OT:  perhaps this leaves the big question of how different players deal with captured pieces.  See how Fischer lined them up here:  http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1044125

(Anand-Giri in the new Open Sicilians update reminded me, albeit vaguely, of that game.)

(edit:  okay, maybe that wasn't Fischer's doing)

Yes, the kinesthetic and mechanical aspects of this are interesting--I'm left-handed and grab my pieces from the side, as if executing a backhand stroke in tennis, or using the Kramnik praying-mantis movement, which is a modified backhand. I'd have to strain awkwardly to point my hand forward.

Keres seems to have placed his knights facing  left or kingside, anyway almost always both sideways facing the same way, in photos of games in progress.

ReneDescartes wrote on 01/15/17 at 17:07:19:

Thanks. I've actually thought of making this style more of a conscious improvement project by "brainwashing" myself with hundreds of games by these players and others like them. I'm fairly sure Keres fits (have you seen any photos of his knights, by the way?). An interesting coincidence (or maybe not): Zenon Franco has written well-received Everyman "Move by Move" books on both Spassky, Anand and most recently Keres in the last few years (though also on Morphy and Rubinstein).

Kasparov is a borderline case between universal-aggressive and all-out attacker, but many of the ultra-attackers become more sedate and universal as they mature anyway. This is even true of Tal in the 1980s and Shirov today! But I'm not sure who among today's top playes best fit the universal-aggressive label apart from Anand - maybe Aronian, Svidler or Ivanchuk (though he plays in all styles and openings apparently). And maybe Western players like Kamsky, van Wely, Short, and Nunn when they were closer to the top of the rating lists.

To continue the quasi-psychological speculation: Maybe universal-aggressive players face the knights forward because we need a reminder to play aggressively, while for more natural or reckless attackers that goes without saying, so they don't need forward knights as a visual que. 

I remember coming across a lengthy discussion of this at Lloyds masters some years back. The arguments were...

In favour of side pointing: 
Not likely to get mixed up with another piece, cos you can see the faces.

Forward pointing:
Aggression, heading into battle.

Someone should ask Christopher Lambert: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104627/

I am just wondering how to position the bishop head slits myself....

Down with the side-wayers I say.

inward - reflecting a purely visual preference for the side profile in favor of the back of the knight-head.
One effect of facing the knights inward over facing them the same direction is that you can tell the origination square of each knight far into the game.  This rarely matters at all but sometimes i've seen old descriptive notation like KN-Q4 or QN-Q4.

Regarding style connections: I admire players with a universal style but leaning more towards the aggressive, and consider Alekhine, Spassky and Anand - all "forwarders" according to the original list - prime examples of that style.

(Though when I get peaceful positions I just pretend I'm Smyslov or Karpov instead, with variable results, so maybe the above is just psychobabble...)

TalJechin wrote on 01/10/17 at 20:05:07:


If that were true, the board would have a dark square on the right, which is not the case in these photos.

http://www.kasparov.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/62%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0...

https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/.vd.SSu990oNabUwUV1jkQ--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlc...

https://cdn.chess24.com/pKL6A3r3Qbu_55-gGZMJPA/original/karpov-furman-opening-pr...

http://c7.alamy.com/comp/GTE871/world-chess-champion-anatoly-karpov-of-russia-ma...

The last is against Anand in Lausanne. The black-and-white is against Furman in Russia.