25 Nov 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI don't know the answer, so I hoped a bump would bring your thread a second chance. 🙂
I remember reading in a thread of a school of chess players who prided themselves on
winning games with little tactical or no tactical flurry, can anyone remember the
reference to that school or players - regards Robbie.
My pal finished this positional idea. It isn't a usable PGN though. 😞
2012 Wyoming Open
Tom Corbett (1704)
Brad Lundstrom (1922)
1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Qf3 e6 4.Nc3 Nxc3
5.Qxc3 d5 6.d4 c5 7.dxc5 Nc6 8.Nf3 b6
9.Bb5 Bd7 10.Bxc6 Bxc6 11.Bg5 Qc7
12.cxb6 Qxb6 13.0–0 Rb8 14.Be3 Qa6
15.Nd4 Bd7 16.a3 Be7 17.f4 0–0 18.b4 f5
19.Bf2 Rfc8 20.Qh3 Rc4 21.c3 Rbc8
22.Rfc1 R8c7 23.Bh4 Bxh4 24.Qxh4 Qc8
25.Ne2 d4 26.Qg3 dxc3 27.Ra2 Ba4
28.Qd3 Rd7 29.Qe3 c2 30.Kf2 Re4
31.Qc5 Qxc5+ 32.bxc5 Rd2 33.Re1
Rdxe2+ 0–1
25 Nov 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieTactical vs. Positional Chess
I remember reading in a thread of a school of chess players who prided themselves on
winning games with little tactical or no tactical flurry, can anyone remember the
reference to that school or players - regards Robbie.
KimDongHawn
According to my opinion..
Tactical chess is about strategy, how to execute our plan to get some benefits, in many case, its about combination, sacfrice, to create mating net or execute a mating combination, or to win some material advantage, etc..
Tactical is about Execution...
and
Positional Chess, is about controling the squares, as many as possible, including the centre or all over the board if possible, to bring our soldiers at the right square, regrouping them, make them the right men on the right place, to play actively, exchange our bad piece with our opponent's good one, building our initiative, preparing our plan, creating pressure to our opponent pyschologically...not try to win quickly, but keep the pressure alive, and step by step push our small advantage higher than before, and keep our threat alive...
According to Josh Waitzkin in The Art Of Learning, Don't try to win quickly, don't try to think about combination if we are not a great thinker...play step by step, play actively, put our soldier on the right square, control the squares, make a good pawn structure, and with a clear head, we use to make threats as many as possible...keep that threats alive.
Remember, the threat is stronger than execution..
25 Nov 12
Originally posted by RJHindsNever mind that jibber jabber Ron, convert my coach's game for me. 😛
Tactical vs. Positional Chess
KimDongHawn
According to my opinion..
Tactical chess is about strategy, how to execute our plan to get some benefits, in many case, its about combination, sacfrice, to create mating net or execute a mating combination, or to win some material advantage, etc..
Tactical is about Execution...
and
Positional Che ...[text shortened]... ny as possible...keep that threats alive.
Remember, the threat is stronger than execution..
25 Nov 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThread 148993
I remember reading in a thread of a school of chess players who prided themselves on
winning games with little tactical or no tactical flurry, can anyone remember the
reference to that school or players - regards Robbie.
SwissGambit's post page 2.
25 Nov 12
Originally posted by Long BarrowThanks LB for the pgn and the link. 🙂
Thread 148993
SwissGambit's post page 2.