Consistent with the theme of past Sunday Book Reviews (and references; see Catalog of Chess Mistakes, Why You Lose At Chess, Surprise in Chess, and Sense of Danger) a trio of relevant quotes, pro, con and general:
One of the important ways of conducting a chess game is to develop in such a way that the opponent will slightly overrate his position, that he will feel obligated to attain something, that his expectations will be somewhat greater than justified. When such is the case, the opponent tends to omit in his calculations considerationf of any and all continuations which give results inferior to his expectations.
Grandmaster Larry Evans, Chess Life, 1961
When your opponent complicates things, there is a strong temptation to look for a refutation of his idea, to pick up the gaunlet, to rise to the challenge. Of course, this is exactly what he wants and why such distractions must be resisted. If you have already decided on a good strategy, why drop it for something that suits your opponent? This requires strong self control, as pressure to switch can be both internal and external. Your ego wants to prove you can beat him at his own game as well as to quiet your critics - actual or potential.
Gary Kasparov, How Life Imitates Chess, 2007
Abstract
Expert chess players, specialized in different openings, recalled positions and solved problems within and outside their area of specialization. While their general expertise was at a similar level players performed better with stimuli from their area of specialization.* The effect of specialization on both recall and problem solving was strong enough to override general expertise – players remembering positions and solving problems from their area of specialization performed at around the level of players one standard deviation above them in general skill.** Their problem solving strategy also changed depending on whether the problem was within their area of specialization or not. When it was, they searched more in depth and less in breadth; with problems outside their area of specialization, the reverse. The knowledge that comes from familiarity with a problem area is more important than general purpose strategies in determining how an expert will tackle it...
Merim Bilalić and Peter McLeod, "Specialization Effect and its influence on Memory and Problem Solving in Expert Chess Players"
[* I guess this is why we study our favorite chess openings, especially our "pet lines" as GM Alburt calls them – RK]
[** After posting "A Slice of Jerome Gambit" I asked ChessBase8 to check, and it seems that when I play the Jerome Gambit online my performance rating is about 225 points above my actual (mostly-FICS) internet rating. I do not know how that translates into standard deviations for FICS (and elsewhere), but if the United States Chess Federation standard deviation is around 200 points, the 225 points of improvement seems to be about what Bilalić and Peter McLeod were suggesting. – RK]
