The Scientist's Method
The Scientist’s Method
Definition
“The Scientist’s Method” is a term used by chess writers and coaches to
describe the systematic, evidence-based approach to decision-making that
replaced the 19th-century “Romantic” style of spontaneous sacrifices and
speculative attacks.
In essence, it is the idea that a chess position can be
examined much like a scientist examines a problem: collect the facts
(evaluate imbalances), formulate a hypothesis (candidate moves),
test the hypothesis (calculate concrete variations), and only then
publish the result (play the move). The method is most closely
associated with Wilhelm Steinitz, the first official World Champion,
whose painstaking analyses earned him the nickname “The Old Scientist.”
Origins & Historical Context
During the mid-1800s, attacking geniuses such as Anderssen and Morphy dazzled the chess world with brilliant combinations that seemed to spring out of thin air. Steinitz argued that such brilliance was only possible because one side had already violated general principles—weakening the king, misplacing pieces, or neglecting the center. If both players followed sound guidelines, he claimed, sacrifices would only succeed when objectively justified. His “Scientific” program included concepts that are now taken for granted:
- Accumulate small, static advantages rather than hunt for immediate mate.
- Only attack the king when you have a superior position.
- Defence, if correct, can and should refute an unsound attack.
- Every move must be supported by concrete calculation.
The controversy surrounding these ideas was fierce—Steinitz’s contemporary Johannes Zukertort derided him as “a coward who hides behind pawns.” Yet Steinitz’s victories in the 1886 World Championship match and in countless tournaments gradually validated the method. His successors—Lasker, Capablanca, Botvinnik, and later the computer engines—proved that the “scientific” style was not a fad but the very core of modern chess.
Core Principles in Practice
- Evaluation. Identify imbalances in material, king safety, pawn structure, space, and minor-piece activity.
- Candidate Moves. List forcing moves first (checks, captures, threats)—sometimes taught with the mnemonic CCT.
- Calculation & Verification. Analyze the resulting positions objectively, searching for refutations to every line you consider.
- Only Then Play. Execute the move that stands up to scrutiny; if two moves appear equal, prefer the one that keeps the position simpler or preserves long-term advantages.
Illustrative Example
One of the clearest demonstrations of the Scientist’s Method in action is Steinitz – von Bardeleben, Hastings 1895. Steinitz had built up overwhelming positional pressure; only when every scientific indicator (space, piece activity, king safety) pointed in his favour did he unleash a forcing combination:
The entire sequence from 22.Re1! onward is forcing; at every branch, checks, captures, or mate threats compel Black’s replies. The combination only works because White’s preliminary “scientific” build-up ensured that no defensive resource could save the position.
Modern Usage
Today the phrase is invoked in two main contexts:
- Teaching thought process. Coaches advise students to “think like a scientist” by first gathering the facts about the position, then calculating forcing lines before finally committing to a move.
- Describing a style. Players such as Botvinnik, Karpov, and even the silicon accuracy of engines like Stockfish are called “scientific” because they squeeze small advantages dry rather than rely on speculative attacks.
Interesting Facts & Anecdotes
- The 1895 Hastings Tournament Book referred to Steinitz’s play as “positively laboratory chess,” one of the first recorded uses of the “scientific” label in print.
- Emanuel Lasker, Steinitz’s successor, blended psychology with science—he deliberately chose second-best lines when he suspected an opponent would respond inaccurately, a twist he called “practical science.”
- World Champion Mikhail Botvinnik studied electrical engineering and insisted on six hours of daily “laboratory work” on the chessboard, further cementing the link between science and high-level play.
- Modern engines follow the Scientist’s Method perfectly: exhaustive evaluation (millions of positions per second) followed by precise calculation, proving Steinitz’s century-old principles on a silicon scale.