A Chess forum. ChessBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ChessBanter forum » Chess Newsgroups » rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The desiccation resulting from opening science



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old April 6th 17, 09:23 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 554
Default The desiccation resulting from opening science

On Thursday, April 6, 2017 at 8:42:25 AM UTC-6, M Winther wrote:

It's called "blitz chess". It is not chess proper. It is utterly boring
and meaningless. When are people going to realize that it's not the same
game?


It has the same rules, so it is "the same game" in the sense most
people would use the phrase. It may well be boring and meaningless
when played under those time controls... but that's a separate
question.

But even there, "boring and meaningless" has to be qualified.

The people who are playing it might find it enjoyable and fun,
rather than stressful. What is meaningless, as it would be boring,
would be for others to study the moves of such a game. That is the
dimension that gets lost.

John Savard
  #12  
Old April 8th 17, 02:40 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 111
Default The desiccation resulting from opening science




GMs can play faster because they have better technique and, above all,
vast opening knowledge thanks to databases. Amateurs make no effort to
collect such knowledge, because there's no point. But much shorter time
controls will impact amateur chess so severely that it becomes
meaningless to play. It is simply no fun to win a game when the opponent
plays badly. GMs and amateurs live in different chess worlds.

Mats


I write a bit with Adorjan and he said he thought there might be as many as 30 people in the world who make a living by playing, rather than by teaching, eg, which means 1,000GMs are 'amateur' and millions of the rest of us.

But I think this is a false dichotomy about playing 'better' if you can't understand the moves that the 30 professionals make! It is a literally absurd standard.

I don't see how faster, 90 minute games become "meaningless" — to whom? Not the players, nor likely other players within a few hundred points of them. I am only talking about reducing the amount of time to less than it takes to run a marathon, that's all.

What people arguing for long time periods want is computer chess — they do not admit the logic of this, but they want 'perfect chess' measurable by the computer down to the last digit, and they want the computer to help them understand the game.

They want safe scientific 'boxing' not a bruiser like Nakamura or Fischer either. "At the end of control, there is creativity." [Ivanchuk]

Phil Innes



  #13  
Old April 9th 17, 07:36 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc
M Winther[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 19
Default The desiccation resulting from opening science

On 08/04/2017 14:40, wrote:



GMs can play faster because they have better technique and, above all,
vast opening knowledge thanks to databases. Amateurs make no effort to
collect such knowledge, because there's no point. But much shorter time
controls will impact amateur chess so severely that it becomes
meaningless to play. It is simply no fun to win a game when the opponent
plays badly. GMs and amateurs live in different chess worlds.

Mats


I write a bit with Adorjan and he said he thought there might be as many as 30 people in the world who make a living by playing, rather than by teaching, eg, which means 1,000GMs are 'amateur' and millions of the rest of us.

But I think this is a false dichotomy about playing 'better' if you can't understand the moves that the 30 professionals make! It is a literally absurd standard.

I don't see how faster, 90 minute games become "meaningless" — to whom? Not the players, nor likely other players within a few hundred points of them. I am only talking about reducing the amount of time to less than it takes to run a marathon, that's all.

What people arguing for long time periods want is computer chess — they do not admit the logic of this, but they want 'perfect chess' measurable by the computer down to the last digit, and they want the computer to help them understand the game.

They want safe scientific 'boxing' not a bruiser like Nakamura or Fischer either. "At the end of control, there is creativity." [Ivanchuk]

Phil Innes




90 minutes isn't exactly rapid chess. I was polemizing against rapid
chess and blitz. Myself, I'm only playing rapid chess these days, on the
net. It is fun, but there's an enormous waste of creative opportunities,
because time and again me and my opponents miss brilliant moves. Truly
qualitative chess cannot be achieved with rapid chess time limits.

Mats
http://mlwi.magix.net/bg/chessvar.htm

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 April 23rd 06 06:21 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 March 22nd 06 06:35 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 March 7th 06 06:30 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 February 4th 06 06:25 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 November 3rd 05 06:30 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2017 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.