Chess
I’ve never played chess seriously, but as Go (game)Go (game)
player it’s hard to not avoid comparing the two games.
It is considered a joke opening because it violates all normal principles of good opening play, and is associated with internet chess humor. Former world champion Magnus Carlsen has used it in online blitz chess
Magnus Carlses Arrives “fashionably late” to a blitz match. I did not watch the game itself, but this comment form a viewer (and the commentator) was very interesting:
To everyone who is new to chess and especially this situation: Kovalev was intentionally taking extra time to make simple moves (he can also blitz these out in a few seconds) to level the time advantage. This was excellent sportsmanship from him. At 4:47 and 5:00 Carlsen adjusts pieces before pressing his clock to communicate to his opponent that he is okay with the time disadvantage now and Kovalev should no longer delay his moves. Kovalev then speeds up and they play an almost normal (bullet) game.
However, I can’t help it that chess always seemed to me pretentious somehow. Probably it’s just that I’ve accepted the manners of playing go as better somehow.
- Why shake hands to start the game when you can instead audibly wish a good game and play your opening move in a way that (by custom, supposedly) shows respect?
- Why offer to shake hands as an act of resigning when you can audibly admit you have lost, or symbolize your weakness by playing an illegal move (two stones at once)?
- Why play blitz to the very last moves before checkmate, instead of taking the time to resign after careful calculation of the position (blitz tournaments are not even a thing in go).
- Rather than occasionally adjust your chess pieces to be in the middle of the squares (or even turn up toppled pieces in a heated blitz), isn’t it more elegant to use a special finger hold to place every single stone on the board?
- Do chess players even do after game analysis to help both you and your opponent learn from the game?
I know ShogiShogi
has basically all these same things as go, so maybe it’s really an Asian vs. West thing.
http://warp.povusers.org/go/GoAndChess/
Has some interesting arguments that I don’t usually hear about the topic: Draw, faking strength online with bots, handicap, null moves. Funny how he expresses delight at the fact that go programs are very weak, even intermediate go players beating the best go programs, and then saying go bots might never beat professional players. Yeah, most of this blog was written around 2004…
http://exeterchessclub.org.uk/content/theory-steinitz From David HOOPER, Steinitz’ Theory, British Chess Magazine Vol. 104, p.370 Sept 1984:
* At the beginning of the game the forces stand in equilibrium.
* Correct play on both sides maintains this equilibrium and leads to a drawn game.
* Therefore a player can win only as a consequence of an error made by the opponent. (There is no such thing as a winning move.)
* As long as the equilibrium is maintained, an attack, however skilful, cannot succeed against correct defence. Such a defence will eventually necessitate the withdrawal and regrouping of the attacking pieces and te attacker will then inevitably suffer disadvantage.
* Therefore a player should not attack until he already has an advantage, caused by the opponent’s error, that justifies the decision to attack.
* At the beginning of the game a player should not at once seek to attack. Instead, a player should seek to disturb the equilibrium in his favour by inducing the opponent to make an error - a preliminary before attacking.
* When a sufficient advantage has been obtained, a player must attack or the advantage will be dissipated.
Every serious tournament player nowadays uses a computer to study and prepare. Some players use it as a crutch and forget how to think for themselves, whereas others use it to stimulate their own creative ideas. Like any tool, chess programs can be used for good or ill.
