Maybe chess and war don't match up, point for point, because in chess everything is on the board, exposed and available to see even hundred of years later. In war so much depends on eyes that know what the other side may not know at that moment and thus is vulnerable to deception . In chess it is only what the player knows, in general, and can apply to the position that is the secret weapon.
Originally posted by apathistThe Art of War is a great work. In some respects it states the obvious, but it is a great compilation of tactics, strategies and concepts that can be applied to nearly any endeavor.
Sun Tzu said that "All warfare is based on deception." I'm like, no, it's based on power.
I looked up the etymology of the word "war", and it is derived to mean "to confuse, perplex"! So I read more about Sun Tzu's Art of War, and I'm convinced: I was wrong, yet again.
Originally posted by MontyMooseYes, but it is a mind game. In many ways one tries to "get in the head" of an opponent. There can be underlying plans. Sac a piece, the guy thinks he's winning, you get play and counter play generating. He gets worried and eventually realizes he's lost. Sure we can replay the game and figure out most of what is being thought.
Maybe chess and war don't match up, point for point, because in chess everything is on the board, exposed and available to see even hundred of years later. In war so much depends on eyes that know what the other side may not know at that moment and thus is vulnerable to deception . In chess it is only what the player knows, in general, and can apply to the position that is the secret weapon.
The classic question of: play the board or play the player?
Here at RHP I've only got a thousand games under my belt and so each game is probably a new experience. I have no reference for this or that screen-name. I don't know how this opponent will react to bait.
The one thing that might work is to gauge how a certain opponent's rating might predict their reaction to a push, pressure, sac. Lower rating and the attack may crash through. Higher rating and you may want to play more solid chess.
"Sac... and you get play"... Oh yes, something I am trying to bring into my games!
Originally posted by MontyMooseI think you nailed it. Excluding time trouble or blitz, there is no room for bluff.
Maybe chess and war don't match up, point for point, because in chess everything is on the board, exposed and available to see even hundred of years later. In war so much depends on eyes that know what the other side may not know at that moment and thus is vulnerable to deception . In chess it is only what the player knows, in general, and can apply to the position that is the secret weapon.
But include them?
Originally posted by PonderableTerry, yes. Started his latest, and am worried (needlessly, am sure (I hope)) about Kaylen.
[b]the Goodkind books?
Fantasy is a means to speculate on the world without people noticing 😉[/b]
Your last sentence, can you explain? While not allowing a total derail?
Originally posted by apathistFirst of all: welcome.
Terry, yes. Started his latest, and am worried (needlessly, am sure (I hope)) about Kaylen.
Your last sentence, can you explain? While not allowing a total derail?
Then you did write that you read the Goodking book, in your later post you made clear which one, which kind of answers my ironic question.
Then you did write that you think Fantasy kinda stupid and I put forward the thesis that Fantasy is a substitute to develop ideas more clearly than in any novel set in the "real" world. After all all novels are fantasy since if they would deal with real facts only they wouldn't be novels at all.
Cheers
Originally posted by ChessPraxisSeems our favorite little man went to chess club for the first time today. Yep, his Mum noticed an ad in the church bulletin about "free lessons for the intellectually / psychologically challenged and beginners under the age of four. Now, he doesn't stay in his crib all day as he has for years and years. Nope, Marlene's boy- child is out and about before sunrise.... running those sweet cheeks all around the neighborhood and back telling everyone he bumps into (even non-english speaking people, political campaigners and total strangers offering candy) that he's Bowmann....
Yes, but it is a mind game.many ways one tries to "get in the head" of an opponent. There can be underlying plans. Sac a piece, the guy thinks he's winning, you get play and counter play generating. He gets worried and eventually realizes he's lost. Sure we can replay the game and figure out most of what is being thought.