This follows a discussion i was having privately with Nimzo. It seemed apparent to
me, during my time playing chess, particularly blitz, that there are certain types of
players.

1.The attacker

This player does not really understand anything about chess, they simply love to
attack. The only concept of chess they have, is attack and defence. Therefore in
order to play against such an opponent, all one needs to do is create a strategic
type of position, when their attack fails, you will have an advantage.

2.The Stonewaller

Likes to create stodgy passive positions with the hope of curtailing any tactical play.
In order to beat up such an approach, one should employ practical means , although
what they are at present , i cannot say, for I only ever meet the attacker.

3.The Waiters

garçon!, garçon!, what is this knight doing in my position, adroitly identified by
Nimzo, they wait for you to make a mistake, they check tactics carefully and punish
any 3 move oversight. They readily exchange material without any attempt at
gaining advantage from the exchanges and will often try to kill any play in the
endgame. These are almost always adult players. Again I am uncertain on how to
proceed, I only ever meet the attacker. any suggestions would be great.

4. The Schoolboy,

perceptively described by Nimzo, the scholastic rising star player who has
tremendous book knowledge but will struggle in anything but a uniform position.
These guys often offer draws repeatedly once they have reached the end of book in
a theoretically even position since they assume that an = opening is a draw. Lol,
other than physically threatening the schoolboy and his father, one should naturally
play for some type of advantage that may be realised in endgame, for he shall be
leaving his comfort zone and heading into ours.

If anyone has any suggestions how to beat up particular types of club players then
please let it be known. Personally i should belong to a category known as the
blunderer, that is one who builds a pretty decent position and blunders away his
advantage with one or two move howlers. Yes, i think i should term it, The Howler!
awwwwooooo!

There may be some sequence like in rock-paper-scissors.

a stonewaller beats an attacker, (attacker crashes against the wall)
a waiter beats a stonewaller, (waiter has mobility and will create opportunities)
a schoolboy beats a waiter, (schoolboy won't give the waiter the space he needs)
an attacker beats a schoolboy (an attacker will bring the schoolboy into positions he doesn't like)

of course, a howler loses to all of them, because he adapts his style in the wrong way, e.g. will attack against a stonewaller.

a super player adapts in the correct way.

I think there is another category too, the Reactor. Someone with no preferred style, so kind of like a Waiter but quite quickly decides upon an Attacking or Stonewalling route in the game, as situations allow/dictate.

*Edit, and almost always playing as black

Originally posted by tvochess
There may be some sequence like in rock-paper-scissors.

a stonewaller beats an attacker, (attacker crashes against the wall)
a waiter beats a stonewaller, (waiter has mobility and will create opportunities)
a schoolboy beats a waiter, (schoolboy won't give the waiter the space he needs)
an attacker beats a schoolboy (an attacker will bring the schoolb ...[text shortened]... rong way, e.g. will attack against a stonewaller.

a super player adapts in the correct way.

Originally posted by morgski
I think there is another category too, the Reactor. Someone with no preferred style, so kind of like a Waiter but quite quickly decides upon an Attacking or Stonewalling route in the game, as situations allow/dictate.

*Edit, and almost always playing as black

Is every action met by an equal and opposite reaction?

Originally posted by ketchuplover
Is every action met by an equal and opposite reaction?

I would add The Offbeat Nonconformist, who always plays the unusual, offbeat, or downright bizarre openings just to be different.

Every offbeat opening usually has one line or scheme that completely derails it (that's why it's less popular, usually, unless a strong player rehabilitates it and it becomes a fad), and you can usually annoy the #$^$ out of them by playing the annoying line against them all the time.

Originally posted by Paul Leggett
I would add The Offbeat Nonconformist, who always plays the unusual, offbeat, or downright bizarre openings just to be different.

Every offbeat opening usually has one line or scheme that completely derails it (that's why it's less popular, usually, unless a strong player rehabilitates it and it becomes a fad), and you can usually annoy the #$^$ out of them by playing the annoying line against them all the time.

A surprise attack with a big stick has always worked well for me.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
here is an example of the attacker, a blitz game just played illustrates the concept well.

mummin v robbie the howler (awooo)
[pgn] [Event "RHP Blitz rated"] [Site "www.timeforchess.com"] [Date "2011.10.12"] [Round "?"] [White "mummin"] [Black "robbie carrobie"] [Result "0-1"] [PlyCount "76"] [EventDate "2011.??.??"] 1. e4 b6 {Owens opening, whi ...[text shortened]... relentless attacker. Awwwwoooooo, werewolfs of London, awooooo} 0-1[/pgn]

Originally posted by ketchuplover
Is every action met by an equal and opposite reaction?

Originally posted by torten
A surprise attack with a big stick has always worked well for me.

Originally posted by morgski
Robbie, that was a clear case of an early attacker getting slowly bludgeoned into submission for his early folly. Awwwooooeeelll done

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have played you five times Torten and lost five times, I wouldn't say you necessarily
attacked in an unjustified manner, in fact, many of our games were book for many
moves until i blundered, awwoooo!