"Chess, like science, is the kiss of death for optimists. Only the most naïve rookie feels optimistic in Chess. Instead, Chess players think about their doom. In a study called "Chess Masters' Hypothesis Testing", Michelle Cowley and Ruth Byrne of Trinity College, University of Dublin, set out to put that to the test with actual chess players and the falsification idea held up.
The best chess players, they found, used falsification to determine their future moves. Bad chess players thought about the counter-moves of opponents in a very positive light (i.e. the opponent will do exactly what is needed in order to lose) while the best chess players thought about what opponents' counter-moves would damage them the most if they enacted a strategy; they falsified their own hypotheses.
So it isn't just scientists who regularly use falsification, but also chess players."
Your thoughts?
I don't know how "bad" the bad chess players were in the test, but expecting/hoping that your opponent will do anything other than play the best continuation is surely asking for trouble at any standard?
ReplyDelete