Basketball and Chess: Revised Thoughts on Material, Position, Forking (Draw 2) and More
"And one thing we know about Elizabeth Harmon is that she loves to win." - Queen's Gambit
Queen's Gambit brought chess into millions of living rooms and rekindled thoughts about basketball and chess. Both require flexibility. In both we find almost infinite ways to win or lose. Both have openings, middle game, and end games. Both are cerebral games. Don't beat yourself.
Analogies are powerful. Analogies lie on a spectrum. As coaches, we may see a player or team similar to others (e.g. Larry Bird/Luka Doncic). We can be rudders or anchors.
Control the center of the board. Many games favor control of center, strength up the middle - baseball, basketball, football, chess. Defenses live by "no middle" and "no penetration." Early game chess prioritizes a strong middle, developing pieces, and potentially attacking opponent pieces (e.g. knights and bishops). Disruptive technology (e.g. three point shooting) changes the game.
Chunking. Elite chess players see groups of pieces. How do our players visualize the play (above)? The best players see a different game than others.
Attack mentality. Both games are often won as one side is more aggressive.
Material advantage. Chess and basketball both rely on material advantage. During a game, we can't improve our players' abilities. But we can impact our opponents through strategies that disadvantage certain players (via size or speed) or imposing foul trouble that may take a queen off the board in exchange for a lesser piece.
Know the difference between strategy and tactics. Basketball is different in that technique beats tactics. Don't force action when there is nothing strategic to do.
"Draw 2." Fork multiple pieces. As in basketball, chess is a game of material (talent) and positional advantage.
The more we understand other domains, the more we understand our world.
Lagniappe: Villanova Motion Concepts
We don't have the skills to operate this, but maybe you do.
