Answers.Body: <p>When a GM, or even lesser strong players reach a position that is totally unfamiliar, they have to break it down into components. They evaluate the following for BOTH sides. In general, a lot of this is done subconsciously by strong players.</p>
  
  <ol>
  <li>Material, and what pieces are better. Sometimes a well-placed knight can be better than a rook, for example.</li>
  <li>Can any of the pieces be shut out of play?</li>
  <li>King safety.</li>
  <li>Are there any direct threats?</li>
  <li>Pawn structure and any corresponding weaknesses. (like doubled pawns, but not all doubled pawns are weak or bad as sometimes they provide great protection...more in the endgame can they really be a big problem, but you have to judge this carefully.)</li>
  <li>How many pawn islands does each side have? (less is usually better)</li>
  <li>Where are the pawn majorities? (Usually a q-side pawn majority is easier to mobilize)</li>
  <li>Passed pawns.</li>
  <li>Who has more space?</li>
  <li>Who better controls the center?</li>
  <li>Are there open lines, and who can control them?</li>
  <li>Are there half-open files that you can put pressure down?</li>
  <li>Strong outposts like being able to put a knight on d6, or a bishop on h6. This can disrupt communication between the two sides of the board, and make defense moving from one side to the other very difficult.</li>
  <li>Any colored square weaknesses, like being weak on the light or dark squares.</li>
  <li>Any lead in development for either side.</li>
  <li>Which trades are good for me, and bad for him? (exchanges are one of the least written about subjects in chess, but they are one of the most important factors in chess as you get stronger. Too bad it has not been translated, but there is a book in Russian called "The Encyclopedia of Exchanges".)</li>
  <li>Related to number 16, and that is who has the better endgame if certain trades happen?</li>
  </ol>
  
  <p>Finally, based on these factors, players weigh them based on experience and importance, and then they come up with a list of candidate moves, and they calculate likely continuations.</p>
  
  <p>I might have missed a point, but that is a pretty complete list.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-08T20:09:33.087Z
Answers.Text: @PhishMaster  -  and how do those things relate to each other weight wise to help a GM pick a move?  Are those what a program uses to analyse the possible moves?  That tells  us more WHAT they might think about rather than HOW they actually think.
Answers.UserDisplayName: yobamamama
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-09T22:47:50.917Z
Answers.Text: @yobamamama yes, to a large extent, chess engines/programs are written to evaluate a position using similar intuition to a human player, so there is great overlap with the items in this list.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Jordan Rieger
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-09T22:49:20.983Z
Answers.Text: I edited my answer to include: "players weigh them based on experience and importance", which is how they use those factors.
Answers.UserDisplayName: PhishMaster
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-09T23:40:49.163Z
Answers.Text: @PhishMaster   --  Agreed.  But how does a programmer translate those to a computer program to use them meaningfully?  Are there any others that a complete program would need to become the best ?
Answers.UserDisplayName: yobamamama
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-10T00:07:22.557Z
Answers.Text: What does this question have to do with programming? Other than using engines, I could care less about programming, and how they do it. That is their problem and job...not mine. I am not a programmer.
Answers.UserDisplayName: PhishMaster
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-10T23:45:17.623Z
Answers.Text: @PhishMaster  -- You may not care but a lot of other questions here are about how to program their own engine to do analysis.
Answers.UserDisplayName: yobamamama
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-19T16:20:58.843Z
Answers.Text: @yobamamama to answer your question - it very much depends on style of play; and the state of the game.  There's no "this is the fixed order of importance"; it's a bit like asking a driver if they think looking out for pedestrians is more important than looking out for other cars.  The answer is it depends if you're on a motorway or in a city.  As for programming - if the OP cared about programming; then they should explicitly say so.  Hoping that people can guess the intention is daft.
Answers.UserDisplayName: UKMonkey
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-01-25T02:41:26.820Z
Answers.Text: Which goes back to the same question.  How does a player or a computer decide which ones to give what weight to when choosing their  next move.
Answers.UserDisplayName: edwina oliver
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-01-26T20:48:58.097Z
Answers.Text: Could you talk more about your point 9 - ''Who has more space?'' - ?
Answers.UserDisplayName: Marcelo
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2020-01-26T21:57:35.447Z
Answers.Text: Space means more territory, usually because their pawns are farther advanced in the opposing side of the board. It is amplified when it is near the opposing king.
Answers.UserDisplayName: PhishMaster
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-08T18:52:16.890Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-12-08T20:39:44.507Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2019-12-08T20:39:44.507Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: PhishMaster
Answers.Body: <p>Depends a lot from player to player and also position to position I think.</p>
  
  <p>The fundamental is that their intuition (built up from studying and playing and solving a lot) will suggest a few moves (or occasionally only one) and they will calculate those moves (candidate moves) and pick whichever they think is best based on calculation and evaluation.</p>
  
  <p>They might find more candidate moves suggest themselves whilst they are calculating the first ones.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-08T21:37:40.257Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-12-08T21:37:40.257Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hamish
Answers.Body: <p>GMs think differently.  Most players would use pattern recognition, intuition, and calculation of variations for candidate moves.</p>
  
  <p>Some GMs will often think past the board and consider the opponent.</p>
  
  <p>They also do other things that are beyond my pay grade. I read about GM thinking once and it convinced me to give up that goal. I  just enjoyed playing as I could not think like they did in what. To me, it was somewhat contradictory and illogical in ways. </p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-10T15:12:39.910Z
Answers.Text: Have any links to articles describing the way of thinking you found unintuitive? Just curious. I thought they relied even more on pattern recognition than regular players.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Jarrod Christman
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-10T15:26:30.203Z
Answers.Text: @JarrodChristman -- They do use pattern analysis a lot.  They are so trained and experienced that such is intuitive without really thinking.  I was referring to that book I read long long ago and the things it described GMs doing.  I  stopped reading when I realized that GM was not in my future.  One thing I do remember was playing the person and other off the board factors they considered.
Answers.UserDisplayName: yobamamama
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-10T21:58:09.507Z
Answers.Text: It’s a long shot, but would your source happen to be “think like a grandmaster” by Alexander Kotov?
Answers.UserDisplayName: 11684
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-10T23:46:35.100Z
Answers.Text: Possibly.   I read the book, or part of it anyway over 30 years ago.  Maybe 40 or more.   Has to be over 40 as I had given up on tournament chess and did not read any more chess books.
Answers.UserDisplayName: yobamamama
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2019-12-08T18:12:44.903Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2019-12-11T01:14:49.730Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2019-12-11T01:14:49.730Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: yobamamama
Body: <p>How do Grandmasters think in an unknown position and make the best move?  </p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-12-09T19:05:45.850Z
Comments.Text: An interesting anecdote from when I was learning chess: they looked at how grandmasters and novices viewed the chess board by showing them a position for a brief moment and then asking them to re-create it.  Obviously the GMs did better, but what was interesting was the kinds of mistakes.  The novices might misplace a piece by one square, or miss a pawn.  The GMs, when they made mistakes, often misplaced several pieces, *forming a tactically similar position*.  When this test was done using randomized board positions, the GMs did no better than novices, and often worse).
Comments.UserDisplayName: Cort Ammon
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2019-12-09T19:06:10.833Z
Comments.Text: While that's not really an answer to your question, I find it will likely provide insight to supplement the answers.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Cort Ammon
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2020-01-10T12:44:17.470Z
Comments.Text: My understanding is that GMs do not encounter unknown positions.  If there was a type of position that they didn't know then their opponents would know that and play it against them.  I'm glad that there is little at stake in my games and so little incentive for my opponents to study my games for weaknesses.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Michael West
Tags: <strategy><positional-play><grandmaster><calculation>
Title: Positional thinking by Grandmasters
ThreadText: # Positional thinking by Grandmasters
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2019-12-08)
  
  How do Grandmasters think in an unknown position and make the best move?
  
  **Tags:** strategy, positional-play, grandmaster, calculation
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: An interesting anecdote from when I was learning chess: they looked at how grandmasters and novices viewed the chess board by showing them a position for a brief moment and then asking them to re-create it.  Obviously the GMs did better, but what was interesting was the kinds of mistakes.  The novices might misplace a piece by one square, or miss a pawn.  The GMs, when they made mistakes, often misplaced several pieces, *forming a tactically similar position*.  When this test was done using randomized board positions, the GMs did no better than novices, and often worse).  
  > **username_1**: While that's not really an answer to your question, I find it will likely provide insight to supplement the answers.  
  > **username_2**: My understanding is that GMs do not encounter unknown positions.  If there was a type of position that they didn't know then their opponents would know that and play it against them.  I'm glad that there is little at stake in my games and so little incentive for my opponents to study my games for weaknesses.  
  
  ---
  
  ## 3 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2019-12-08. Score: 35
  
  When a GM, or even lesser strong players reach a position that is totally unfamiliar, they have to break it down into components. They evaluate the following for BOTH sides. In general, a lot of this is done subconsciously by strong players.
  
  1. Material, and what pieces are better. Sometimes a well-placed knight can be better than a rook, for example.
  2. Can any of the pieces be shut out of play?
  3. King safety.
  4. Are there any direct threats?
  5. Pawn structure and any corresponding weaknesses. (like doubled pawns, but not all doubled pawns are weak or bad as sometimes they provide great protection...more in the endgame can they really be a big problem, but you have to judge this carefully.)
  6. How many pawn islands does each side have? (less is usually better)
  7. Where are the pawn majorities? (Usually a q-side pawn majority is easier to mobilize)
  8. Passed pawns.
  9. Who has more space?
  10. Who better controls the center?
  11. Are there open lines, and who can control them?
  12. Are there half-open files that you can put pressure down?
  13. Strong outposts like being able to put a knight on d6, or a bishop on h6. This can disrupt communication between the two sides of the board, and make defense moving from one side to the other very difficult.
  14. Any colored square weaknesses, like being weak on the light or dark squares.
  15. Any lead in development for either side.
  16. Which trades are good for me, and bad for him? (exchanges are one of the least written about subjects in chess, but they are one of the most important factors in chess as you get stronger. Too bad it has not been translated, but there is a book in Russian called "The Encyclopedia of Exchanges".)
  17. Related to number 16, and that is who has the better endgame if certain trades happen?
  
  Finally, based on these factors, players weigh them based on experience and importance, and then they come up with a list of candidate moves, and they calculate likely continuations.
  
  I might have missed a point, but that is a pretty complete list.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_4**: @username_3  -  and how do those things relate to each other weight wise to help a GM pick a move?  Are those what a program uses to analyse the possible moves?  That tells  us more WHAT they might think about rather than HOW they actually think.  
  > **username_5**: @username_4 yes, to a large extent, chess engines/programs are written to evaluate a position using similar intuition to a human username_0, so there is great overlap with the items in this list.  
  > **username_3**: I edited my answer to include: "players weigh them based on experience and importance", which is how they use those factors.  
  > **username_4**: @username_3   --  Agreed.  But how does a programmer translate those to a computer program to use them meaningfully?  Are there any others that a complete program would need to become the best ?  
  > **username_3**: What does this question have to do with programming? Other than using engines, I could care less about programming, and how they do it. That is their problem and job...not mine. I am not a programmer.  
  > **username_4**: @username_3  -- You may not care but a lot of other questions here are about how to program their own engine to do analysis.  
  > **username_6**: @username_4 to answer your question - it very much depends on style of play; and the state of the game.  There's no "this is the fixed order of importance"; it's a bit like asking a driver if they think looking out for pedestrians is more important than looking out for other cars.  The answer is it depends if you're on a motorway or in a city.  As for programming - if the OP cared about programming; then they should explicitly say so.  Hoping that people can guess the intention is daft.  
  > **username_7**: Which goes back to the same question.  How does a username_0 or a computer decide which ones to give what weight to when choosing their  next move.  
  > **username_8**: Could you talk more about your point 9 - ''Who has more space?'' - ?  
  > **username_3**: Space means more territory, usually because their pawns are farther advanced in the opposing side of the board. It is amplified when it is near the opposing king.  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_9 on 2019-12-08. Score: 7
  
  Depends a lot from username_0 to username_0 and also position to position I think.
  
  The fundamental is that their intuition (built up from studying and playing and solving a lot) will suggest a few moves (or occasionally only one) and they will calculate those moves (candidate moves) and pick whichever they think is best based on calculation and evaluation.
  
  They might find more candidate moves suggest themselves whilst they are calculating the first ones.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_4 on 2019-12-08. Score: 4
  
  GMs think differently. Most players would use pattern recognition, intuition, and calculation of variations for candidate moves.
  
  Some GMs will often think past the board and consider the opponent.
  
  They also do other things that are beyond my pay grade. I read about GM thinking once and it convinced me to give up that goal. I just enjoyed playing as I could not think like they did in what. To me, it was somewhat contradictory and illogical in ways.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_10**: Have any links to articles describing the way of thinking you found unintuitive? Just curious. I thought they relied even more on pattern recognition than regular players.  
  > **username_4**: @username_10 -- They do use pattern analysis a lot.  They are so trained and experienced that such is intuitive without really thinking.  I was referring to that book I read long long ago and the things it described GMs doing.  I  stopped reading when I realized that GM was not in my future.  One thing I do remember was playing the person and other off the board factors they considered.  
  > **username_11**: It’s a long shot, but would your source happen to be “think like a grandmaster” by Alexander Kotov?  
  > **username_4**: Possibly.   I read the book, or part of it anyway over 30 years ago.  Maybe 40 or more.   Has to be over 40 as I had given up on tournament chess and did not read any more chess books.  
  
  ---
  
  