Life In 19x19

hyperpape wrote:This seems inconsistent with the feats of reading that I've heard about (reading a corner sequence that's 15 or 20 moves deep in two seconds).

I sometimes do that (in a pale imitation of strong players, I guess :p), and depending on situation each tap is either a stone or a complete sequence.

nagano wrote::lol: I mean like 2-3 times a second, it's very clear that the blinking pattern has something to do with their reading. I think it is significant that only professionals and strong amateurs usually do this. I don't see many Western amateurs doing it, either.

I tend to blink rapidly (unconsciously) when I'm focusing hard on a position, especially if I'm tired. I wouldn't be surprised if that's what happening with the pros you saw.

Okay, so I got a response from Choi Dongeun. She says that it is just a habit, and doesn't really mean anything.

nagano wrote:Okay, so I got a response from Choi Dongeun. She says that it is just a habit, and doesn't really mean anything.

Nah, she just wants to keep the secret of strength to herself!

I think it has to do with altered states.

It's no secret that people go into altered states to accomplish different activities. Sports, driving and even spelling require you to shift your state of consciousness to varying degrees.

One of the behavioral signs of altered states is a marked change in blinking patterns and speed. It varies with the state, person and activity, but you'll notice this in children who are simply not listening and staring straight through you, the employee whose attention is sidetracked, people watching TV, people talking animatedly about something, etc.

I would imagine reading dozens of variations 30 moves deep would require you to alter your state drastically! What Choi Dongeun probably meant was that it wasn't something she did consciously. And she would be quite right!

This sort of unconscious blinking is also marked by slightly slower blinks. It's difficult to find changes in the speed of something like a blink but if you watch closely you should be able to notice it. (Protip: don't convince yourself something is slower just because you're expecting it to be!)

Other fun things you can watch for (with good quality video):
Eyes defocusing
Increased flaccidity of muscles, especially in the face
Slower muscle movements
Lower lip more engorged with blood
Lightening of skin pigment

I'm sure some of L19ers have more than enough free time to do this.

Joaz Banbeck wrote:... Does anyone have links to any concrete data?

probably not. Who would spend time taking data on this?

speedchase wrote:

Joaz Banbeck wrote:... Does anyone have links to any concrete data?

probably not. Who would spend time taking data on this?

Well, maybe this might be a nice idea for people interested in: NLP, hypnosis, altered states (like Phoenix describes), flow.
________
BTW, Phoenix, when I read your comment, I looked at your nickname again and immediately had to think of this.

Bonobo wrote:

speedchase wrote:

Joaz Banbeck wrote:... Does anyone have links to any concrete data?

probably not. Who would spend time taking data on this?

Well, maybe this might be a nice idea for people interested in: NLP, hypnosis, altered states (like Phoenix describes), flow.
________
BTW, Phoenix, when I read your comment, I looked at your nickname again and immediately had to think of this.

My nickname has nothing to do with Phoenix, AZ or Milton Erickson. You're right, however, to point out I was referring to NLP. I did not want to name it, because there's so much misinterpretation and bashing going on with this field. So as a message to everyone: don't get hooked up on the name and don't trust everything Google says!

There's also a lot of bugaboo about hypnosis and trance work. Which is why I prefer to use the more accepted and clinically studied term 'altered states'. There's also more misinformation about hypnosis than every other subject I've researched.

In terms of quantifying these sorts of cues in research, NLPers are much more worried about the practicalities of helping people than theory. The field of psychology has just recently begun to document eye-accessing cues, a basic set of nonverbal tells central to calibrating the way people think to themselves in real time.

The fantastic thing about the concepts that make up the framework we call NLP is that they're immediately testable. There are a lot of NLP practitioners who insist there is no theory in NLP, only observations and, to use a technical term, "things that work". The underlying idea is that "If it doesn't work, it doesn't work", and "If something doesn't work, do something else." Some fields could learn quite a bit from this kind of approach.

These 'accessing cues' were pointed out by Richard Bandler and John Grinder in the 70's. You may notice some old cartoon characters used to follow these patterns, so they weren't the first to figure this out.

If this trend continues, I expect it will be a long time until we get statistical evidence backing these ideas (or refutes them, who knows?). In the meantime, NLPers are out there creating change.

So the answer to this thread's question is up in the air until a few cognitive behaviorists decide to tackle it scientifically.


If anyone wants more information on hypnosis, a good place to visit is the IAYH website: http://youthehypnotists.com/hypnosis-le ... -hypnosis/

The following is the best resource I could find to define NLP. It's wordy and complicated, but Robert Dilts is one of the most respected NLP Society certified coaches out there: http://www.nlpu.com/NewDesign/NLPU_WhatIsNLP.html

now this thread reminded me that at evenings at tournaments, after having played 3 long games, my eyes often hurt, more than after spending a day by computer screen. i assumed it is due to more staring at the board and less blinking, but could be also a more complicated pattern i won't discover on my own. guess i should make a video of myself playing next time

I wondered what natural language processing had to do with those other topics.

That overview of NLP is not "complicated", it is vague to the point of being almost content-free.

cdybeijing wrote:Is it qualitatively different than tapping your fingers with each stone you place mentally? All strong Chinese players do that, and I have picked up the habit.

Very old thread, but I have been practicing my reading a lot lately and find myself involuntarily sort of tapping or wiggling my fingers in the air as I count off variations. I am reluctant to use it because it feels odd, but a 6d I know, when he looks at a tsumego on the board, actually looks off into space and sort of counts off the variations with his fingers against his mental image of the board, so I'm disinclined to regard it as a bad habit.

Also, I recently saw this article: http://news.uchicago.edu/article/2014/0 ... h-learning in which kids learning math are using fingers to group numbers together and there is a claim that it helps.

This sort of gesturing came up naturally for me and seems pretty useful-reading to my threshold seems much easier when doing it and now that I'm in the habit it seems that it would be hard to break.

For those curious about original question, posted in 2012, I may be able to help. I'm not that strong a player, but I do share this blinking habit for pretty solid reasons. My reasoning is that, even though I overlay the picture within my mind with the board I see, I tend to fluctuate between watching the board and looking at the board with my mind's eye. Whenever I'm reasoning in more abstract domain, I'm more inclined to close my eyes, and I may keep them closed if I really want to focus on whatever abstract reasoning that's going on, but usually I'm balancing between the two, and as a result I instinctively blink every once in a while when I drift further into the imagined board, and only to come back really soon after because it's rather pointless to dwell in imaginary board when you have the real one right in front of you.

Do they blink while reading, or while they are waiting?

Another possible explanation for the blinking is tension. When I kibitzed Takagawa and Yamabe, at the next board Maeda was playing a young 7 dan whose name I did not know. They had gotten into a big fight on the 7 dan's side of the board. As far as I could tell, the 7 dan's large group there was dead. Of course, I remained as stone-faced as I could. The 7 dan took almost two hours for one move. Maeda, who was in his 60s, was the only one in the room in kimono. He smoked a kiseru and sipped green tea while rocking gently back and forth as he gazed at the board. The 7 dan was leaning forward, partly over the board, stock still except for an occasional twitch and exaggerated blinking. While he was waiting, Maeda went to the bathroom five times.