I'm saying that regardless of whether you have a policy of satisficing or maximizing, both methods benefit from additional time spent thinking.
Taken literally, this is obviously and trivially true. You get more resources, your solution is likely to improve.
But in the context, the benefit is not costless. Time (in particular in a chess game) is a precious resource -- to justify spending it you need cost-benefit analysis.
Your position offers no criteria and no way to figure out when you've spent enough resources (time) and should stop -- and that is the real issue at hand.
Time (in particular in a chess game) is a precious resource -- to justify spending it you need cost-benefit analysis.
Position is also a precious resource in chess. You need to structure your play so that the trade-off between time and position is optimal, and cutting off your search the moment you think of a playable move is not that trade-off. Evidence in favor:
Another month, another rationality quotes thread. The rules are: