Normal Topic Chess attitude (Read 2856 times)
Patrick
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


Play chess!

Posts: 15
Location: England
Joined: 08/28/04
Gender: Male
Re: Chess attitude
Reply #4 - 08/28/04 at 08:31:55
Post Tools
I have similar reasons for playing chess. I kept losing at luck games like snakes and ladders Grin
  

Gower Power
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MarkPharaoh
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline


I love ChessPublishing
.com!

Posts: 42
Location: Tobyhanna
Joined: 05/23/04
Gender: Male
Re: Chess attitude
Reply #3 - 08/23/04 at 15:48:16
Post Tools
I only started like 10 months ago.  I first started because people on the school chess team kept bothering me to play since I was very good at games and solving problems very quickly so I joined.

Now I play for a few reasons.  First, it doesn't have nearly as many flaws as Magic.  I don't like to lose because of luck like I do at Grand Prix for Magic (although, they really need to do something about tie-breakers in Chess swiss tourneys).  I only like to lose because my opponent is a superior player then me.  On the flip side, another reason why I play is the satifaction of beating other players not because of luck but because of skill.
  
Back to top
AIM  
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Online


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10778
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Re: Chess attitude
Reply #2 - 08/09/04 at 10:04:13
Post Tools
Amen.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
A.A.
Guest


Re: Chess attitude
Reply #1 - 08/08/04 at 04:49:01
Post Tools
Chess to me is very similar to life. There will always be: 

i) ayatollahs, who think they have the only clue and everyone else should shut up and do as they're told.  Grin

ii) medics, i.e. 'you shouldn't play this or that since it loses the bishop pair or give you an isolani etc etc'. In life we all know we should be skinny and sober vegetarians, but where's the fun in that?  Cheesy

iii) paragraph riders, who'll inform you that the BDG is considered bad and smoking pot is against the Law, while they sip their vodka, smoke their cigarrettes and defend against the Ruy Lopez.  Grin

iv) labellers, i.e. people who can't sleep at night until they've put a nice label on every thing and person they've encountered during the day. Once they 'know' e.g.  that the Dragon is dubious since Kasparov gave it up, they won't be interested in why. If they then encounter it in play, they see it as breach of ettiquette, and won't analyse their loss with such a rude person.  Grin

v) the cunning, these are the ones who'll gladly inform you that 1.f3 and 2.g4 is the best of all openings, especially if they'll be playing black against you next week...  Grin

vi) and then there's fellow degenerates like myself, who like to mix it up with something different once in a while. As Maude tells Harold in the classic movie Harold and Maude: 
[i]'You should try something new every day, After all, we're given life to find it out. It doesn't last forever.'  Cheesy
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MNb
God Member
*****
Online


Rudolf Spielmann forever

Posts: 10778
Location: Moengo
Joined: 01/05/04
Gender: Male
Chess attitude
08/03/04 at 09:27:24
Post Tools
On request of AA I will try to explain my attitude towards chess.
For young ambitious players, the main goal is to improve their level, skilss and ELO. That is OK. They should study all aspects of the game to get a harmonious development. So did I, some 20 years ago.
But sooner or later everybody reaches a turning point - usually at the age of 25-30. No matter the efforts, progress declines and eventually stops. Everybody knows the examples of fresh GM's who fall back immediately after getting their title.
It happened to me some 13 years ago.  What was worse, when all the hard work lead to nothing anymore, I lost pleasure in chess. It happened two times, that I left a tournament after 1 or 2 rounds just because of disgust. Like Piket and Kamsky I seriously considered quitting chess.
But I asked myself the question: what makes chess attractive to me? My answer is personal, though not original: advanturous, daring, sacrificial play. I studied The art of sacrifice by my great example again. Since then I played a couple of games, which might not impress the rest of the chess world, but gave me great pleasure at the time and afterwards.
So if I do not improve anymore, be it. As long as I can play entertaining, exciting games, it is good enough for me. Sometimes I play a game I am really satisfied about. That is why I had the courage, to publish a game in the Blumenfeld Gambit in NIC, about two years ago. I am still proud of GM Van der Sterren's comment, that I am capable of good thinking. Not bad for a 1800 patzer like me, is it?
Of course other attitudes are fully justified. Some prefer slow, manoeuvring games. Others just want to raise their ELO. I can proudly say, that I have teached a few of the latter kind a hard lesson at the chessboard. The second time they meet me, they usually beat me. That is OK too.
In my opinion chess would be dead very soon, if everyone had the same attitude, played the same openings and had the same style. So I do not judge anyone, who differs from me; even not those who are so scared to lose, that they avoid all risk. I just do not want to be condemned, because I play a kind of game which is disapproved by real or false authorities.
My only advice to others is: make sure you enjoy the game. How to do this, is very personal.
  

The book had the effect good books usually have: it made the stupids more stupid, the intelligent more intelligent and the other thousands of readers remained unchanged.
GC Lichtenberg
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo