.<<
That's generally my approach as well...as long as I'm sure that the move is my best choice, and none of his choices contains a refutation. But positions that critical only come up a few times per game.
As a side note, I use notes extensively so that I don't have to rework my analysis from the beginning after every move. HOWEVER, I've found that it's still important to recheck when the position actually appears on the board. Even if I saw it coming, I didn't necessarily work through all the implications.
♡ 15 ( +1 | -1 ) The best I was ever able to do was 8 moves ahead, but those days have long since passed me by (15 years ago, at least!). Nowadays, I'm at 2-3 if I'm lucky...
♡ 71 ( +1 | -1 ) What does it mean to see, say, 5 moves ahead? Does it mean that for the next 5 moves, you'll know for sure that whatever move I make you'll know what move you'll make to counter it? Or is like a chess puzzle, where you have, as one example, "white mates in 5"? In this example, then White knows for certain that no matter what Black does, he can win in 5 moves. So, if someone says that they can see 5 moves ahead, does it mean that they know what their next 5 moves will be irrespective of what his opponent does? If so, then shouldn't it be said that a person, ON OCCASION, and in certain circumstances, can see 5 moves ahead?