Chess

Discussion in 'Free Thoughts' started by nicholas1M7, Oct 26, 2005.

  1. nicholas1M7 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,417
    Although I have limited experience with the game, it seems that chess success correlates highly with visual-spatial intelligence. Some believe that mathematicians make great chess players, while others believe the two are not highly correlated. Would you say visual-spatial intelligence is the sole source of strategic thinking? Is it merely that grandmasters and world champions are brilliant strategists who are equally as proficient at making life's decisions?
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. justagirl Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334
    Ex-World Champions Steinitz and Fischer make a compelling argument against your premise.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2005
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. c20H25N3o Shiny Heart of a Shiny Child Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,017
    Chess strategy focuses primarily on dominating the middle four squares on the board. If I have 3 pieces attacking a square and you only have 2 pieces attacking one of these four squares then I am in a better position to profit from an exchange on that square and will undoubtedly capture that square.

    [boast]I was county champion several years ago[/boast]

    My maths is not good. Certainly not up to the standards of some posters here, however wherever you have a situation where 0 < 1 then maths can be applied and effective algorithms developed to ensure that you are always more likely to be 1 than 0. Obviously this is how chess computers work.

    I dont think studying chess makes me any more adept at dealing with life's complex emotional problems with their many colours though. Chess is very black and white

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    There is definately a correlation between visual-spatial intelligence / chess strategy and object orientated computer programming though. The smarter I become at chess the easier I find it to develop more efficient code and vice versa.

    peace

    c20
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Arcane Guest

    I agree with you, chess is all about strategic thinking. The philosophy of playing as God is manifested in the game. Anyways, really good players can usually see three to four moves ahead, which is what gives them their edge.

    If you have every played with a player of this calibur, you realize that I'm right. I played a game against my friend's grandfather, whos been playing chess for decades, and he made me realize it. He was able to see several moves ahead, so it felt like he was reading my mind. He knew exactly what I was going to do, how I would react to this or that, so he devised a plan based on these 'visions' and was able to defeat me in like ten minutes.

    After the match, he told me all you need is a tactical attack which you should stick to.

    Arc
     
  8. Arcane Guest

    I' ll have to disagree with some of the things you said there my friend. Chess is very mathematical, and you can plan attacks using simple calculus and probability. 8x8=64, -32 already used up, leaves you with 32 squares of a battle field. Its almost the same thing as going to war just like the middle ages.

    "very black and white"? You should read the philosophical aspects of chess. The colors represent what kingdoms were built upon, white lies and blackmails.

    Arc
     
  9. c20H25N3o Shiny Heart of a Shiny Child Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,017
    Chessmasters have the whole game planned ahead based upon the opening gambit. If you the opponent make one false reply you will lose. Chess at its highest level is about remembering the correct reply because all variations of a reply have been studied and their weaknesses exposed.
    At its highest level the game should always end in a draw.

    c20
     
  10. c20H25N3o Shiny Heart of a Shiny Child Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,017
    I am aware that chess can be viewed entirely as a mathematical problem to solve which is why I made reference to chess computers.
    However one can play chess to a high standard without having any experience with calculus but rather relying purely on memory of opening gambits and replies.

    I dare say there are a whole heap of philosophies. Chess is a complex game. I just dont correlate being proficient at it with being proficient at dealing with lifes problems. In other words I personally cannot see how chess skills are transferable to the skills needed for coping with divorce for example. Make sense?

    EDIT: I am happy for any correlations to be suggested. I am not talking in absolutes or claiming to be an authority on the idea of correlating chess strategy to real life situations. Perhaps something I havn't seen in a light that you have could get me to say 'Yeah, I guess that is pretty similiar. I hadn't thought of it that way before.'

    I guess this is what the OP is looking for?

    peace

    c20
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2005
  11. justagirl Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334
    While I agree a Chess Master knows numerous book moves for the opening, it's impossible to have the whole game planned.

    Example: P- k4 is a popular opening and the more popular defenses for it are Ruy Lopez, Giuoco Piano, King's Gambit, Sicilian Defense, French Defense, Caro-Kann, Center Counter, and Pirc/Modern. Though there are a few hundred obscure defenses too.

    And there are variations of every opening, typically, the better players think 4 to 8 moves ahead due to the ever changing possibilities of your opponent. A worthy opponent will always interfere with your plan, chess is a game of position and patience. It's considered sloppy play to assume your opponent will fall for your tricks or make a mistake
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2005
  12. c20H25N3o Shiny Heart of a Shiny Child Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,017
    Indeed, which is why it is important to study each and every variation and understand that if your opponent counters every move with algorithmic perfection the game will only end in a draw. It is impossible to plan a win without assuming your opponent will make an uncalculated mistake somewhere along the line.

    peace


    c20
     
  13. whitewolf asleep under the juniper bush Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,112
    Do you guys want to play chess and/or checkers on yahoo?
     
  14. justagirl Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    334
    No, winning chess is about being in the right position to capitalize on a mistake. The moment you assume your opponent will make a mistake, you've made your first mistake.
     
  15. c20H25N3o Shiny Heart of a Shiny Child Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,017
    Thats what I said :bugeye:
     
  16. SoLiDUS OMGWTFBBQ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,593
    Nicholas, I see you've made your way to this board: try not to troll too much now...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. Darkman Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    87
    I have found that the best strategy to chess is never to take a peice unless it is sufficiently backed up so that you always come out on top. This way you always have the initiative.

    I agree with this statement:
    but I disagree with the statement that the four centre squares are most important.
     
  18. c20H25N3o Shiny Heart of a Shiny Child Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,017
    They are because each piece can maximise its area of coverage from those centre squares and therefore maximise its effectiveness. This is not necessarily applicable to end game strategy however.

    peace

    c20
     
  19. SoLiDUS OMGWTFBBQ Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,593
    I'm curious: to those of you with sufficient chess experience, what is your rating ?
     
  20. Michalowski Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    33
    Good old Bobby hated math... so there we go
     
  21. Jenyar Solar flair Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,833
    I think my FIDE rating was around 1300-1400, but that was years ago.
     

Share This Page