Why people ruin structure developement within the opening of the game for such cheaps attempts at tricks that they will most likely not accomplish, is beyond me. That's not chess; cheap power-packed developement, opening up the board to play off of trading pieces or working off of childish tricks is not strategy, and therefore, not chess; these "players" do not play gracefully, skillfully, or with developed strengths, but with the hope of a quick, fatal opening game. - ...it shows true lack of what the game can truly offer.
Originally posted by mlu9 Why people ruin structure developement within the opening of the game for such cheaps attempts at tricks that they will most likely not accomplish, is beyond me. That's not chess; cheap power-packed developement, opening up the board to play off of trading pieces or working off of childish tricks is not strategy, and therefore, not chess; these "players" do not ...[text shortened]... uick, fatal opening game. - ...it shows true lack of what the game can truly offer.
~mlu9
You play your style and let them play their style. If you fall for cheap tricks, it's your problem.
Originally posted by mlu9 Why people ruin structure developement within the opening of the game for such cheaps attempts at tricks that they will most likely not accomplish, is beyond me. That's not chess; cheap power-packed developement, opening up the board to play off of trading pieces or working off of childish tricks is not strategy, and therefore, not chess; these "players" do not ...[text shortened]... uick, fatal opening game. - ...it shows true lack of what the game can truly offer.
~mlu9
It is the right strategy if it wins a reasonable amount of games.
Originally posted by mlu9 Why people ruin structure developement within the opening of the game for such cheaps attempts at tricks that they will most likely not accomplish, is beyond me. That's not chess; cheap power-packed developement, opening up the board to play off of trading pieces or working off of childish tricks is not strategy, and therefore, not chess; these "players" do not ...[text shortened]... uick, fatal opening game. - ...it shows true lack of what the game can truly offer.
Originally posted by mlu9 Why people ruin structure developement within the opening of the game for such cheaps attempts at tricks that they will most likely not accomplish, is beyond me. That's not chess; cheap power-packed developement, opening up the board to play off of trading pieces or working off of childish tricks is not strategy, and therefore, not chess; these "players" do not ...[text shortened]... uick, fatal opening game. - ...it shows true lack of what the game can truly offer.
Originally posted by mlu9 Why people ruin structure developement within the opening of the game for such cheaps attempts at tricks that they will most likely not accomplish, is beyond me. That's not chess; cheap power-packed developement, opening up the board to play off of trading pieces or working off of childish tricks is not strategy, and therefore, not chess; these "players" do not ...[text shortened]... uick, fatal opening game. - ...it shows true lack of what the game can truly offer.
~mlu9
Well,if you continue to play people rated around 1000 you'll see a lot of those "cheap attempts".
Try to play people around your level and you'll have nothing to whine about.
It is nice to see responses... nomatter the negativity, I suppose. Though you will see "cheap tricks" wherever you may look when concerning players of the game. While I agree a person should play someone of their own strength in the game, as of right now, I'm not completely certain where my own level is, so I continue to search for it. I play a large variety of players, ranging from beginners to somewhat above "average" but yet I find that when in a bind, tricks are somewhat referred to very often.
All I would say to the reply of "do what wins" is that the game, as most games is not merely for winning. Let whoever do what they may, but know very little experience would be gained if the win were to be accidental or just slight cheap calculation.
I guess it really comes down to that people will play as they wish and will most likely never see, (if they lack seeing) that to truly play chess would be for the art or the grace... not to 'win,' though that is a plus. You can often find a player defeating another who may be more skilled than he/she is.
It just really is funny to see them waste their attempts at these plays is all I was noticing.
Originally posted by mlu9 It is nice to see responses... nomatter the negativity, I suppose. Though you will see "cheap tricks" wherever you may look when concerning players of the game. While I agree a person should play someone of their own strength in the game, as of right now, I'm not completely certain where my own level is, so I continue to search for it. I play a large variety of ...[text shortened]... attempts at these plays is all I was noticing.
Originally posted by mlu9 Though you will see "cheap tricks" wherever you may look when concerning players of the game.
players in the 1600's and under are mainly separated by the notion that a 'trick' from lower rated players will usually leave them worse if not fallen into, while a 'trick' from 1600+ will gain him something even when the opponent doesn't fall into it.
Originally posted by wormwood players in the 1600's and under are mainly separated by the notion that a 'trick' from lower rated players will usually leave them worse if not fallen into, while a 'trick' from 1600+ will gain him something even when the opponent doesn't fall into it.
it's about pressure, threats and tension.
those 1600+ have so much pressure, threats and tension like you said...until it s like a trick, followed by another and another...
Designer's move
26 Apr '06 18:58
Back to Top