8220 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
"The Chessplayer's Style"
I suggest a method of determining a player's style according to a model which uses primary and secondary function. Fischer would be a positional player with tactics as secondary function (or help function). Spassky would have tactics as primary function and the positional as secondary. Botvinnik is a strategist with positional play as secondary function. Kasparov would be primarily concretistic with tactics as secondary. The tacticians and the strategists are the visionary and also the artistic types. The concretists and the positional players belong to the realistic and the more "scientific" types.
Please read the article here:
Your idea fascinates me. Please keep me updated.
I see you have drawn perpendicular axes. Does that not suggest a field in which you could plot points at relative distances from the center or from the extremes? I believe it is your intention to identify which quadrant of such a graph a given player will fall in to.
Correct me if I am wrong. You identified Petrosian as the extreme Strategist, Kasparov as the extreme Tactician, Botvinnik as the extreme imaginitive positional thinker and Spassky as the extreme Concreteist.
It will be a real challenge to locate Tal early in his career compared to later in his career, in light of the transformation he made.
I would seriously consider giving up Jung if I were you.
Whereas in some extremely rare cases the Myers-Briggs type indicator might help an individual on a road of personal growth by discovering some hitherto unknown personal aspects, I find it hard to believe that one's insight of his profile as a chessplayer makes any difference in any direction.
ok, its a little silly, but actually its a little interesting at the same time.
I think I am somewhat like a positional/tactical player, much like petrosian...and we both seem to like the QGA :) I think certain styles tend to have greatest strength/problems against other styles...
But I tihnk its a little more complicated than some 2 dimensional thing.
...Not to mention that the assigning of these labels is a trifle arbitrary...
but then I can say I am a much superior secondary tactician than you are.
Spoken like a typical concretist...
I feel like all of these words MIGHT just mean exactly the same thing. i.e. Positional, strategy, tactical...
and i thought this was about topology.
mine is mostly round.
I guess you're type O
too many here are AB normal
What about Toroidal? Or if someone isn't simply connected then things get pretty interesting in the analysis of that system =/
We need more amateurs to post their annotated games.
by jetfighter13 a few minutes ago
Who is the Best Chess Player - Norway 2013
by geoffalford 3 minutes ago
WANG HAO BEATS CARLSEN AND ANAND
by Elubas 5 minutes ago
setting up game time.
by Heritage140 6 minutes ago
i can't escape chess but i must!
by ilikeflags 6 minutes ago
Chess rating accuracy
by alanlee222 6 minutes ago
Improve Chess and Intelligence
by corrijean 14 minutes ago
Solve this Riddle if you can
by Piecefodder 16 minutes ago
Funny Najdorf Trap
by learningthemoves 16 minutes ago
why do people stall when they are losing?
by sushi362 20 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com