16015 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!
Robert J Fischer (peace be upon him) chastised Karpov and Kasparov and claimed that he himself played 'honest' chess. Now one can argue over the validity of Fischers statement but the idea struck me and I was wondering how important it is to refrain from giving ones opponent as little information as possible by playing the least commital moves as possible.
Boring chess, but that is how I 'Try' to play. Fischer is/was crazy and his claims on Karpov and Kasparov was just as silly. He would have beaten Karpov 1975, but if you don't play we will 'REALLY' never know. Play your style, whatever that is, and try to get your opponent to play 'your' game.
How important Herbie do you think it is to conceal your intent? Would you for example play 1.d4 and then 2.Nf3 instead of 2.c4 to conceal what you will do with the c pawn?
I would think the greater the uncertainty, the greater the confusion for the opponent. Captain Liddell Hart, in his great book Strategy mentions a great many generals of the past who won because they never went for the war of attrition. These greats confused the psychological balance of the opposing generals buy having more than one targets. This would force the defender to make decisions whether to distribute their forces or leave one side a bit weaker. It also ties the opponent into calculating more than would have been required in the case of outright committal. Gringo
The Soviets were notorious cheats. They rigged games to try to force Fischer to play tougher opponents in candidates tournament just so an American couldn't get a shot, unfair arbiters bribed by the Soviets and such dirty tricks, but he won anyway. That might be what he meant.
yeah very interesting Gringo, thanks for the idea.
No. I would not conceal much in the opening, but in the middle game it maybe a little different. Besides, I have no idea on how to conceal moves.
"Gashimov Memorial - Round 2 With Hosts IM Rendle and FM Klein!"
Highly ACCLAIMED Chess Book of 2013-14?.
by TheGreatOogieBoogie a few minutes ago
by plutonia 3 minutes ago
is studying modern masters useful?
by JG27Pyth 4 minutes ago
by MrDamonSmith 4 minutes ago
FREE DIAMOND MEMBERSHIP FOR WHO GETS THIS RIGHT!
by cornbeefhashvili 5 minutes ago
Good resources for slav/semi-slav?
by plutonia 8 minutes ago
does memorizing master's games good???
by Ziryab 10 minutes ago
4/21/2014 - One And Done
by snake_babu 16 minutes ago
Live chess does not work anymore. Already Did F5 and reset browserhistory.
by Ivy883 21 minutes ago
The "Millenials" are the Greatest Generation!
by chess_gg 23 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!