Originally posted by Marinkatomb I got Barbarian, but that couldn't be further from the truth. When asked to evaluate Sicilian positions i naturally consider tactical implications. I don't play e4 though so my opinions on that are irrelevant..
Of course it's just for amusement. I didn't agree with my results either. When I was younger, yes, I was a barbarian chess wise. I think I've matured into a more positional dynamic type. But my attitude is much the same, as well as what I like and don't like.
I got Chess Surgeon, sharing that with Lasker, apparently.
"Surgeons are tricky, practical players who use positional play to fight for a win in all positions. They don't usually gain big advantages early in the game, and sometimes even get worse positions; but the Surgeon is clever and knows how to fight. With great nerves and calculating ability, a Surgeon will uncover every hidden resource available to bring the game to a favorable conclusion."
It's definitely true that my opening game is not the best. I barely know any theory and I rely on my middle and endgame play to carry the day.
Fun 'test.' Assassin. No surprise that I should admire Fischer's games. I think someone once said of Fischer that playing against him was like being emotionally clubbed to death.
Magicians are the ultimate attackers. Magicians don't care too much if their play is objectively correct - they prefer to follow their intuition and fancy, creating complications and confusing their opponent. A Magician sees chess as a creative art, and creative art cannot be held captive by stern and fixed principles. Magicians can calculate well, but they sometimes do so quickly and carelessly, using their calculation to support what their intuition tells them. Magicians enjoy the unusual and spectacular, and can often become bored by slow maneuvering.