Originally posted by tvochess
What is the difference between a scientist and an engineer?
It depends what type of scientist and what type of engineer. Clearly the demarcation between lets say a theoretical physicist and a civil engineer are quite distinct, for although both use mathematics the civil engineers may be put towards an application, say building an expansion bridge, whereas the theoretical physicist simply develops theories. But chess is not engineering nor science.
Interesting was that Morphy was the most booked up player of his day and Fischer probably of his day, surely this makes them to an extent, theoreticians? But they were also chess players, whereas Staunton although he played chess, is described more as a theoretician, so i guess he theorised a lot and played a little chess as opposed to playing a lot of chess with a little theory. Is it not the case?