Originally posted by tomtom232I doubt that and so do most GMs. They play with themes in mind. (d5 in the Sicilian, f6 in the French, etc.) I look at the strategical points of the position and see what the best plan is. Then, I think about what I need to do to implement that plan. Now, I look at all the tactics that can make my plan work or fail.
How is that so when strategy is planning and GM's always say to have a plan at all times, they also say that you won't get many tactical shots unless you play with a plan?
ps. I don't doubt what you say, this is just an honest question.
Tactics and strategy go hand in hand...but I believe in a deeper sense the game is more action and reaction. By that I mean both players have their ideas about how they want to go into the game, but those plans can be changed by the actions of their opponent....for better or worse. This means your game plan is perpetually changing unless your opponent plays exactly as you had hoped or surmised. All of this is assuming that one or both sides are playing perfect chess and not pitching pieces. I have played some players who play a totally defensive game and will not make a proactive move until their opponent blunders. Likewise I have seen several players who come out attacking like there is no tomorrow. Sometimes they overwhelm their opponent and sometimes they become over-extended and fall prey to their opponent. The strategy portion of the game especially comes into view when you determine what segment of the game you would like to end the game. Against an opponent with a strong early game and weak end game, trade off early and force the end game. That is provided that you already know strengths or weaknesses of your opponent. I personally do not believe that there are standard answers to all the games. I don't believe that all of the various chess openings have to be played a certain way. I believe that surprise is a huge weapon and disguising your plan, or playing the unpredictable can produce rewards. Of course, as I have proven in several of my games, playing with your head up your ass can produce unfavorable results as well. I am not sure if what I said makes any sense to all of you (it does make perfect sense to me btw), but that is my take on the topic. Arguing the merits of tactics vs strategy is like arguing whether air or water are most important to your survival....both are very important and either can kill you if it is missing so neither is more important than the other.
Originally posted by shortcircuitYou can go days without water, but only minutes without air. Though both are essential to life, that does suggest that air is more important.
Arguing the merits of tactics vs strategy is like arguing whether air or water are most important to your survival....both are very important and either can kill you if it is missing so neither is more important than the other.
Originally posted by bassoYour point is well taken, but don't forget, while both water and air are essential to life, they both possess the power to kill you as well.
You can go days without water, but only minutes without air. Though both are essential to life, that does suggest that air is more important.
Originally posted by shortcircuitTrue enough. I read awhile ago that a boy had engaged in a water-drinking contest with a friend to see who could drink the most water. Well, boy A did in fact drink the most water and won the contest, but, as a result, he died. True story.
Your point is well taken, but don't forget, while both water and air are essential to life, they both possess the power to kill you as well.
Originally posted by Squelchbelchyou can't force tactics to appear with strategy either. the only way a tactical shot can appear is by your opponent looking (at least) one move less deep than you. making an error.
That's a bit extreme. You can't magic a tactic out of thin air if none exists.
and tactical power is just that. seeing more and faster than your opponent. strategy is a (n educated) shot into the darkness that lies beyond your tactical sight.
being forced to choose, I'd take tactical vision every time. but luckily we can have both.