A lot of people argue that fencing equals chess on the fencing strip. Although it may serve as an interesting metaphor, borrowing here and there from each other in terms of thought and in case of a stronger opponent, maybe prayer, my experience is that the way you analyze chess is vastly different from how you analyze fencing.
One of the key differences is that in case of chess, you always have to wait for your opponent to move, the moves are limited to what’s on the board and the position the pieces are in. You have to move in fixed steps according to squares.
Fencing is fluid. Timing is everything, regardless of whether the opponent has moved or hasn’t moved. The analysis, contrary to in chess, relates directly to the rhythm and timing of particular moves and what moves the opponent has gotten used to so far.
Playing chess due to strong gambling skills I score near 250 points higher (computer rated ELO, CrELO) than you’d expect based on my puzzle-level. My CrELO-score had an upper limit of 1800. I couldn’t concentrate due to forced antipsychotics-abuse. Chess did help, but mucuna pruriens (levodopa) really helped me score higher than that. L-tyrosine works even better, because it makes sure your brain makes the levodopa itself. I still have problems with creativity, L-Tryptophan might be the answer.
I make puzzles and this does help me analyze the board, but as I reached a higher level, I figured out that I hadn’t fully realized what it actually was I was analyzing. I was just “seeing” but I didn’t know what. In my efforts to restore the brain damage I suffered, I went back to the beginning and analyzed what it was I analyzed. I hope it helps you as well.
The essay I wrote was only a first exploration and isn’t 100% accurate. I’ve by now found that it is possible to 100% accurately describe the multiple intentions used in chess, which I strive to do. I needed to look at things a bit differently than in fencing, because all the pieces fight together and you’ve got squares, but it’s doable. It’s going to take me some time to analyze all of it, even now I’ve managed to reduce the amount of brain damage I have.
One thing I can’t teach you or myself is to be creative. You need to get your brain to work. Otherwise you’re going to get stuck on a pattern recognition level, where you make a lot of puzzles and go by what you’ve seen before. Being creative isn’t the same as painting by numbers or playing from sheet music. Being creative means that you find your own way and your own voice, also in chess.
For those that are creative, I also work on a different kind of statistical analysis and interpretation of things like the value of the pieces. This might open up the game a bit more. Some puzzles teach you what you should do. Some teach you what you can do. What if, based on your preferred play, you’re better off not doing it? What if what I just said is bullshit? Why is that so?