Answers.Body: <p>If you are interested in the psychology of learning and improving in chess, I really recommend reading <em>Chess for Zebras</em> from Jonathan Rowson (and/or <em>Move First Think Later</em> from Willy Hendriks, which has a very similar message).</p>
  <p>tl;dr: <strong>Yes</strong>, finding the &quot;best&quot; move continually becomes more and more natural (and thus faster!) while you improve (although even masters never reach the point of perfection).</p>
  <p>Rowson explicitly distinguishes between <em>Knowledge</em> (theory learned from books etc.) and <em>Skill</em> (the practiced ability to actually use that knowledge on the board). If you think about learning languages, the former would be knowledge about grammar and vocabulary (you can learn that to a reasonable degree in school), and the latter would be the ability to speak/write <strong>fluently</strong> (you can only really learn this by constant practice of the language). Someone with only school <em>knowledge</em> will have to consciously think about everything and thus needs more time than a <em>skilled</em> speaker to form sentences - even if he/she knows all the parts!</p>
  <p>It works roughly the same way in chess, up to the point that strong masters can often subconsciously &quot;feel&quot; a move within seconds and then &quot;just&quot; have to use their calculation abilities to make sure it actually works.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-07-30T08:09:57.443Z
Answers.Text: Thank you! @Annatar,that answers everything.
Answers.UserDisplayName: bretlee
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-07-30T07:55:14.147Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2020-07-30T08:01:10.697Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2020-07-30T08:01:10.697Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Annatar
Body: <p>I have started playing &quot;real chess&quot; but the problem is it takes too much time. How will I able to win in small time-controls? Does this process of searching the opponents threats and looking for candidate moves ever become a second-nature?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-07-29T16:42:48.200Z
Comments.Text: What do you mean by "real chess"?
Comments.UserDisplayName: Herb
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-07-29T17:38:07.630Z
Comments.Text: It means before playing a move you check all the opponents threat,captures or any hanging pieces you might have and then you come up with the right move.And hope chess refers to you just play a move cause you want to play it.
Comments.UserDisplayName: bretlee
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-07-29T17:43:59.890Z
Comments.Text: @HerbWolfe: This is referring to Dan Heisman’s concept of “Real chess”. See the earlier question [How to get out of “Hope” chess into “Real” chess](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/1030), which has a link to one of Heisman’s articles.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Stephen
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-07-30T06:27:18.640Z
Comments.Text: "Real chess" is played with time control, so you won't ever make the full process
Comments.UserDisplayName: David
Tags: <strategy>
Title: Does this process ever becomes a second nature?
ThreadText: # Does this process ever becomes a second nature?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2020-07-29)
  
  I have started playing "real chess" but the problem is it takes too much time. How will I able to win in small time-controls? Does this process of searching the opponents threats and looking for candidate moves ever become a second-nature?
  
  **Tags:** strategy
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: What do you mean by "real chess"?  
  > **username_0**: It means before playing a move you check all the opponents threat,captures or any hanging pieces you might have and then you come up with the right move.And hope chess refers to you just play a move cause you want to play it.  
  > **username_2**: @username_1Wolfe: This is referring to Dan Heisman’s concept of “Real chess”. See the earlier question [How to get out of “Hope” chess into “Real” chess](https://chess.stackexchange.com/questions/1030), which has a link to one of Heisman’s articles.  
  > **username_3**: "Real chess" is played with time control, so you won't ever make the full process  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2020-07-30. Score: 4 | Accepted answer
  
  If you are interested in the psychology of learning and improving in chess, I really recommend reading *Chess for Zebras* from Jonathan Rowson (and/or *Move First Think Later* from Willy Hendriks, which has a very similar message).
  
  tl;dr: **Yes**, finding the "best" move continually becomes more and more natural (and thus faster!) while you improve (although even masters never reach the point of perfection).
  
  Rowson explicitly distinguishes between *Knowledge* (theory learned from books etc.) and *Skill* (the practiced ability to actually use that knowledge on the board). If you think about learning languages, the former would be knowledge about grammar and vocabulary (you can learn that to a reasonable degree in school), and the latter would be the ability to speak/write **fluently** (you can only really learn this by constant practice of the language). Someone with only school *knowledge* will have to consciously think about everything and thus needs more time than a *skilled* speaker to form sentences - even if he/she knows all the parts!
  
  It works roughly the same way in chess, up to the point that strong masters can often subconsciously "feel" a move within seconds and then "just" have to use their calculation abilities to make sure it actually works.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: Thank you! @username_4,that answers everything.  
  
  ---
  
  