# Chess/Sample chess game

\_\_NOTOC\_\_ This is a **sample game of chess**, recorded in standard
algebraic chess notation and accompanied by commentary.

White has the first move and therefore a significant initiative. White
wins 10% more often than Black simply on the power of that initiative.
It is important not to squander the opening advantage with a move that
does nothing.

## Moves 1-5

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 1. e4

White chooses an excellent move, common among beginners and experts
alike. The move has several advantages:

1.  It stakes out territory in the center. A player who controls the
    center with pawns will probably be able to find good squares for
    their pieces.
2.  It opens a diagonal for the king\'s bishop to move out and attack,
    which also facilitates kingside castling.
3.  It opens a diagonal for the queen to move out and attack.

This move follows the two most important principles of an opening
move: 1. develop a piece, or facilitate the development of a piece, and
2. control the center.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 1\... e5

This move for Black is good for the same reasons listed above. Note that
the two e-file pawns are not threatening to capture each other, because
pawns capture diagonally. Instead, they merely block each other until
something breaks the logjam.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 2. Nf3

White makes another fine move. White is mobilizing forces by bringing a
knight forward into an attacking position. Because the white knight is
attacking Black\'s e-pawn, White is maintaining the initiative by
forcing Black to react. So now, Black must choose a move that defends
the pawn, or else he might lose it. The initiative may appear to offer
only a slight edge, but at the hands of a master, it can be deadly.

White could have moved out the queen instead, but that would be
dangerous. The queen is generally too valuable to trade for any other
piece except the enemy queen (however, it can be traded for multiple
enemy pieces of equivalent total value, such as two bishops and three
pawns; two bishops and a knight; or a rook, a bishop, and a pawn, for
instance), so it can\'t do much by itself unless the opponent carelessly
leaves pieces unprotected. Thus, your opponent can keep attacking your
queen with different pieces. And while you are simply moving your queen
around, your opponent will be able to keep developing their pieces. It
is better to wait until there are other pieces in the fray which can
serve as shock troops for her.

White also could have moved out the kingside bishop. That would not be a
bad idea, but it isn\'t clear yet whether the bishop wants to be at c4,
b5, or possibly even behind the pawns. The knight, on the other hand,
usually goes to f3 anyway, because the other squares it could move to
are inferior: on h3, it would not attack the center, and on e2, it would
be temporarily in the way.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 2\... f6?

Black makes a worthless move, entering the infamous Damiano Defense.
Black needed to defend his pawn with either
2\...Nc6
(main line) or
2\...d6
(Philidor Defense), or counterattack White\'s pawn with
2\...Nf6
(Petrov\'s Defense). Either of the knight moves would have maintained
the balance of the game by contesting the center. If Black felt brave,
he could also venture into the murky waters of
2\...f5
(Latvian Gambit) or
2\...d5
(Elephant Gambit).

The move 2\...f6 appears to defend the threatened e-pawn, but this is an
illusion, as the game shall demonstrate. Black has weakened the
kingside, allowing attacks on the f7-square, which is protected by
nothing other than the king itself. This weakening is called \"opening
the door,\" and White must take advantage of this.

Black has failed to follow the principles here and has received no
compensation. He has affected the center, but the move 2\...d6 would
have done the same and gained some control on the queenside. Also, he
has not developed a piece, nor has he facilitated the development of a
piece. 2\...Nc6 would have developed and gained control in the center,
and 2\...d6 would have gained some control on the c8--h3 diagonal and
facilitated the development of the light-squared bishop. Black has also
weakened his kingside. Any pawn moves in front of a castled king can be
useful weaknesses for the opponent. Since pawns cannot go backwards, you
should be very cautious of any pawn moves on the side you wish to castle
on (usually the kingside).

The moves 2\...f5 and 2\...d5 seem to not adhere to the principles. Why
have these moves been brought up? The fact is that the best moves in a
position will sometimes break principles, but they will offer
compensation for whatever gains are lost by not following the principle.
So, in a sense, the principles tell us what questions to ask ourselves
when making a move, such as, \"Should I develop now?\" So it is
important to understand the principles in order to decide if you are
getting enough compensation. It is not always good to blindly do
whatever the principles dictate.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 3. Nxe5

White attacks immediately, *sacrificing* the white knight for a pawn,
although White would generally need three pawns for the knight to have
material equality. Before making this sacrifice, White has to calculate
to make sure he is going to gain something that compensates for the lost
material. In this case, as the following moves show, White knows that he
will gain an attack on the enemy king, forcing Black to either surrender
more material or allow checkmate.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 3\... fxe5?

Black makes the only move consistent with 2\...f6, but it is not best.
The best try for an equal game was 3\...Qe7, *skewering* White\'s knight
and pawn and putting pressure on White\'s king. That is to say, the
queen would indirectly be attacking everything in the e-file. After the
knight moved away, the queen could take on e4 with check, regaining the
pawn. White would, however, have a large advantage because of his lead
in development and Black\'s weakened kingside pawn structure, e.g. 4.Nf3
Qxe4+ 5.Be2, likely followed by 0-0 and Nc3, attacking the queen.

Retaking the knight now merely invites White\'s queen to jump into the
fray with check. The fact that Black cannot afford to take the knight
shows that 2\...f6 did not really protect the pawn at all.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 4. Qh5+

The game\'s first check! There are three legal ways to respond to check:

1.  Capture the piece giving check. Here, this is impossible, as Black
    has nothing which can move to h5.
2.  Interpose a piece between the king and the piece giving check. Black
    could play 4\...g6, but that would lose a rook to 5.Qxe5+ and
    6.Qxh8.
3.  Move the king out of check. Moving the king to f7 leaves it in check
    and is thus illegal, so e7 is the only square to move out of check.

Note that White has forked the king on e8 and the pawn on e5. There is
no time for Black to protect both, so no matter what Black does to get
out of check, White\'s queen can take on e5.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 4\... Ke7

This move leaves Black in a dangerous position because the black king is
so exposed. Furthermore, the black rooks, bishops, and queen still have
no way to get out. The black position is no more developed than it was
at the start of the game.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 5. Qxe5+

Another check. Black now has only one legal move: Black can\'t interpose
anything between the king and queen, and he can\'t take the queen, so
the black king must be moved out of check. There is only one square next
to Black\'s king which White\'s queen is not threatening.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 5\... Kf7

Black moves the king; it\'s the only available move to play. White\'s
queen is a dangerous attacker. However, because it is too valuable to
trade for anything, it can only take undefended pieces. Everything in
Black\'s camp that the white queen could target is defended by
something, so the queen has done all it can do by itself. It is time to
bring in reinforcements.

## Moves 6-10

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 6. Bc4+

This is an excellent move to keep the pressure on Black because it
develops a piece and gives check while preventing Black from
consolidating.

If White had played less energetically with 6.Nc3, the advantage would
have evaporated instantly. Black could answer with 6\...Nf6, bringing a
piece to the defense. If Black gets his king to safety, Black might
actually be winning: White has only two pawns for the sacrificed knight,
giving him a material disadvantage.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 6\.... d5!

Black makes an excellent defensive move. Never forget that moving the
king isn\'t the only way to get out of check!

Admittedly, Black\'s d-pawn is a dead duck. It is attacked by White\'s
bishop, queen, and pawn, three times altogether, while it is defended
only once, by Black\'s queen. The sacrifice is worthwhile, though, to
open up lines for the queen and bishop so they can help with the
defense. Now, if White fails to find the best continuation, Black has
some chance to counterattack.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 7. Bxd5+

White gives check yet again, which prevents Black from doing anything
constructive. Let\'s review the three ways to get out of check:

1.  Capture the piece giving check. Black could play 7\...Qxd5. However,
    White would simply take the queen with 8.Qxd5+. With such a huge
    material disadvantage and an exposed king, Black could resign
    without feeling like a quitter.
2.  Interpose a piece. Black could play 7\...Be6. However, that would be
    inadvisable because the bishop would be defended only once (by
    Black\'s king) and attacked twice (by White\'s queen and bishop). In
    fact, White could end the game at once with 8.Qxe6#.
3.  Move the king. Alas, the only square which is not under attack by
    White is g6, even further into the open. It beats the alternatives,
    though.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 7\... Kg6

Now White must think of a way to continue the attack. White would like
to play 8.Qf5+, driving Black\'s king to h6 where it can be cornered and
checkmated, but Black\'s c8-bishop is guarding the square f5. If Black
hadn\'t interposed with 6\...d5, Black would now be subject to a forced
checkmate. As it stands, White has to be more creative to keep the
initiative.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 8. h4

Again, White finds a strong continuation. White is threatening to force
the Black king to h6 after all with h5+. Also, the pawn protects the g5
square, which is important in some mating combinations. Finally, there
is some chance the rook will be able to join the attack down the h-file.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 8\... h5

Black plays a tenacious defense in a precarious situation. White\'s pawn
is blocked from further advances, and the king has a new escape square
on h7. Black\'s position is still precarious, but there is no immediate
way for White to force checkmate.

Now let us take a step deeper into chess reasoning. White knows Black is
on the run for the moment, but if Black has a chance to regroup, the
game is far from over. Three pawns for the sacrificed knight is roughly
material equality.

If White brings additional forces forward with 9.Nc3 or 9.d4, the
obvious developing moves, Black will harass White\'s queen with
9\...Bd6. That would force White to lose time protecting the queen.
Black would gain enough time to get the black pieces out and get the
black king to safety.

White desperately wants a quick kill but can\'t see how to get it. White
is annoyed that Black\'s bishop on c8 prevents White from playing 9.Qf5+
and administering the coup de grace. Therefore, White asks the question,
\"What if Black\'s bishop were not on c8? If only that annoyance were
removed, I could do great things.\"

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 9. Bxb7!!

White finds a forceful continuation that puts Black in dire straits.
Black\'s best bet now is to ignore White\'s bishop and harass White\'s
queen with 9\...Bd6, but then White calmly plays 10.Qa5, maintaining the
threat on f5 and forcing Black to lose material. One possible line of
play is 9\...Bd6 10.Qa5 Nc6 11.Bxc6 Rb8. The checkmate has been avoided,
but now White has a large material advantage of four extra pawns, and he
can win slowly and surely with patient developing moves like 12.Nc3.
(Note that after 9\...Bd6 10.Qa5, Black cannot play 10\...Bxb7 because
of 11.Qf5+, with the same play as in the main variation below.)

As it happens, Black does not understand the danger.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 9\... Bxb7?

Black grabs the bishop to gain a material advantage (bishop plus knight
versus four pawns). This is Black\'s critical error, allowing White\'s
attack to break through. From here on, White has a forced
mate.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 10. Qf5+

The crushing move can be unleashed at last. Black has only one legal
reply.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 10\... Kh6

This is the only move to get out of check: the white queen cannot be
taken, and any other moves for the king would leave it under attack.

## Moves 11-14

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 11. d4+

White continues the attack with a special kind of check, a *discovered
check*. White moves a pawn, but it isn\'t the pawn which gives check. It
is White\'s bishop, attacking from its home square, which delivers the
blow.

Note that Black\'s king has no legal moves, and White\'s bishop is safe
from capture, so interposition is the only option. But because it *is*
an option, this is not yet checkmate.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 11\... g5

At this point, White has an easy win with 12.Bxg5+ Kg7 13.Bxd8. The
material advantage of a queen and five pawns for a bishop and a knight
is overwhelming. However, weak players have been known to play on in
completely hopeless positions rather than resign. In order to forestall
a long, boring mop-up operation, White looks for a direct kill.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 12. Qf7!

Truly a masterful move! White doesn\'t even call check, but mate is now
inevitable.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 12\... Qe7

Nothing can save Black now short of White forgetting the plan, but there
is some logic to Black\'s move. Where can White\'s queen go? Any of
Black\'s pieces that it could take are protected. If White trades
queens, then the attack is over, and Black is winning. Finally, if
White\'s queen simply retreats, Black will strike back with check:
13\...Qxe4+! However, White must have foreseen this possibility when
playing his last move.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 13. hxg5+

This checks Black\'s king and destroys Black\'s pawn cover. Black can\'t
get out of this check by interposition or by moving the king away. All
retreat is cut off by White\'s well-placed queen. The only option is to
capture the checking piece.

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 13\... Qxg5

```{=html}
<div class="thumb tright">
```
```{=html}
</div>
```
##### 14. Rxh5#

Checkmate. Black can\'t interpose anything, because the rook is giving
check from an adjacent square. Black\'s king can\'t move away, because
White\'s queen covers all retreat squares. Black\'s king can\'t capture
the rook, because then it would be in check from White\'s queen.
Finally, Black\'s queen can\'t capture White\'s rook because it is
pinned. If Black\'s queen moved away, White\'s bishop on c1 would be
giving check to Black\'s king.

Notice that, although material considerations are very important in
chess thinking, one doesn\'t win by having the most pieces. One wins by
delivering checkmate. White has been behind in material almost the
entire game, including in the final position, but comes away with the
victory nonetheless.

## Move list in Portable Game Notation

Here is the game in Portable Game Notation (PGN) format. Most computer
chess programs have an easy way to import games in this format. In the
best case you can just copy the following code, start your chess program
and paste the code to it:

`[Event ""]`\
`[Site ""]`\
`[Date "????.??.??"]`\
`[Round ""]`\
`[White "White"]`\
`[Black "Black"]`\
`[TimeControl "-"]`\
`[Result "1-0"]`\
\
`1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f6 3.Nxe5 fxe5 4.Qh5+ Ke7 5.Qxe5+ Kf7 6.Bc4+ d5 7.Bxd5+ `\
`Kg6 8.h4 h5 9.Bxb7 Bxb7 10.Qf5+ Kh6 11.d4+ g5 12.Qf7 Qe7 13.hxg5+ Qxg5 `\
`14.Rxh5# 1-0`

ms:Catur/Contoh permainan


# Chess/The Endgame

The Endgame is the last stage of chess, and arguably the most important.
Even if you succeed in the opening and middle stages of the game, not
knowing the skills to turn the resulting endgame into a checkmate can
cost you many wins, turning many otherwise easily won positions into
draws or even losses. For this reason, we recommend devoting a good
portion of your study to endgames.

If you\'re still beginning your chess studies, the Basic Checkmates
section should be enough to cover the simplest scenarios appropriate for
your level. More complex situations are covered in the second part of
this manual, suitable for those who already have a decent grasp of the
easy checkmates.

## Basic Checkmates

These include positions that have no pawns. When one side is ahead in
material and has pawns, the easiest winning plan is typically to queen
one or more pawns and use them to checkmate.

The situations where one has a king and queen, king and two rooks, or
king and rook versus a lone king occur very often and it is essential to
know how checkmate is achieved in such cases. The other cases, with
minor pieces (bishops and knights) are more rare and more difficult to
perform, but nonetheless are covered here for completeness.

-   King and Queen vs. King
-   King and Two Major Pieces vs.
    King
-   King and Rook vs. King
-   Minor Pieces
-   Pawn Endings

## More Advanced Endgames

These are situations that occur less commonly in games, but are still
very important. Most intermediate to advanced players are expected to
have at least a basic understanding of how these endings work.

-   Endings with Multiple Major
    Pieces
-   Rook and Minor Piece
    Endings
-   Rook and Pawn Endings
-   Endings with 3+ Minor
    Pieces
-   Other Endgames

------------------------------------------------------------------------

-   Endgame Studies and
    Puzzles

## External links

-   Interactive King + Queen vs King
    Checkmate
-   Interactive King + Rook vs King
    Checkmate
-   View endgames involving the King+Knight+Pawn vs.
    King+Knight+Pawn
-   View endgames involving the King+Pawn vs.
    King+Pawn
-   View endgames involving the King+Queen+Pawn vs.
    King+Queen+Pawn
-   View endgames involving the King+Rook+Pawn vs.
    King+Rook+Pawn
-   View endgames involving the King+Bishop+Pawn vs.
    King+Bishop+Pawn

\_\_NOTOC\_\_

it:Scacchi/Finali
ro:Şah/Finalul


# Chess/Variants

!*De ludo scachorum*,
1493
Just as chess has changed over the centuries that it has been played,
there are people who try to add new features or ideas to chess even now.
Sometimes this is just a minor rule change to make things interesting,
but sometimes there are whole new ideas that are proposed that will
modify chess so substantially that it essentially is a whole new game to
be played. The following are some chess variants to be considered if you
want to experiment with alternative ideas for playing chess:

Many other chess variants can be found on
Wikipedia.

-   /Random Opening Chess/
-   Arimaa
-   /Bug House/ and /Crazy
    House/
-   /Crazy House/ (see /Bug
    House/)
-   /Chinese Chess/ or
    Xiangqi
-   Shogi or Japanese Chess

## Fairy chess

It is possible to invent a piece that moves according to any defined set
of rules. In fairy chess, pieces are typically divided into three
categories: leapers, riders, and hoppers.

A **leaper** moves directly from one square to another, regardless of
the position of any other pieces on the board. In ordinary chess, the
knight is a (2,1) leaper: it moves one square horizontally and two
squares vertically, or vice versa. The king is a hybrid (1,0) and (1,1)
leaper: it moves to any adjacent square.

Fairy chess has pieces called camels and zebras: these are long-range
leapers like knights, except that they leap (3,1) and (3,2)
respectively. Note that a (3,1) leaper, like a bishop, always stays on
squares of the same color, but a (3,2) leaper, like a knight, always
moves to a square of the opposite color.

A **rider** is a leaper that can make multiple leaps in the same
direction on the same move. In ordinary chess, the bishop is a (1,1)
rider: it can move to any square diagonally, no matter how far away it
is, as long as there is no other piece blocking the diagonal line.
Similary, the rook is a (1,0) rider. The queen is a hybrid (1,1) and
(1,0) rider.

A special fairy chess rider is the nightrider or knightrider. This is a
knight that can make consecutive knight-hops in the same direction on
the same move.

A **hopper** is a piece that moves in a line while hopping over another
piece. There are no hoppers in ordinary chess, but the capture rule in
checkers is a kind of hop: the capturing piece jumps over the
opponent\'s piece, which is then removed from the board. Also, the
cannon in Xiangqi is a
hopper. In fairy chess, a hopper may or may not be restricted to jumping
over pieces of one color or the other; and the piece that is jumped over
may either stay on the board or be removed, depending on the rules for
that particular hopper.

The prototypical fairy chess hopper is the grasshopper. It moves in any
direction, like a queen, but it can move only by hopping over another
piece, and it lands one square beyond that piece. The piece that is
jumped over is not removed from the board; however, a locust is a
special type of grasshopper, which captures an enemy piece over which it
jumps.

T. R. Dawson, one of the most prolific chess composers of all time,
defined the concepts of fairy chess in the 1930s, and produced many
problems using invented pieces such as the nightrider and grasshopper.
Fairy chess has become a popular domain for chess composing and solving,
especially because it offers a level of creativity that is sometimes
hard to find in the more thoroughly developed areas of traditional chess
composition.


# Chess/Tournaments

If you want to play chess in serious competition, beyond the casual
play, you may want to play in **tournaments**. The strength of the
tournament players can vary greatly from tournament to tournament, as
well as within the tournament.

## Types of tournament

Common tournament forms include

-   Master tournaments are usually closed events where very strong
    players are invited to play against each other. As a new player, you
    will probably not wind up in such tournaments for some time (if at
    all). However, there are frequently side events to a master
    tournament, open to other players.
-   Open tournaments are generally open to any player who has the
    required memberships, and who want to play. There may be some very
    strong masters in such tournaments as well, but the list of players
    usually will include a majority of amateur players. Open
    tournaments, in particular larger events, may be sectioned, where
    the lower sections are limited to players with a chess rating below
    some threshold. How players without ratings are handled may vary
    from event to event; if in doubt, contact the organizer.
-   Scholastic events are tournaments set up for children in school age.
    They tend to feature faster time controls than the adult events.
    Children in school age are usually more than welcome to enter adult
    tournaments, although the youngest children, or those with little or
    no tournament experience may find themselves outclassed in such
    events.

Some tournaments may be arranged over one day with several fast games
being played (or a small number of rounds). Some are arranged over the
course of a weekend. Larger international tournaments are frequently a
week long, with one round a day. Club tournaments may last over several
months, with an evening round each week.

### Tournament formats

The most common tournament formats are *round robins* and *Swiss
systems*. The round-robin is an all-play-all event, usually in small
sections. You will during the course of a round-robin meet everyone else
in the section.

Perhaps even more common is the Swiss system, where you in each round
meet a player who has a score similar to your score. So if you have lost
your first game, you will most likely meet another player who lost the
first game as well for the next round. You are never *eliminated* from a
Swiss system event, if there are an odd number of players the worst that
can happen is that you receive a \"bye\", which means you get a free
point (as if you won a game) instead of a game for that particular
round. The bye is generally awarded to a player in the lowest score
group, but a player can only receive one of them. In some events the
organizer may arrange for an extra game for the player who got a bye.

## Where to find tournaments

Most countries have a national chess federation or association, and
their websites usually have notes about tournaments.

For the United States tournament announcements may be found on the USCF
website\'s tournament search
engine,
but it does not list all events, smaller events are often not listed.
Websites of the state affiliates may include more local events). For
other countries you can find links to the national chess federations
here.

## Requirements for entering a tournament

### Rules

You should be sure you know how the pieces move, and how a game ends. In
particular, you need to know the rules of *en passant*, *castling*,
*pawn promotion* and the *three-time repetition of position* rule.

You should know how the chess clock is used. In all tournaments you have
to complete your moves within a time limit, which varies from tournament
to tournament.

Furthermore, you should know how to record the
game using algebraic chess
notation. Most tournaments with reasonably long time limits require
players to keep score of the game. This is not an absolute requirement,
players who are unable to keep score for various reasons, be they
religious or due to an inability to write, may be exempted.
Additionally, players who are in time trouble (with less than five
minutes on their clocks) can be temporarily excused from writing moves
to conserve time, although they are encouraged to update their
scoresheets with the opponent\'s score if/when a time control is
reached.

In tournament play, the touch-move rule is strictly enforced. If you
touch a piece of your own you must move it (if you have a legal move),
when you\'ve released the piece after a move it stays. If you touch your
opponents piece you must capture it, provided that you have a legal
capture. If you merely wish to adjust a piece which is standing askew on
the square, you may do so if you warn your opponent (\"I adjust\" is
fine, but the French \"J\'adoube\" is also popular) *before* you touch
the piece.

Remember that tournaments can, and should, be fun, but they are pretty
formal events. Distracting or disturbing your opponent is prohibited. In
addition, you should refrain from talking in the tournament hall as much
as possible. If you have to communicate something to someone, do it as
quietly and discreetly as possible. If, after finishing a game, you and
your opponent want to go over it, go to a different room to analyse
instead of remaining in the playing hall pushing pieces around - it
distracts nearby players.

*Remember to turn mobile phones off before the game starts!* If a mobile
phone rings during the game, a penalty is usually assessed by the
arbiter, depending on the tournament. In most USCF tournaments, for a
first offence ten minutes is removed from the offending player\'s clock,
and for a second offence the game is forfeited as a loss. There is
nothing more embarrassing than the *faux pas* of a loud ringtone going
off in an otherwise dead silent playing hall and half a dozen people
from nearby boards glaring at you. The FIDE laws which most other
countries play by are even more strict: mobile phones are *prohibited
altogether*, and if a player is found to be in possession of a mobile
phone, then that player loses. Organizers may announce a more lenient
policy, but unless you are informed otherwise, assume that the strict
\"no mobile phones\" rule applies.

From 2009, the general rule at serious, professional tournaments about
arriving late to the board is a zero tolerance policy. If you are not
present at the board when the round starts, you forfeit the game. This
has sometimes been enforced in a draconian fashion, one player in the
Chinese Championship who was standing near the board waiting for the
game to start was forfeited when the round started because she wasn\'t
*sitting* at the board
1.
A tournament may announce a more lenient rule where a latecomer is
forfeited only if a certain time elapses (one hour was the limit before
the rule change in 2009), and some federations have announced that one
hour will remain the default standard for all tournaments in their
country (such as the USCF). However, even if arriving late does not
forfeit the game automatically, your clock *will* be started on time, so
unless you are willing to waste the time you have for thinking, **don\'t
be late for your game**.

Full laws can be read
here. (Note
that the United States have slightly different tournament regulations.)

### Membership

In most events, it is required that you are a member of the country\'s
chess association. In the United States, this means that you must be a
member of the United States Chess Federation and so on. Some events may
require further memberships, club championships may require membership
in that club for instance.

For many events in Europe, membership in any national chess federation
associated with FIDE may be sufficient (this allows foreign players to
play without purchasing new memberships all the time.)

The organizer can nearly always arrange a membership for you, so don\'t
feel like you cannot go to a tournament just because you aren\'t a
member yet.

### Equipment

In most tournaments in the United States, players are expected to
provide boards, sets and clocks. Pieces should be of normal Staunton
design, with a king about 3-and-a-half inches to 4 inches tall, and the
board should have squares of around 2 to 2-and-a-half inches. A cheap
roll-up board with normal plastic pieces is quite sufficient. Clocks can
be purchased in many places, and the prices can vary. Shop around.

Some sets include an extra pair of queens, so that one can handle the
situation where a player gets two queens due to pawn promotion. While
helpful, this is not essential. In tournaments, multiple queens should
be handled by fetching an additional queen, and *not* by placing an
overturned rook in place of a queen. The situation is fairly rare in
practice however, and when it does happen, you can usually borrow a
queen from someone else.

In Europe equipment is usually provided, though some events may have a
shortage of clocks, and ask players to provide that.

Bring a pen to write with so that you can keep score.

## General advice for play

-   Remember that tournament play is a learning experience. After the
    game try to go through the game with your opponent so that you can
    learn from mistakes made. Do this especially when you have lost,
    because here you must have done something wrong where your opponent
    did something right, and you should try to avoid losing the same way
    again.
-   Inexperienced players sometimes get distracted by the clock, and
    start playing too fast. If you have two hours available to make 40
    moves, but have only used thirty minutes when the 40 moves are up,
    you have probably played too quickly and consequently not thought
    the position through well enough.
-   If you get a winning position, be careful! Your opponent will in all
    likelihood be looking for ways in which you can go wrong, letting
    him escape with a draw or turn the tables and win.

## Withdrawing

Try to complete the tournament, even if you have started badly. The
opposition will tend to get easier, and learning how to bounce back
after setbacks is important.

If you must withdraw, you must tell the organizer that you are going to
do so. Otherwise the player you would have met will be deprived of a
game. (That player gets awarded a full-point as if the game were won,
but the entry fee was probably paid for an opportunity to play chess,
not to sit at a table with nobody to play with!) In some cases, a player
dropping out without informing the organizer, may face a fine, and be
excluded from that organizer\'s future events until the fine is paid.

## Ratings

Tournament players are after a stipulated number of games assigned a
rating, which is an *estimate* for the strength of that player. This
goes up and down depending on the player\'s performance in rated events.
The average rating of a tournament player is around 1400, the strongest
grandmasters have ratings in the excess of 2700. As a rule of thumb, a
player with a rating 200 points higher than the opponent should expect
to score 75% against that opponent, and 90% against someone rated 400
points lower, but upsets are in practice more common than what the
rating formulas predict.

Understand that an average tournament player of 1400 is, compared to a
casual player who only knows the rules, but with no tournament
experience or study of the game, a very strong player indeed. A new
player who enters a tournament may easily find the first rating to be
below 1000, but as experience is gained this may rise!

Remember, ratings are only estimates of playing strength based on past
events. Ratings do not measure a person\'s ability to improve, they are
not rewards in themselves, and they are definitely not measures of
self-worth.

In tournament play, ratings determine what sections you are eligible to
play in, and which opponents you will meet in Swiss system events.

## Glossary of terms

-   **Arbiter** or **tournament director** is the authority which
    referees the event, makes pairings, and rulings.
-   **Board 1, board 2, etc.**. In Swiss system events boards are
    numbered. The players who currently have the best scores are seated
    at board no. 1, while those with the weakest scores are seated
    further down.
-   **Class prize**. A prize awarded to a player for finishing at the
    top of his or her rating class. A prize could be awarded for
    instance for \"first place among those rated below 1600\".
-   **Entry fee**. The amount a player is charged in order to be allowed
    to participate.
-   **Flag**. On analog chess clocks, the flag is a small device
    attached just left of the \"12\" on the clock face. As the minute
    hand approaches 12, it lifts the flag up so that it falls once the
    minute hand passes 12. This **flag fall** makes it possible to
    determine exactly when the time has expired. For example, if each
    player has 90 minutes, the clocks are initially set at 4:30, and the
    time has expired when the flag falls when the clock is at 6:00.
    (Technically, the flag also falls at 5:00, but this has no
    consequence.) Digital clocks usually have some indicator marking
    expiry, and the indicator when this is activated is also called a
    \"flag fall\". If the time control stipulates that a certain number
    of moves be made within a time limit, the last required move must be
    completed, and the clock stopped, before flag fall, otherwise that
    player has overstepped the time limit.
-   **Forfeit loss/forfeit win**. If a player fails to arrive at the
    board an hour after the announced starting time, then that player
    loses by forfeit, and the opponent receives a forfeit win. The game
    counts for tournament standings, but not rating. A person who loses
    by forfeit is typically removed from the tournament, unless an
    adequate excuse is provided. A player who has received a win by
    forfeit is ineligible for receiving a full-point bye in future
    rounds.
-   **Full-point bye** or **walkover**. If there is an odd number of
    players for a round, the arbiter will award a full-point bye to one
    player who does not play that particular round, but instead receives
    a point as if a game was won.
-   **Half-point bye**. In some tournaments, a player who is unable to
    play a particular round may elect to take a half-point bye. The
    player does not play that round but receives a half-point instead as
    if a game were drawn. Tournaments frequently regulate such byes,
    putting a cap on how many can be taken and/or requiring that a
    player commit to taking them before a certain deadline.
-   **Increment**. A small amount of time (the increment) which is added
    to a player\'s clock at every move. This avoids frantic time
    scrambles by ensuring that there will always be enough time to make
    a move. Some tournaments stipulate a time limit with an increment,
    others do not. Games played with an increment require a digital
    chess clock with this capability.
-   **J\'adoube**. French for \"I adjust\", and can be said by a player
    before touching a piece to adjust it rather than move it.
-   **Sandbagging**. A fraudulent scheme where a player deliberately
    lowers his rating so that he may play in a lower rated section
    sometime in the future in order to win cash prizes. Sandbagging is a
    form of cheating, and people caught may face stiff sanctions.
-   **Sudden death**. A time limit where one must make all remaining
    moves in a set amount of time. A time limit of \"40/90, SD/30\"
    means that each player must complete 40 moves in 90 minutes (that is
    the non-sudden death control), and then the remaining moves in 30
    minutes (plus any time left over from the first time control), this
    second phase is the sudden death phase.
-   **Swiss-system**. An tournament format where players face other
    players with same or similar scores in each round.
-   **Time control**. The number of moves one must make within the time
    limit. For example if one must make 35 moves in 90 minutes, the time
    control is at 35 moves.
-   **Time delay**. A small amount of time (the delay) which passes
    before the clock starts deducting time from a player at every move.
    No time is deducted if a player moves before the delay is up. The
    idea is similar to that of an increment, but a player cannot build
    up a reservoir of time. Games played with a delay require a digital
    chess clock with this capability. In the United States, a five
    second time delay is standard, and clocks which have the delay
    capability are preferred over clocks which do not.


# Chess/Famous Games

Throughout the history of chess there have been many famous games
between the masters that many serious players are familiar. These games
stand out because they contain unusual positions, feature brilliant
sacrifices, or some other reason that sets them apart from average chess
games. By studying and analysing these games, you can not only gain more
appreciation for chess, but improve your strategy as well.

This section is intended for readers with some knowledge of basic chess
strategy. The games are provided with commentary to explain critical
moves and point out strategy concepts.

#### 19th Century: The Era of Gambits and Sacrifices

-   Anderssen vs. Kieseritzky, 1851: The Immortal
    Game
-   Anderssen vs. Dufresne, 1852: The Evergreen
    Game
-   Morphy vs. Duke Karl and Count Isouard, 1858: The Opera
    Game

#### Early 20th Century: Steinitz, Lasker, and Capablanca

-   Alekhine vs. Nimzowitsch 1930

#### Later 20th Century: From Fischer to Kasparov

-   Byrne vs. Fischer, 1958: The Game of the
    Century
-   Caruana vs. Wojtkiewicz,
    2002, Fabiano
    Caruana (10 years old) is the youngest player to defeat a GM [^1]

#### Modern Era: Man and Machine

-   Deep Blue vs. Garry Kasparov, 1996: Game
    One
-   Kasparov vs. the World, 1999

## References

```{=html}
<references />
```
 \_\_NOTOC\_\_

[^1]:


# Chess/Puzzles

Chess piece placement puzzles are puzzles where certain pieces have to
be placed on the board and satisfy certain conditions.

Chess checkmates are problems where White starts and mates in a
*clearly* stated number of moves (or less).

Chess endgames and middlegames are problems where the number of moves is
indefinite, and White (or Black) has to either win or tie, as stated by
the question.

-   Piece placement puzzles
-   Directmates
-   Endgame problems
-   Middlegame problems


# Chess/Computer Chess

If you\'re interested in chess and wish to improve, you might want to
consider installing a chess program onto your computer to help train
you. Some programs are dedicated to certain areas of the game (such as
endgame or opening study, or tactical exercises), while others allow you
to input your games into a database and have the computer analyse them
for errors and suggestions.

Most regular tournament players usually have some sort of chess engine
installed on their computer. These engines are programmed to find the
best possible moves in any position given to them and determine who is
ahead by means of algorithms. When plugged into an interface, you can
either play directly against the engine or submit vary widely in quality
and playing style. Some are commercial, others are freeware and
available to download over the internet. Due to advances in technology
in the 21st century, some of these engines have become so strong that
even the best human players in the world have difficulty beating them,
even on an average-speed home computer. A non-Master will probably never
be able to beat - or even draw - a strong engine unassisted. In a sense,
having a good chess program running over your games is almost like
having a Grandmaster on hand to discuss your games with you.

Engines are not all the same. Depending on how it\'s programmed, it may
favour moves that are attacking and tactical, while others prefer solid,
positional moves and don\'t take as many risks. Formerly, commercial
engines were the strongest, but now some freeware engines are just as
good or even better.

Online

If you don\'t want to install your own engine, you may play against one
on a free online service. Be aware that these do not play at full
strength and may not be allocated a lot of thinking time. In summary,
they do not play at the highest level they can play at.

-   lichess.org features the powerful
    Stockfish engine in levels 1 through 8 (Glicko-2 ranges 1500 to 2361
    \-- near Grandmaster), with 50 to 400 ms thinking time. You may set
    up positions using the Board Editor.
    You may analyse the games afterwards with Stockfish at nearly full
    strength, with 2 seconds of thinking time for each move.
-   GameKnot features a
    proprietary engine at levels ranging from \~1000 Elo rating to 2200+
    (Grandmaster) Elo rating. Allows setting up a position from the
    Games DB. Does not
    offer a takeback option. Requires a Java Runtime.
-   The Shredder Chess
    website
    features the engine of the same name on easy, medium and hard
    levels. The hard level is particularly difficult for players of all
    skills.
-   Chess.com allows for users to play against other users, or against
    bots. Post-game review is also available for users to analyze their
    games.

Interfaces

Before you can use an engine, you first have to run it through an
interface. There are many that can be used, the most common of which are
listed:

-   \"Fritz\" interface - This is one of the most popular interfaces in
    use by professionals today. It generally comes prepackaged when you
    buy one of the commercial engines sold by ChessBase (Fritz,
    Shredder, Hiarcs, et al.). As such, it\'s considered commercial,
    although older versions of the interface may be released as
    freeware. (Be aware though, that there may be compatibility problems
    in this case.)
-   Arena = This is the most common
    freeware interface. It is compatible with Mac, Windows, and Linux.
-   Chessmaster - This interface comes prepackaged with the King chess
    engine. There are multiple training tools available as well, such as
    an openings book, tactics exercises, etc., so you don\'t have to
    purchase a separate program to do this. However, it may be harder to
    install independent chess engines to run underneath this interface.

Engines

Freeware:

-   Stockfish = Very strong
    open-source engine, consistently ranked as first or second strongest
    in the world.


# Chess/Optional homework

These optional Worksheet problems will test your / your students\'
ability to apply chess concepts. Try them and learn/teach!

Each handout is designed to have a 20 minute time limit; feel free to
use a timer, or adjust timing depending on the skill of your players.
Each handout can be print using the \"Printable version\" button
available on the left side of page.

First, choose the groups so that no student on the same table has the
same group (this allows to prevent cheating):

-   Group A
-   Group B
-   Group C
-   Group D

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   /Solutions/


# Cognitive Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience/Cognitive Psychology and the Brain

Imagine the following situation: A young man, let's call him Knut, is
sitting at his desk, reading some papers which he needs to complete a
psychology assignment. In his right hand he holds a cup of coffee. With
his left one he reaches for a bag of sweets without removing the focus
of his eyes from the paper. Suddenly he stares up to the ceiling of his
room and asks himself: "What is happening here?"

Probably everybody has had experiences like the one described above.
Even though at first sight there is nothing exciting happening in this
everyday situation, a lot of what is going on here is highly interesting
particularly for researchers and students in the field of Cognitive
Psychology. They are involved in the study of lots of incredibly
fascinating processes which we are not aware of in this situation.
Roughly speaking, an analysis of Knut\'s situation by Cognitive
Psychologists would look like this:

Knut has a problem; he really needs to do his assignment. To solve this
problem, he has to perform loads of cognition. The light reaching his
eyes is transduced into electrical signals traveling through several
stations to his visual cortex. Meanwhile, complex nets of neurons filter
the information flow and compute contrast, colour, patterns, positions
in space, motion of the objects in Knut\'s environment. Stains and lines
on the screen become words; words get meaning; the meaning is put into
context; analyzed on its relevance for Knut\'s problem and finally maybe
stored in some part of his memory. At the same time an appetite for
sweets is creeping from Knut\'s
hypothalamus, a region in the brain
responsible for controlling the needs of an organism. This appetite
finally causes Knut to reach out for his sweets.

Now, let us take a look into the past to see how Cognitive Psychologists
developed its terminology and methods to interpret ourselves on the
basis of brain, behaviour and theory.

## History of Cognitive Psychology

Early thoughts claimed that knowledge was stored in the brain.

### Renaissance and Beyond

Renaissance philosophers of the 17th century generally agreed with
Nativists and even tried to show the structure and functions of the
brain graphically. But also empiricist philosophers had very important
ideas. According to David Hume, the internal
representations of knowledge are formed obeying particular rules. These
creations and transformations take effort and time. Actually, this is
the basis of much current research in Cognitive Psychology. In the 19th
Century Wilhelm Wundt and Franciscus
Cornelis Donders made the corresponding
experiments measuring the reaction time required for a response, of
which further interpretation gave rise to Cognitive Psychology 55 years
later.

### 20th Century and the Cognitive Revolution

During the first half of the 20th Century, a radical turn in the
investigation of cognition took place. Behaviourists like Burrhus
Frederic Skinner claimed that such mental
internal operations - such as attention, memory, and thinking -- are
only hypothetical constructs that cannot be observed or proven.
Therefore, Behaviorists asserted, mental constructs are not as important
and relevant as the study and experimental analysis of behaviour
(directly observable data) in response to some stimulus. According to
Watson and Skinner, man could be objectively studied only in this way.
The popularity of Behavioralist theory in the psychological world led
investigation of mental events and processes to be abandoned for about
50 years.

In the 1950s scientific interest returned again to attention, memory,
images, language processing, thinking and consciousness. The "failure"
of Behaviourism heralded a new period in the investigation of cognition,
called Cognitive Revolution. This
was characterized by a revival of already existing theories and the rise
of new ideas such as various communication theories. These theories
emerged mainly from the previously created information theory, giving
rise to experiments in signal detection and attention in order to form a
theoretical and practical understanding of communication.

Modern linguists suggested new theories on language and grammar
structure, which were correlated with cognitive processes.
Chomsky's Generative Grammar and Universal
Grammar theory, proposed language hierarchy, and his critique of
Skinner's "Verbal Behaviour" are all milestones in the history of
Cognitive Science. Theories of memory and models of its organization
gave rise to models of other cognitive processes. Computer science,
especially artificial intelligence, re-examined basic theories of
problem solving and the processing and storage of memory, language
processing and acquisition.

**For clarification: Further discussion on the \"behaviorist\"
history.**

Although the above account reflects the most common version of the rise
and fall of behaviorism, it is a misrepresentation. In order to better
understand the founding of cognitive psychology it must be understood in
an accurate historical context. Theoretical disagreements exist in every
science. However, these disagreements should be based on an honest
interpretation of the opposing view. There is a general tendency to draw
a false equivalence between Skinner and Watson. It is true that Watson
rejected the role that mental or conscious events played in the behavior
of humans. In hindsight this was an error. However, if we examine the
historical context of Watson\'s position we can better understand why he
went to such extremes. He, like many young psychologists of the time,
was growing frustrated with the lack of practical progress in
psychological science. The focus on consciousness was yielding
inconsistent, unreliable and conflicting data. Excited by the progress
coming from Pavlov\'s work with elicited responses and looking to the
natural sciences for inspiration, Watson rejected the study of
observable mental events and also pushed psychology to study
stimulus-response relations as a means to better understand human
behavior. This new school of psychology, \"behaviorism\" became very
popular. Skinner\'s school of thought, although inspired by Watson,
takes a very different approach to the study of unobservable mental
events. Skinner proposed that the distinction between \"mind\" and
\"body\" brought with it irreconcilable philosophical baggage. He
proposed that the events going on \"within the skin\", previously
referred to as mental events, be called private events. This would bring
the private experiences of thinking, reasoning, feeling and such, back
into the scientific fold of psychology. However, Skinner proposed that
these were things we are doing rather than events going on at a
theorized mental place. For Skinner, the question was not of a mental
world existing or not, it was whether or not we need to appeal to the
existence of a mental world in order to explain the things going on
inside our heads. Such as the natural sciences ask whether we need to
assume the existence of a creator in order to account for phenomena in
the natural world. For Skinner, it was an error for psychologists to
point to these private events (mental) events as causes of behavior.
Instead, he suggested that these too had to be explained through the
study of how one evolves as a matter of experience. For example, we
could say that a student studies because she \"expects\" to do better on
an exam if she does. To \"expect\" might sound like an acceptable
explanation for the behavior of studying, however, Skinner would ask why
she \"expects\". The answer to this question would yield the true
explanation of why the student is studying. To \"expect\" is to do
something, to behave \"in our head\", and thus must also be explained.

The cognitive psychologist Henry Roediger pointed out that many
psychologists erroneously subscribe to the version of psychology
presented in the first paragraph. He also pointed to the successful
rebuttal against Chomsky\'s review of Verbal behavior. The evidence for
the utility in Skinner\'s book can be seen in the abundance of
actionable data it has generated, therapies unmatched by any modern
linguistic account of language. Roediger reminded his readers that in
fact, we all measure behavior, some simply choose to make more
assumptions about its origins than others. He recalls how, even as a
cognitive psychologist, he has been the focus of criticism for not
making more assumptions about his data. The law of parsimony tells us
that when choosing an explanation for a set of data about observable
behavior (the data all psychologists collect), we must be careful not to
make assumptions beyond those necessary to explain the data. This is
where the main division lies between modern day behavior analysts and
cognitive psychologists. It is not in the rejection of our private
experiences, it is in how these experiences are studied. Behavior
analysts study them in relation to our learning history and the brain
correlates of that history. They use this information to design
environments that change our private experience by changing our
interaction with the world. After all, it is through our interaction
with our relative world that our private experiences evolve. It is a far
cry from the mechanical stimulus-response psychology of John Watson.
Academic honesty requires that we make a good faith effort to understand
what we wish to criticize. Henry Roediger pointed out that many
psychologists understand a very stereotyped, erroneous version of
psychology\'s history. In doing so they miss the many successful real
world applications that Skinner\'s analysis has generated.

Neuroinformatics, which is based on the natural structure of the human
nervous system, tries to build neuronal structures by the idea of
artificial neurons. In addition to that, Neuroinformatics is used as a
field of evidence for psychological models, for example models for
memory. The artificial neuron network "learns" words and behaves like
"real" neurons in the brain. If the results of the artificial neuron
network are quite similar to the results of real memory experiments, it
would support the model. In this way psychological models can be
"tested". Furthermore it would help to build artificial neuron networks,
which posses similar skills like the human such as face recognition.

If more about the ways humans process information was understood, it
would be much simpler to build artificial structures, which have the
same or similar abilities. The area of cognitive development
investigation tried to describe how children develop their cognitive
abilities from infancy to adolescence. The theories of knowledge
representation were first strongly concerned with sensory inputs.
Current scientists claim to have evidence that our internal
representation of reality is not a one-to-one reproduction of the
physical world. It is rather stored in some abstract or neurochemical
code. Tolman, Bartlett, Norman and Rumelhart made some experiments on
cognitive mapping. Here, the inner knowledge seemed not only to be
related to sensory input, but also to be modified by some kind of
knowledge network modeled by past experience.

Newer methods, like Electroencephalography
(EEG) and functional magnetic
resonance imaging (fMRI) have given researchers the
possibility to measure brain activity and possibly correlate it to
mental states and processes. All these new approaches in the study of
human cognition and psychology have defined the field of Cognitive
Psychology, a very fascinating field which tries to answer what is quite
possibly the most interesting question posed since the dawn of reason.
There is still a lot to discover and to answer and to ask again, but
first we want to make you more familiar with the concept of Cognitive
Psychology.

## What is Cognitive Psychology?

The easiest answer to this question is: "Cognitive Psychology is the
study of thinking and the processes underlying mental events." Of course
this creates the new problem of what a mental event actually is. There
are many possible answers for this:

Let us look at Knut again to give you some more examples and make the
things clearer. He needs to focus on reading his paper. So all his
attention is directed at the words and sentences which he perceives
through his visual pathways. Other stimuli and information that enter
his cognitive apparatus - maybe some street noise or the fly crawling
along a window - are not that relevant in this moment and are therefore
attended much less. Many higher cognitive abilities are also subject to
investigation. Knut's situation could be explained as a classical
example of problem solving: He needs to get from his present state -- an
unfinished assignment -- to a goal state - a completed assignment - and
has certain operators to achieve that goal. Both Knut's short and long
term memory are active. He needs his short term memory to integrate what
he is reading with the information from earlier passages of the paper.
His long term memory helps him remember what he learned in the lectures
he took and what he read in other books. And of course Knut's ability to
comprehend language enables him to make sense of the letters printed on
the paper and to relate the sentences in a proper way.

This situation can be considered to reflect mental events like
perception, comprehension and memory storage. Some scientists think that
our emotions cannot be considered separate from cognition, so that hate,
love, fear or joy are also sometimes looked at as part of our individual
minds. Cognitive psychologists study questions like: How do we receive
information about the outside world? How do we store it and process it?
How do we solve problems? How is language represented?

Cognitive Psychology is a field of psychology that learns and researches
about mental processes, including perception, thinking, memory, and
judgment. The mainstay of cognitive psychology is the idea where
sensation and perception are both different issues.

## Relations to Neuroscience

### Cognitive Neuropsychology

Of course it would be very convenient if we could understand the nature
of cognition without the nature of the brain itself. But unfortunately
it is very difficult if not impossible to build and prove theories about
our thinking in absence of neurobiological constraints. Neuroscience
comprises the study of neuroanatomy, neurophysiology, brain functions
and related psychological and computer based models. For years,
investigations on a neuronal level were completely separated from those
on a cognitive or psychological level. The thinking process is so vast
and complex that there are too many conceivable solutions to the problem
of how cognitive operation could be accomplished.

Neurobiological data provide physical evidence for a theoretical
approach to the investigation of cognition. Therefore it narrows the
research area and makes it much more exact. The correlation between
brain pathology and behaviour supports scientists in their research. It
has been known for a long time that different types of brain damage,
traumas, lesions, and tumours affect behaviour and cause changes in some
mental functions. The rise of new technologies allows us to see and
investigate brain structures and processes never seen before. This
provides us with a lot of information and material to build simulation
models which help us to understand processes in our mind. As
neuroscience is not always able to explain all the observations made in
laboratories, neurobiologists turn towards Cognitive Psychology in order
to find models of brain and behaviour on an interdisciplinary level --
Cognitive Neuropsychology. This "inter-science" as a bridge connects and
integrates the two most important domains and their methods of research
of the human mind. Research at one level provides constraints,
correlations and inspirations for research at another level.

### Neuroanatomy Basics

The basic building blocks of the brain are a special sort of cells
called neurons. There are approximately 100
billion neurons involved in information processing in the brain. When we
look at the brain superficially, we can\'t see these neurons, but rather
look at two halves called the
hemispheres. The hemispheres
themselves may differ in size and function, as we will see later in the
book, but principally each of them can be subdivided into four parts
called the lobes: the temporal,
parietal,
occipital and frontal
lobe. This division of modern neuroscience
is supported by the up- and down-bulging structure of the brain\'s
surface. The bulges are called gyri (singular gyrus), the creases sulci
(singular sulcus). They are also involved in information processing. The
different tasks performed by different subdivisions of the brain as
attention, memory and language cannot be viewed as separated from each
other, nevertheless some parts play a key role in a specific task. For
example the parietal lobe has been shown to be responsible for
orientation in space and the relation you have to it, the occipital lobe
is mainly responsible for visual perception and imagination etc. Summed
up, brain anatomy poses some basic constraints to what is possible for
us and a better understanding will help us to find better therapies for
cognitive deficits as well as guide research for cognitive
psychologists. It is one goal of our book to present the complex
interactions between the different levels on which the brain that can be
described, and their implications for Cognitive Neuropsychology.

### Methods

Newer methods, like EEG and fMRI etc. allow researchers to correlate the
behaviour of a participant in an experiment with the brain activity
which is measured simultaneously. It is possible to record
neurophysiological responses to certain stimuli or to find out which
brain areas are involved in the execution of certain mental tasks. EEG
measures the electric potentials along the skull through electrodes that
are attached to a cap. While its spatial resolution is not very precise,
the temporal resolution lies within the range of milliseconds. The use
of fMRI benefits from the fact the increased brain activity goes along
with increased blood flow in the active region. The
haemoglobin in the blood has magnetic
properties that are registered by the fMRI scanner. The spatial
resolution of fMRI is very precise in comparison to EEG. On the other
hand, the temporal resolution is in the range of just 1--2 seconds.

## Conclusion

Remember the scenario described at the beginning of the chapter. Knut
was asking himself "What is happening here?" It should have become clear
that this question cannot be simply answered with one or two sentences.
We have seen that the field of Cognitive Psychology comprises a lot of
processes and phenomena of which every single one is subject to
extensive research to understand how cognitive abilities are produced by
our brain. In the following chapters of this WikiBook you will see how
the different areas of research in Cognitive Psychology are trying to
solve the initial question raised by Knut.