Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    16,998

    Development of a Chess Style

    It is quite common for chess-players to be classified as either "tactical" or "positional". However, I believe that these classifications are "relative" strong chessplayers are good (or at least reasonably good) at all faccets of the game. I have published a game in my blog today, where Tal completely outplayed Smyslov in the ENDGAME. And yet, Tal is recognized as a tactical player only. I can also think of a number of games where Smyslov (a well known endgame master) played beautiful deep combinations.

    Thus, I feel that while the chess styles do exist, strong players are generally strong in all types of positions.
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  2. #2
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,353
    I second that. It is no longer possible for a player to rely on a single style since opening theory provides so many ways to get them into a position not compatible with it.

    Actually it surprises me that the stylistic predelictions of today's strong players are as marked as they are in view of that. The way Kramnik nearly always chooses the clear move over the murky one, or the way Topalov is always throwing pawns up the board, for examples.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  3. #3
    CC Grandmaster Denis_Jessop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    3,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    I second that. It is no longer possible for a player to rely on a single style since opening theory provides so many ways to get them into a position not compatible with it.

    Actually it surprises me that the stylistic predelictions of today's strong players are as marked as they are in view of that. The way Kramnik nearly always chooses the clear move over the murky one, or the way Topalov is always throwing pawns up the board, for examples.
    I don't think that it was ever the case that leading players were entirely positional or entirely tactical but rather that they were predominantly, or by preference, one or the other. After all Paul Morphy's combinative play captures the attention of many, yet, as Cecil Purdy (and others) pointed out Morphy's real strength lay in his appreciation of postional principles which other leading players did not appreciate at a time when it was fashionable to play an out-and-out combinative style.

    But I am a bit puzzled by your opening remarks Kevin as I would have thought that all the research that has gone into opening theory in recent years would, if anything, allow a (top class) player more easily to manoeuvre into lines suiting his style. In other words, I don't see that opening theory research has made much difference.

    DJ
    ...I don't want to go among mad people Alice remarked, "Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: we're all mad here. I am mad. You're mad." "How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice. "You must be," said the Cat ,"or you wouldn't have come here."

  4. #4
    CC FIDE Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    587

    zzzzzzzzzzzzz

    My style of play is neither positional nor tactical. Instead, it is best described as stodgy, dull, boring, somniferous or negative.

    Whatever the most boring move there is, good, brilliant or terrible, I will play it

    There is more excitement watching a cow chew grass tahn in playing against me or playing through my games.

    Yet, my methods are effective . I have bored one of my correspondence opponents to death!

  5. #5
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,399
    Quote Originally Posted by qpawn
    I have bored one of my correspondence opponents to death!
    And a few on here as well!
    No this is silly, the whole premise is silly and very badly written. I'm the senior officer here and I've not had a funny line yet so I'm stopping it.

    Sydney International Open

    Parramatta Chess Club

    Manchester United - In decline since 92!

  6. #6
    CC Grandmaster Spiny Norman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    4,437
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron
    I have published a game in my blog today, where Tal completely outplayed Smyslov in the ENDGAME. And yet, Tal is recognized as a tactical player only. I can also think of a number of games where Smyslov (a well known endgame master) played beautiful deep combinations.
    My view of Tal is a little different. He was known for his tactical ability and was, perhaps, one of the very best ever in that regard ... but IMO it wasn't just about his ability to calculate, or even pattern recognition ... it was more about his predilection to whip up complications out of what often appeared to be a fairly "simple" position, or to deliberately choose unclear lines over clear ones, because they offered more tactical chances. Interested in what others think about that.

    Regarding your observation that "strong players are generally strong in all types of positions" ... you're probably right ... but some players have a definite set of preferences (e.g. Fischer very often played Bc4 on the White side of a Sicilian). This seems to be more than just a deeper understanding of certain openings. Fischer never struck me as an overly tactical sort of player. The thing that struck me about him was that he almost always seemed to avoid unnecessary complications, and would steer the game into simpler positions where one or two smaller positional advantages would accrue to him. Again, interested what others think about that.

    I think Fischer V Tal world championship match would have been a beauty when both were at their peak. In years gone by, the best comparison I could come up with to those two would be Capablanca V Alekhine (?).
    “As you perhaps know, I haven't always been a Christian. I didn't go to religion to make me happy. I always knew a bottle of port would do that. If you want a religion to make you feel really comfortable, I certainly don't recommend Christianity.” -- C.S.Lewis

  7. #7
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,539
    I guess the difference in style would be better characterised by whether someone prefers balanced or unbalanced position.
    For private coaching (IM, four times VIC champion) call or SMS 0417519733
    Computer tells you what to play. Good coach explains why.

  8. #8
    CC Grandmaster ER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Melbourne - Australia
    Posts
    13,609

    excellent!

    Quote Originally Posted by Frosty
    .... it wasn't just about his ability to calculate, or even pattern recognition ... it was more about his predilection to whip up complications out of what often appeared to be a fairly "simple" position, or to deliberately choose unclear lines over clear ones, because they offered more tactical chances...
    What a profound, revolutionary way of chess thinking! In itself the hypothesis provides a new colourful and thought provoking ground, unlike the (commonly) maximalistic approach to describing chess styles. Thanks Frosty!
    Cheers and good luck!
    https://www.nswca.org.au/index.php
    ACF 3118316
    FIDE 3201457

    From this day (13-11-20) onwards, I will only be posting, shouting and reading none other than chess related posts.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Turkish Chess Federation
    By Denis_Jessop in forum General Chess Chat
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 27-11-2010, 06:58 AM
  2. 2006 Australian Internet Junior Chess Championships Discussion
    By AES in forum 2006 Australian Internet Junior Championships
    Replies: 240
    Last Post: 18-12-2007, 11:28 PM
  3. What do you want to have provided at big tournaments?
    By WhiteElephant in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 03-01-2007, 03:37 PM
  4. Thanks Jenni
    By JohnH in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-07-2006, 01:59 PM
  5. Large lot of chess books for sale: cheap!
    By Kyclee23 in forum General Chess Chat
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 24-01-2006, 09:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •