Can You Think Like a Fighter Pilot When You Play Chess?
Martin B. Justesen
Hi everyone!Some days ago I came by a post about an article on the OODA Loop somewhere on Twitter. You might ask, what the hell is the OODA Loop? The OODA Loop is an abbreviation for Observe–Orient–Decide–Act, developed by military strategist and the United States Air Force Colonel John Boyd.
After reading about the method I then thought if fighter-pilots learn to think like this, will it make sense for chess players to do the same?Boyd made the cycle to help the fighter-pilot make decisions fast and outmaneuver their opponent. The cycle consists of four stages: Observe > Orient > Decide > Act
From the article ‘A Briefing on Metrics and Risks for Autonomous Decision-making in Aerospace Applications’
On the diagram, you can see that the fighter-pilot starts with making observations and collecting data.
To give an example, consider a doctor meeting with a patient in the emergency room for the first time to identify how to treat them. Their first priority is figuring out what information they need to collect, then collecting it.1
Next is ‘orientation’ where the pilot interprets the data and uses his previous experience. You can also watch this short video by DecisionSkills to understand the theory.
Orientation means connecting yourself with reality and seeing the world as it really is, as free as possible from the influence of cognitive biases and shortcuts.1
The OODA Loop: A Competitive Decision-Making Tool
The next step is ‘decide’.
Boyd described this step as the hypothesis stage. The implication is that we should test the decisions we make at this point in the loop, spotting their flaws and including any issues in future observation stages.1
The last step we ‘act’ and is the culmination of the last 3 stages. The feedback from this action goes back to the observe-stage, and we now have a loop.
Does OODA translate into chess?
Can you think like a fighter-pilot in chess? Let’s try to formulate the stages in chess-speak.
ObservationAt this stage, the chess player scans the board and collects information. Move ideas pop-up, free diagonals, threats, pawn structure, pins, and the tactical pattern are observed. Maybe it is noticed that the opponent has an unprotected Knight on the rim or a Bishop on c5 that can be pushed back with a combined pawn advance. The experienced player will be able to collect more data knowing how to read the board quickly.
OrientationNow that all the data of the position is collected it is time to orient. Here the chessplayer makes sense of the position and interprets the data. It is the goal to look objectively at the position and filter out the non-important factors. What is the proper plan you might ask? The more experienced and skilled the player is the better the filtering. It is here that you find the correct assessment of the position. At this stage, additional candidate moves might come into consideration or you prune away bad moves before moving to the decision stage.
DecisionAt this stage, the chessplayer runs through the available options, calculates variations, and decide on a move between the different alternatives. It might be necessary to calculate new moves to come up with a functioning hypothesis ~ a move that works.
ActThe move is made on the board and is the culmination of the three last stages. The move is tested against the opponent’s reply, and the feedback brought to step 1 (observation).
Did that make any sense to you? If it did you might be able to play chess like a fighter pilot! My own evaluation of this method is that it helps to break down the process of finding a move into stages highlighting separate skills. The heavy emphasis on calculation from the Kotov-school often shades for other skills in chess such as observing the position, understanding what’s going on, and filtering the noise away to find a practical move.
If you have thought about a position for some time and are still unsure what to play, then it is essential to be ruthlessly pragmatic. You have to ask yourself whether further thought is really going to help you make a better decision. Suppose your lengthy cogitation is the result of indecision; for example, say there are two moves, both of which have roughly equal merit. If you have not been able to decide between them up to now, it is reasonable to suppose that there is in fact little to choose between them. Considerable further thought might eventually reveal some tiny difference, but it is rare that this expenditure of time is worthwhile. GM John Nunn, Secrets of Practical Chess
Leave a comment and let me know what you think?Best, Martin
*pstt..if you haven’t yet got a copy of my book it’s currently on sale🙈
In order to unsubscribe, click here.
If you were forwarded this newsletter and you like it, you can subscribe here.
Created with Revue by Twitter.