Originally posted by FleabittenTwo-valued semantic mindsets ignore tertium quid options. Winning or losing represent only two viable outcomes of the noble game.
If I play to win and not not lose, then even if I lose, I win because I have the moral victory of knowing I have not played to not be lost. It's really quite clear.
An extraordinarily high percentage of all grandmaster games reach a different conclusion, because both white and black have bought
into an alternative paradigm which reflects their collective realism. These patient giants see further and know better than to attempt,
irresponsibly, to escalate any likely and legitimate positionally bound draw. They accept the authority of external competitive reality...
Job #1 for the intrepid is to avoid 'L' to keep both 'D' and 'W' possibilities open. We're handicapped by impatience and myopic greed.
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyWe'll have to agree to disagree. My aim from the outset is victory (Job #1) and nothing less. It is only after the game has progressed to the point that I am satisfied that my opponent has demonstrated their equality or superiority that I will shift gears to Job #2 and play to draw (not lose).
Job #1 for the intrepid is to avoid 'L' to keep both 'D' and 'W' possibilities open. We're handicapped by impatience and myopic greed.[/b]
Edit: I don't ignore the 'tertium quid option'. I merely delay considering it until I feel it warrants consideration.
Originally posted by FleabittenLet's bridge the conceptual divide (which may well be at the word level)
We'll have to agree to disagree. My aim from the outset is victory (Job #1) and nothing less. It is only after the game has progressed to the point that I am satisfied that my opponent has demonstrated their equality or superiority that I will shift gears to Job #2 and play to draw (not lose).
Edit: I don't ignore the 'tertium quid option'. I merely delay considering it until I feel it warrants consideration.
with a common ground proposition: Objective #1 = W. Job #1 = no L.
Well, GBS, please permit me to preface the answer wiith a forgotten Robert Frost atypical two liner in light verse, "It takes a lot of in and outdoor schoolin / to get accustomed to my kind of foolin." With respect to chess, that schooling began at age nine at a kitchen table not too far from Boston with my benevolent Swedish Uncle Len (who just celebrated his 92nd birthday) and in earnest with five world class mentors (E.M. Reubens, Ben Landey, Kermit Pransky, Edmund Brown, Tigran Shaack) during the decade of my twenties.
Should you be interested in reading the two biographical articles by Bernardo Inglesias on Russian born Emil Reubens and his son in law Ben Landey, simply google... Boylston Chess Club/Reubens. then click top of the page 'Weblog U2200 BCC Championship. ~gb
Originally posted by FleabittenDouble postscript, Flea: (1) Though my rhp win percent is still disgustingly modest,
A fair and equitable resolution.
draws since July, 2007, do exceed my losses by 20%. Mr.Reubens would be proud.
*Here are a few 'Sticky Thread' conversation pertinent chess quotes from my profile:
"You need not play well, just help your opponent to play badly." -Genrikh Chepukaitis.
“The tactician must know what to do whenever something needs doing; the strategist
must know what to do when nothing needs doing” -Tartakover. “Only the player with
the initiative has the right to attack” -Wilhelm Steinitz. “Chess simulates life” -anon.
.................
(2) 2009 NFL Week #6 my perfomance index stats suggest eight favorites (Cinc, Minn,
NO, Phil, Seat, Nyje, NE, Atl) and six underdogs (kc, cleve, stls, tb, detr and denv).
............................................