[jprival]

Reminds me tangentially of the study that found that strong chess players were much worse at recalling randomized positions than realistic ones: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758/BF03200937.pdf

I’m wary of inviting the too-easy “it’s just like how it works for people!” comparison, but the implied context and history of a game state seems to be important in processing it.

[pvg]

Is it context and history or just that real game positions have much lower entropy? Most people can easily remember a sentence after a quick look, a similar-length string of random characters a lot less so.

[613style]

I think this is correct. I play Go at a strong amateur level, and on the 19x19 board, I can often fully recall 200+ move games against "normal" opponents, because the moves tell a story that makes sense. But if I play someone much weaker or much stronger who makes a lot of unexpected moves, I'll have trouble remembering those moments.