10 Feb 09
Originally posted by moteutschAnd I say, we must move forward, not backward, upward not forward,
“You must take your opponent into a deep dark forest where 2+2=5,
and the path leading out is only wide enough for one”
- [b]Mikhail Tal[/b]
and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom.
11 Feb 09
Originally posted by AlzheimerI disagree with the second one.
this statement is from Nigel Short:
"Chess is ruthless: you've got to be prepared to kill people."
I am not sure I agree with this!!!
The only I totally agree with is this one:
"Even a poor plan is better than no plan at all." Mikhail Tchigorin
11 Feb 09
Originally posted by Diet Cokewell, I guess it depends on how good your opponent is!!!
In two recent OTB games I've played the reason I've won isn't because of anything I've done, rather it was my opponent "trying to do something" and ending up losing.
If he is a strong player he/she should find a good plan.
I think if a player can find a plan, then he/she isn't a good player.
If I find a plan in a game I will play it. If the plan is good it'll work out fine. If the plan is bad you lose. That's fine with me. But doing nothing is not my style!!! 😉
What did you gain from that game apart from two points, Diet Coke?
11 Feb 09
Originally posted by AlzheimerMy opponents outgraded me by 23BCF and 43BCF.
well, I guess it depends on how good your opponent is!!!
If he is a strong player he/she should find a good plan.
I think if a player can find a plan, then he/she isn't a good player.
If I find a plan in a game I will play it. If the plan is good it'll work out fine. If the plan is bad you lose. That's fine with me. But doing nothing is not my style!!! 😉
What did you gain from that game apart from two points, Diet Coke?
11 Feb 09
Originally posted by AlzheimerAnd I gained a place in the QF of my club knock out cup. 😛
didn't really answer my question!
This reminds me of a conversation between two masters I read in a book (I forget their names).
A: Are you playing for a draw?
B: No
A: Then you are playing for a win?
B: No
A: Surely you're not playing for a loss?
B: I'm just playing the moves the position demands.
Incidentally, the game ended in a draw.
11 Feb 09
Originally posted by Diet CokeGood conversation! According to Silman, it's from the book "Najdorf: Life and Games".
And I gained a place in the QF of my club knock out cup. 😛
This reminds me of a conversation between two masters I read in a book (I forget their names).
A: Are you playing for a draw?
B: No
A: Then you are playing for a win?
B: No
A: Surely you're not playing for a loss?
B: I'm just playing the moves the position demands.
Incidentally, the game ended in a draw.
Silman quotes,
A conversation that occurred during a game against Boleslavsky:
Najdorf: “Do you want a draw?”
Boleslavsky: “No.”
N: “You’re playing for a win, then?”
B: “No.”
N: “So you do want a draw!”
B: “No.”
N: “Would you by any chance be playing for a loss, then?”
B: “No.”
N: “Well, what do you want, then?”
B: “To play chess.”
11 Feb 09
3 edits
I think that making any old move that doesn't hang material or create an obvious positional weakness is preferable to pursuing a bad plan. While you're making your "do nothing" moves, your opponent might make a move that gives you an opportunity to pursue a good plan.
It seems to me that pursuing a bad plan is probably going to make your position worse (otherwise the plan wouldn't be bad), while doing "nothing" will more or less maintain the status quo.
Before a match against a computer in the 1980's, IM David Levy expressed his strategy as follows: "I'm going to do nothing, but I'm going to do it very carefully."