spirituality in chess

I have to make a correction at the abv post as following:

1. Seek for the truth when I try to decide the specific kind of weakness that Ι want to create at the enemy camp. Of course Ι have to keep my forces well paired and flexible


Excuse me for the inconvenience😵

Oh this "I" keeps up refusing to be typed😵

Originally posted by black beetle
Oh this "I" keeps up refusing to be typed😵

beetle i have to share these thoughts with you for they seem to me to be an accurate summation of the essence of sacrifice, not of its immediate effect, the transitional qualities that you have already given breath to, for to be sure, no combination in chess has so profound an effect, the apparent senselessness, the risk of material loss and the humility which must accompany it if it fails, but we are thrilled in its execution, its a matter of the imagination over the mundane, of intellect over materialism, the triumph of original thought over maxims and mere opinion, and so it becomes a matter of spirituality! is it not amazing?

Master Reti puts it this way 'Now we see wherein lies the pleasure to be derived from a chess combination. it lies in the feeling that a human mind is behind the game and dominating the pieces with which the game is carried on, and giving them the breath of life. We may regard it as an intellectual delight, equal to that afforded us by the knowledge that behind so many disconnected and seemingly chance happenings in the physical world lies the one great ruling spirit - the law of Nature.'

what can we say? To play for material advantage is what everyone does, as in chess as in life! it is the usual everyday occurrence and may rightly be termed banal, but winning combination involving sacrifices, represent the victory of originality over the jejune mind, the triumph of the imagination over lack of, personality over materialism. is it any wonder they give us such occasion for happiness?

oh brothers of the chess board should we be afraid to make sacrifices, as in chess as in life! it is true even as the teacher himself states, 'there is more happiness in giving than in receiving!' 🙂

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
beetle i have to share these thoughts with you for they seem to me to be an accurate summation of the essence of sacrifice, not of its immediate effect, the transitional qualities that you have already given breath to, for to be sure, no combination in chess has so profound an effect, the apparent senselessness, the risk of material loss and the humi ...[text shortened]... ven as the teacher himself states, 'there is more happiness in giving than in receiving!' 🙂

I 'm not as good as master Reti neither at the Immortal Game nor at the field of the dexterity of offering a clear shape of my ideas -at least in English; however I see the Sacrifice as the strongest agent that enables us to apply our Strategy.

I think that you are familiar with Popper's philosophical concept of the Worlds 1, 2 and 3, according to which the Human is a product of his products. Well, the chessplayer is definately a product of his (opening, middlegame, endgame studies/ practice) products due to the fact that Sacrifice pops up by means of a specific shape to his Strategy through his Tactics. This is clear to me whilst studying, ie, the Endgame; for example, at an R + pawn vs B endgame the camp with the Rook has to sac the Rook for the Bishop in order to win; and when we are at a R + a-pawn vs B + a-pawn, the King of the inferior camp should be forced to move at least to the e file or further and to be isolated there, because then the superior camp will sac the Rook for the Bishop and the enemy pawn in order to win. If you know the Strategy you will apply the correct Tactics, and your opponent will defend doind the same in order to deter your plans; nothing supernatural or amazing over here -Nothing Holy, although the chessplayer who ignores the Intentions-Concept/ Strategy required for each camp at this kind of position could possibly assume that there is "magic"! And yes, there 's always "magic" when you have worked out your a$$ year after year for years and then everything you do is coming seemingly out of the blue without the slightest effort.

So you always have to know What to Do! Study of the endgame shows amongst else that the Sacrifice cannot arise out of the blue -there are principles and motives that they are used as indicators of the accuracy of such a decision. There are always specific details in the position and we have to pay attention in order to spot and decode them in order to evaluate the position accurately.

I don't know at what specific stage the Product of the chessplayer's knowledge regarding Sacrifice can transform his way of thinking and therefore transform himself; I mean, I do believe that this is a constant process, however I have the impression that one needs solely to Know -and he probably Knows well enough when he gets his GM norm. Below this level, this kind of wavefuncion can be collapsed by every other chessplayer too, but the accuracy of the variations is quite lower. Therefore, the product "Sacrifice" has to be worked in depth by the chessplayer in order to have the product "chessplayer" created. Then, the chessplayer will be able to act as a pure product of his product/ Knowledge🙂

So what is the Law of Nature as Reti poses it? Is it "...if I stub your heart it's fine if you stub my hand..."?

I tend to believe that originality is a product of our Knowledge/ Intuition -and I firmly believe that we earn Knowledge/ Intuition after hard struggle in a never ending School; also I firmly believe that if my Heart is out of order then my Brain is useless. I need my BodySoul in oneness, otherwise the Void gives its place to miscellaneous delusions😵

And just a bit deeper: when we are ready to apply a strategy we would better watch out for its falsification just as Popper poses it. What can go wrong?! A strategy is quite similar to a new scientific theory, and a scientific theory must definately pass the test of the falsification.

So we do have to find out what can go wrong, otherwise our strategy is not backed up well by our tactics and therefore it will probably fail due to the superior tactics of our opponent. The main tactical blast known as Sacrifice must be seriously considered, and of course we must consider the possibility that our opponent will refuse to accept our Greek Gift. Therefore, our ability to falsify our own strategy in order to avoid a soon to come tactical blow, and of course our ability to falsify the strategy of our opponent in order to deliver soon a tactical blow, they both spring from our Knowledge/ Intuition alone.
Nothing Holy😵

Originally posted by black beetle
And just a bit deeper: when we are ready to apply a strategy we would better watch out for its falsification just as Popper poses it. What can go wrong?! A strategy is quite similar to a new scientific theory, and a scientific theory must definately pass the test of the falsification.

So we do have to find out what can go wrong, otherwise our strateg ...[text shortened]... iver soon a tactical blow, they both spring from our Knowledge/ Intuition alone.
Nothing Holy😵

id be really interested as to what your opinion is with regard to a purely intuitive sacrifice, i.e. one that is entirely speculative! for as you are aware beetle there are differing degrees of sacrifice due to the relative values of the pieces, thus we may sacrifice a pawn to open lines as master Morphy was adept at, this coupled with an an advantage in development should yield good results, but it is not entirely intuitive, for it has a rational behind it, therefore, if we contrast that, with a purely intuitive sacrifice of the queen say, the loss of which would most certainly meet with devastation, and may or may not transform the position in our favour, then it is something quite different, for it is purely speculative, yet almost always absolutely decisive.

i unashamedly reproduce for you a game, yes brothers of the immortal game, i know this is the spirituality forum, but we are discussing matters of the spirit, intuition and sacrifice, imagination over materialism, so please allow us this simple interlude.

its a game from Greenpawns book, rampant chess, in which Jacob Agaard, does exactly this, engages in a purely intuitive and speculative queen sacrifice! thus because of its intuitive nature, it seems to me, to become at that moment, a purely spiritual entity, for it seems to almost transcend rationality, after all who would sacrifice there queen for a pawn without any reassurances?



thus greenpawn himself states, 'dear reader there is no other move on the chessboard that gives you the same feeling of absolute exaltation an an unclear queen sacrifice, and this is an unclear queen sacrifice. this is no three move check-check-mate variation. Sac your queen for a mere pawn and you walk with the Gods. your brain switches into top gear, adrenaline flows, your eyes go as big as dinner plates, you see everything! the best bit is when you play the game, even years later, you still get that feeling of complete joy.

thus it appears to me beetle, to possibly transcend, even the mind, for it seems to defy rationality, and then, it becomes part of the spiritual realm 🙂

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
id be really interested as to what your opinion is with regard to a purely intuitive sacrifice, i.e. one that is entirely speculative! for as you are aware beetle there are differing degrees of sacrifice due to the relative values of the pieces, thus we may sacrifice a pawn to open lines as master Morphy was adept at, this coupled with an an advanta ...[text shortened]... the mind, for it seems to defy rationality, and then, it becomes part of the spiritual realm 🙂

This is fine -I have to buy and read this book, but for the time being I study Grivas and Dvoretsky and very soon Kotov, and it is above my ability to move further.

However I am sure that master Aagard, a discipline of master Dvoretsky too, had his Queen sac perfectly calculated 😵

Isolated Pawn

The IP can be supported solely by pieces; an IP at the side files is a weakness, so we avoid to be saddled with it unless we have in mind specific tactics that they will offer us solid compensation.

A central IP is a tricky characteristic: during the opening we may achieve thanks to a central IP quick development, spatial advantage, control of important squares and initiative; and during the middlegame we may achieve thanks to the above strong initiation at the centre or at the flanks, therefore a player with a central IP has to bring up quickly a good plan because once s/he enters the endgame this dynamic advantage becomes a permanent weakness. Why? Because the strategy of the side with the central IP will be focused rather on the support of that pawn than on an energetic attacking plan.

So the central IP could become our Force or our Weakness: Force if the player will be able to turn its short term dynamism into a concrete and lasting advantage, and Weakness if the player succumbs to the static weakness of the IP.

The disadvantages of our central IP are the following:
1. The pawn itself for it can be supported solely by pieces, therefore if the opponent is permitted to attack it with more pieces than the ones that defend it we will loose material;
2. The hole in front of the IP becomes a strong square for the opponent;
3. If we are playing passively we will see soon our pieces badly coordinated;
4. Since we are aware that the endgame will be hard for us we could be trapped in our own mind, therefore we could end up trying to overcome the difficulties of the position by causing even more impurities in our camp;

The advantages of our central IP are the following:
1. Fast development during the opening;
2. Spatial advantage;
3. Control of vital central squares;
4. Initiation during the middlegame;
5. Chances to strike hard at the centre by means of a well calculated advance of our IP;
6. Chances over the exploitation of the open and semi-open files that the central IP creates;

The cornerstone of the strategy of the players in a position with a central IP is the answer of this question: what pieces must be kept and what pieces must be exchanged?
The army with a central IP has to avoid the exchanges that they do not lead to a concrete advantage; if the player with a central IP is forced to trade pieces and has the chance to choose, s/he should avoid to trade the light pieces because in an endgame with heavy pieces s/he can hardly stand a chance.
The player with a central IP should avoid further weakening of her/ his pawn structure because in this case s/he will face more problems.

The above thoughts are not carved on stone: each position should be treated according to our evaluation, and our evaluation should be based on the analysis of the specific strategic and tactical characteristics of the position. Each move of ours should raise phenomena tricky enough to cause confusion to our opponent, and at the same time they should lead us to the gaining of miscellaneous strategic advantages😵

Can you say something about the 'spirituality' of the Budapest-Fajarowicz.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Can you say something about the 'spirituality' of the Budapest-Fajarowicz.

I rarely face it with the White and I never play it with the Black, so my knowledge of this system is ancient and based mostly on early Keene’s comments (and nowdays Cox finds the system easy to crack, whilst Nunn et all demonstrate in detail in NCO how easily the Black can be devastated).

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.de methinks the Fajarowicz is problematic due to 3. …Ne4 4.Nf3 Bb4+ 5. Bd2 Bc5 6.e3 Nc6 7.Nc3 Nxd2 8.Qxd2 0-0 9.Nd5 a5 10.Be2 Re8 11.Qc3!, and the Black has to fight hard in order to regain his pawn whilst the White has just to play based on common sense -for example, White’s sole plan could be the defense of his e5 pawn by all means. You can also study Alekhine-Tartakower 1-0 London 1932. However, the Fajarowicz has scored better than 3. ..Ng4.
On the other hand, after 3. …Ng4 (that is considered better than Fajarowicz) Gligoric killed Westerinen in Venice 1971 within 27 moves…

Of course we keep in mind that Budapest is very tactical and can become a lethal OTB and blitz surprise weapon
😵

Originally posted by black beetle
I rarely face it with the White and I never play it with the Black, so my knowledge of this system is ancient and based mostly on early Keene’s comments (and nowdays Cox finds the system easy to crack, whilst Nunn et all demonstrate in detail in NCO how easily the Black can be devastated).

After 1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e5 3.de methinks the Fajarowicz is proble ...[text shortened]... in mind that Budapest is very tactical and can become a lethal OTB and blitz surprise weapon
😵

one must ask the question, for what is black willing to sacrifice his central e pawn for? After 1.d4 Nf6, 2.c4 e5, 3.dxe5 Ng4 the position has been transformed and black can look forward to some active piece play. His dark squared bishop can easily come to c5 or b4, his knight shall come quickly to the centre on c6, after d6 his bishop has scope perhaps to e6, f5 and he has a half open e file with doubled pawns as targets, and white has lost a little of his central control due to the exchange of his d4 pawn now on e5.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
one must ask the question, for what is black willing to sacrifice his central e pawn for? After 1.d4 Nf6, 2.c4 e5, 3.dxe5 Ng4 the position has been transformed and black can look forward to some active piece play. His dark squared bishop can easily come to c5 or b4, his knight shall come quickly to the centre on c6, after d6 his bishop has scope pe ...[text shortened]... and white has lost a little of his central control due to the exchange of his d4 pawn now on e5.

"Active play" means to me "good planning", and "good planning" is hard whenever you face a position that forces you to equalize and at the same time asks from you to be extremely inventive. The Budapest Fajarowicz idea is good -activity for some material by means of a pseudogambit- however the White can always gain a small but lasting advantage even after trading his e5 pawn for the control over d5: since the White keeps his two Bs, controls the a1-h8 diagonal and hunts down the black B with his K, the position is slightly better for him than for the Black -and methinks this is the reason why Cox states "what was once a search for lively counter-attacking play, today tends to be used to reach solid and slightly worse positions".
In fact I do not see any easy way for the Black to equalize😵

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
dear friends i wish to explore some of the ideas pertaining to certain spiritual or philosophical ideas and how they may be understood to assist with the process of development in chess. this has partly been inspired by my friend black beetle, an atheist and philosopher and partly by the need to explore ideas and principles to gain understanding. t ...[text shortened]... friend.

thus the principle is one adaptation and fluidity, but how does this apply to chess?

Ah, Bishop-hopper, when you can snatch the pawn from the board, it is time for you to move on. 🙂

Originally posted by Ice Cold
Ah, Bishop-hopper, when you can snatch the pawn from the board, it is time for you to move on. 🙂

ahhhhh yes Master!

Originally posted by black beetle
"Active play" means to me "good planning", and "good planning" is hard whenever you face a position that forces you to equalize and at the same time asks from you to be extremely inventive. The Budapest Fajarowicz idea is good -activity for some material by means of a pseudogambit- however the White can always gain a small but lasting advantage even aft lightly worse positions".
In fact I do not see any easy way for the Black to equalize😵

it has i think been proven in praxis that the white cannot successfully ignore the gambit. moves like 3.d5 (provides an out post on c5 for blacks kings bishop), 3.e3 (black shall simply remove the d pawn and his position is sound, exd4 is harmless and Qxd4 is bad) and even after the acceptance of the gambit with ...Ng4 what is white to do? he has tried f4 a la Alekhine chasing the knight away, but giving himself weaknesses, moves like Qd4 protecting the e pawn and attacking the night are also unsuccessful, and he has tried the more classical approach with 4.Nf3 and 4.Bf4 protecting the pawn, which cannot be done, or rather is quite difficult to do.

This is the point , really, for it is well known that the queens Gambit player likes to pressurise the centre, slowly, almost imperceptibly, until the momentum of his pieces causes cracks and weaknesses, for the black, if he is not active he gets strangled and thus this provides him with easy strategy. The white in many lines may keep his two bishops, but the position is not so easy to open and if black can manage to keep it closed and exchange a bishop, he stands in good stead. If the white is unprepared for it, it can be so sharp that he walks the plank. Imagine you are sitting as the white and you are ready to play against the Kings Indian, the Nimzo or the QGD and the black goes and plays 2.e5, shall we rejoice at the prospect, and the black he is grinning gleefully like Tal, making mischief with 2.e5!