|
|
|
Topic: How do you determine what your own playing style is?
| |
|
|
Author
| Message |
|---|
|
|
Hi Kensho,
I don't think I can fully agree about your theory. I guess a players style can give an indication about one's personallity, but as viceroy already pointed out there are many factors. I guess one's behaviour in daily life is to a great extent influenced by social, cultural and natural factors. I guess it is not wise in "real life" to "take" your Queen Beatrix in order to get control over once life. And castling is too expensive for me at the moment 
But it is an interesting question. I am recently going over my old games after I started playing chess again here at QA and keep on wondering about my own style in those games.... I am not that fearfull... am I?
|
|
|
Well, mustang, I hope you were doing the "good" aspect when you whipped my tail so easily. I'd hate to think you were playing "bad" at the time...
|
|
|
Hi BW,
You're right. It would be great if a chess game could reveal all there is to a person, but that is impossible. Life is more complex than a chessgame. But the point I try to make is that some core traits of a person are reflected in the playing style. The fact that other influences like social, cultural and other factors are eliminated makes it more likely it does so. Chess is an universal language. I dont think that many players analyse games with the question in mind: "What motivates me, or my opponent, to play like this?" from a behavioural point of view. Or "Why do I like this opening soo much" Or "Why does someone dont care if they are loosing pieces but others do". The answer lies in de person itself. Why did Kasparov loose to Deep Blue? Because he thought that a computer couldn't think in a certain way. Hey didn't understand the 'personality' of the computer, or better the personality of the people who designed it. Kasparov couldn't believe he had lost from a computer because he felt superiour in the first place. This trait eventually cost him the match. The designers knew this. So all they had to do is to build something that could do something unexpected and bereave Kasparov from his feeling of superiority. This caused depression, maybe even fear, which became agression and he angry left the board. So a style is not about what people do on the board, but why they do it. 
|
|
|
Well the idea that personality correlates to chess play I don't think is that important or useful. Looking at my games one would think I'm some steet-fighting crazy nut, a psychopath, or a downright ideot. But of course allthough I'm a genius good thing I'm such a good tactician as I'm not the brains of the chessworld. Better to be proactive and aggressive then passive, any solid position can crack given enough pressure.
|
|
|
I just want everyone to know that I'm not one of Steinitz's positional deciples, I am a tactician and I will proactively seek to knock-out the king or win material given the oppertunity.
|
| Previous 1 2 3 4 Next |
|
|
|
