The Ultimate Weapon – ‘Predicting’ Part 1

In a game of chess, the ability to predict is a powerful weapon that more than often determines the outcome of the game depending on how well the tool is used. Frequently, advanced chess players attempt to predict what will happen during the game and therefore take such knowledge and act upon it. Chess masters, such as Gary Kasparov, the undisputed world champion for consecutive years, simulates the whole game play-by-play even before the game starts. This can be difficult in a game of Counter-Strike, but the point is to predict as many plays ahead as possible which inevitably will make you many steps ahead of the opponent.

I have taken private lessons with numerous renowned CS strategists so I can ask the same question each time: “What am I to predict?” With almost every instructor except for one, I got the exact same answer. It was something along the lines of: “Predict what your opponent will do and then act to counter that”. Seems logical, however there is a problem: what if your opponent predicts what you predicted and thus putting you at a disadvantage to defend? Maybe you predicted two steps ahead and predict that the opponent would predict what you’ll probably predict and therefore act in a way to counter their counter-prediction. Why then can’t the opponent do the same? This chain of prediction and counter-prediction on what the opponent will do can be stressful and pointless; eventually both you and the opponent could be at a stalemate.

Let me illustrate this problem with chess openings (for those who are not familiar with chess, this will be complete jargon; however ‘openings’ will be discussed later this series).

Suppose were starting off with the black pieces, our opponent takes the traditional King’s-pawn opening (e4) to take early control of the center chess board. We respond with a Sicilian Defense by moving our pawn to c5, showing our opponent that we mean business and do not intend to forfeit the center board so easily. By following a traditional Sicilian play and without going too deep into the situation, we will eventually be at a disadvantage in the game if we predict what the opponent would do and attempt to avoid it – we throw ourselves off guard becoming less focused on the situation. Even if we predict 4-5 steps ahead, we can still be at a disadvantage if the opponent is also predicting ahead. However, what we can do in this situation is take on a Sicilian Dragon variation and predict what the opponent might not do and force them to do it, we are therefore forcing them to drop their original King’s-pawn opening and take on another variation, thus putting the Dragon at an attacking stance and putting you in control of the game.

Relating this to Counter-Strike, the analogy above explains why we have to think at a different frequency than the opponent. Do not predict what they will do and then counter it, instead, predict what they will not do and force them to do it. This would throw them off guard and make them rethink their strategy - making them take a step back means they are one step behind you. To illustrate this in laymen terms, I will bring in a regular situation in Counter-Strike and provide a real example that happened in a premier match.

We were Counter-Terrorist (Defensive) and we had lost the pistol round and were now in our first eco-save round. We bought Desert Eagles and smoked middle followed by having the whole team walk to long A. We are predicting that the Terrorists (Offense) would not rush B as they cannot count how many are going to B site due to the smoke. We then pre-naded long A forcing the Offense to go B. Therefore, we are predicting what they will not do and forcing them to do it. The Offense, using the traditional predictive strategy, assumes that the smoke is a response to them counting and decides to scout B instead of full rushing it; they thought however that the initial response was to trigger a trap at long A and thus end up going into B unscarred. This shows they are predicting what the opponent will do and are acting to avoid it. Following the plant, we move from long A to the Offensive team’s spawn and stack outside B to take exit frags, taking down two to three terrorists and not losing a single Desert Eagle, we mocked the opponent for falling into our trap.

The next round, the Offensive team was determined to not fall into the same trap again. They noticed a smoke in middle and predicted that the Defense might this time have some in B as they have some guns to counter attacks with. Being smart however, the Offense predicted another step ahead and assumed that the Defense might still have people going long A as to produce a ‘variation’ of the original trap. The Offense decides to walk B this time and be more cautious, leaving a scout around middle and long A in case of a sneak attack – therefore they are predicting what the Defense will do and are acting to avoid it.

Counter-Terrorists (Defensive) predict that the Terrorists (Defensive) will not set themselves up into another trap and thus attempt to leave towards the Defensive spawn. Using the new predictive strategy, the defense is going to force the offense to set themselves up for the same trap previously. Thus, with the smoke in middle, they leave one Defender outside the B bombsite to stand guard while the rest walk long A – they are predicting what the opponent will not do and forcing them to do it.

The following situation then happened: the Defender located outside of B called for help instead of trying to get frags, the Defense fell back a bit and waited. The 4 other Defenders at long A pushed towards the Offense’s spawn. The Offensive scout picked off one Defender but was unable to fend off the horde that was rushing at him. The Defense once again went around the Offense’s spawn towards B tunnel and waited, one of them went to lower B towards double doors. The Offense, with the bomb planted and seconds to go before it blew are ready to escape. The Defender that was originally located outside B started off the grenades and flashes; the Defender that came from lower B to middle double doors is standing guard to fend off the Offense’s escape. The Offense, thinking that the Defenders are outside B doors take another route and leaves from tunnels. The Defender at middle falls back to lower B and goes up the stairs. Eventually all the entire Offense was sandwiched between stairs and outside B tunnels and none of them survived to tell the story of how they were once again set up into the same trap.

With the clock running all the time in Counter-Strike and in chess, to throw an opponent off guard then is to predict what they will not do and push them to do it, they may in that case fall for your trap or at the least, take a step back and reanalyze their strategy with only a heartbeat left to make a decisive decision.