11060 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!
I don't intend on spamming, but I was curious, again. Arthur Bisguier said that Fischer needed tension, that he deplored positions without counterplay. Kramnik also said that Fischer played very vigorous chess, much like Kasparov would play later on. However, I've also heard that Fischer always sought clarity in his positions. My fundamental problem is that I'm not quite sure of how clear positions have tension. For example, when I think of clear positions, I think of Capablanca, and when I think of Capablanca, I don't think of tension. I wanted some examples from his games, if that's not too much to ask. This will be the LAST question for today :)
As I understand it, tension just means setting problems for your opponent. For example in a KID black is geared for a king side attack, both you and your opponent know it, but white has the problem to solve, how to deal with it correctly?
Fischer exceeded in technical play. So you can think of it as setting them technical problems to solve. Bad structure, worse minor pieces, space, something like this. Just because the problem is well defined doesn't mean it's any easier to solve.
Capablanca was: "this endgame is better for me"Opponent "ORLY?"Capablanca: "yarly"And 20 moves later his opponent resigns.
That's a helpful assessment :)
I have also heard that, according to Alexander Shashin, Fischer played more aggressively with the Black pieces. He also has the quote about Black having to play for a win instead of steering for equality. I would think that this is related to his striving for tension, for the winning chances.
There is a story about Fischer playing on for several moves after there were only two kings left on the board. That's how much of a "fighter" he was. : )
Tension is the result of fighting chess.
Nice post, well done, Paul Gottlieb.
"Tension" is a chess position has a special meaning. It doesn't just mean a position which is difficult or double-edged, although that can certainly be tense! There is tension is a position when the enemy units, particularly the pawns are in contact and attacking one another. At each turn both players need to consider whether they want to initiate a pawn exchange--and which pawns to exchange? Or they may want to push past, locking the formation and releasing the tension, or they may want to do neither--perhaps develop a piece and leave the tension in the position--or even increase it. Here are a couple of simple examples: 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5. The d and e pawns mutually attack each other, creating tension. White can A) remove the tension with 3.exd, B) remove the tension by pushing past with 3.e5 or C)maintain the tension with 3.Nc3. And of course after 3.e5 Black usually creates new tension with 3...c5, while after 3.Nc3 Black has the choice between releasing the tension with 3...dxe4, maintaining the tension with 3...Nf6, or increasing the tension with 3...Bb4.
Very often, releasing the tension, by initiating a pawn trade or piece trade is making a concession. Positions full of tension are richer in winning--and losing possibilities
Nice post! I'm quoting it just in case
Opponent "ORLY?"Capablanca: "yarly"And 20 moves later his opponent resigns.
My favourite explaination of Capablanca's playstyle.
Paul nailed it.
"The turning point in my career came with the realization that Black should play to win instead of just steering for equality." (Fischer)
Interesting quote. It will be interesting to find out what he means.
In chess tension means a position, when pieces or pawns or both are attacking each other.
"Tension" is a chess position has a special meaning. It doesn't just mean a position which is difficult or double-edged, although that can certainly be tense! There is tension is a position when the enemy units, particularly the pawns are in contact and attacking one another.
IMO Bisguier was not talking about paulgottlieb's definition of "tension":
Arthur Bisguier interview: "Q. The charge has been leveled that he'd rather win an ugly game than draw or lose a beautiful one.
A. Unfair charge! So would 99% of his competitors -- so long as the rewards are commensurate with the results scored and not the way points are achieved. Present company excepted of course. Q. What I'm getting at is his ferocious killer instinct which may be indicative of an overall sadistic personality. A. He only takes a draw when it's hopeless or when he's afraid he might get hurt in the position. When I analyzed with him he would say: "I kill him if I get this position." He deplores positions without counterplay. Even if he's in bad shape, there must be tension. This is the essence of his chess style. And that's the difference between him and Reshevsky. Sammy can defend a passive position."
What about D. Nd2
That's not indicative of however tenacious Fischer may have been, that's just ridiculous. Sorry. I refuse to be impressed.
Since Paul Gottlieb didn't answer the question, then why hasn't anyone else bothered to explain it yet? I thought all the gurus on Chess.com love the games of Bobby Fischer.
Really, it would be great if someone could explain what GM Bisguier was talking about and how that mixes with the concept that Fischer sought clear positions.
Arthur Bisguier said that Fischer needed tension, that he deplored positions without counterplay.
"Q. What I'm getting at is Bobby's ferocious killer instinct which may be indicative of an overall sadistic personality. A. Bisguier - He only takes a draw when it's hopeless or when he's afraid he might get hurt in the position. When I analyzed with him he would say: 'I kill him if I get this position.'
He deplores positions without counterplay. Even if he's in bad shape, there must be tension. This is the essence of his chess style. And that's the difference between him and Reshevsky. Sammy can defend a passive position."
This is an interesting quote from Fischer:
"You've got to equalize first with Black before looking for something."
This was what he told Robert Byrne when he felt Byrne was overextending himself with Black in playing for a win. Byrne has an interesting quote, considering that he lived in the era of Tigran Petrosian:
"No one is harder to beat in an inferior positon, as those who have been up against him well know."
10/1/2014 - Mate in 3 Again
by alex_chen a few minutes ago
anand can beat carlsen
by chessman1504 9 minutes ago
by DrSpudnik 12 minutes ago
Analysis Requested :) :) :)
by LesuhAn 12 minutes ago
Deleting sent messages
by kleelof 22 minutes ago
who is better and why
by kleelof 23 minutes ago
How to Become a GM: By Zod
by conrad123 27 minutes ago
Who's your fav in the Top Ten?
by josiah777 34 minutes ago
Paul Morphy vs Wilhelm Steinitz
by yureesystem 38 minutes ago
CARLSEN-ANAND WORLD CHAMPIONSHIP DEBATE THREAD
by DarknisMetalDragon 40 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!