14797 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!
Nameno1had, there's actually been experiments with soccer players and American football players "Switching sides" for practices. The results were that the American Football players simply didn't have the conditioning to run continuously, nor did they have the leg coordination to do much with the ball if they happened to get it. By contrast, the soccer players were unable to muster the power required during contact and lacked hand skills that are essential for skill positions.
The notion that American football players would beat a world class soccer team at soccer is hillarious. The American football players wouldn't be on the pitch after the 1st period.
I am sure that is an accurate assessment for how they respond to the years of training for what the do respectively. Hands down, we still have the worlds greatest athletes in the NFL and the NBA...had they trained for continuous running, instead of training for 6 second bursts,as in the NFL, for example, I am sure you'd see a difference. I am sure soccer players would have adapted better to hand eye coordination if they practiced it... all that said I still stand by my statement...you are failing to realize a tactic if I was coach was simply to put all of you players on stretchers, even if mine slower less athletic guys get tossed, I am sure we could get the odds in our favor...
But can soccer players play hockey? No, in hockey diving is a penalty.
I'd give em no chances to do that ...they'd go for xrays and stitches...
Blind chess doesnt impress me that much. Now blind hockey...that would be impressive.
Has this thread gone "blind skinny-dipping" or what?
Where are all the people lamenting the future of the human race when you need them?
With all of the attempts at World Championship "post" analysis...you'll have that
I like soccer and American football.
I think i'll take Nameno1had's idea to the world of football. Whoever wins in this weekend's game between the Giants and Patriots should have to play Spain in a 5 game series alternating between American football and soccer to see who is world all around football champion.
I would add...rugby too! And have to play either England or France!
Thats a great idea, none of those other teams stand a chance, if I was coach...we would dominate all of them...most of our guys would end up red carded in soccer, but at the end, 2 on 1 the goalie has no chance....I'd say, we'd just straight up smoke them in rugby....were big,fast, strong, etc...
Yeah, and rugby players are palefaced puny dweebs
They're strong dudes but they can't put on too much weight because they'd just be slow. In American footbal you have to deal with guys pushing 300lbs/130kg. The other side of that is that they're not too fast at all.
Yeah, and rugby players are palefaced puny dweebs
Yeah, because fatter = stronger
f = ma
When you get hit by a 300lb man you'll figure it out.
Besides, pads were mandatory. They were getting a huge number of cuncussions and deaths in the NFL when they weren't using them.
Wrong equation. You were looking for p=mv.
yep, though f=ma is correct if the 300lb man fell out of a helicopter.
No, f=ma is correct if the 300lb man is getting hit.
p=mv is the monentum equation. momentum = mass(velocity)
They still have a boatload of concussions with the pads, and occasionally someone's head gets shoved down too hard suddenly and they die.
No NFL player has ever died during a game from a game related issue. One dude died of a heart attack unrelated to football.
I think opening preparation is a part of the game. If you can get good positions out of the opening, it demonstrates that you have explored a lot of the game thoroughly and accurately, and I think that's an incredible achievement given how vast chess is. The more theory that's played out, the more we know about chess, and I love that -- gets us one step closer to unraveling the mystery of the game. I don't think it's the most important part of the game, but, like the chess clock, it definitely is entitled to some stock.
Whether this person (an opening expert) was just memorizing stuff all day or if he really understood the moves he was playing becomes clear in middlegame and endgame play.
That is my counterargument to chess 960 in match play -- I like seeing new developments in the exact same game. A lot of what I like about the game is feeling warmer and warmer to it the more you play it; you feel the power of development, you feel the power of extra pawns, etc, etc, etc, as you get more familiar with chess, and this makes you feel like you have just a little bit more control of your fate. And I think that's a really good feeling for any chess player, because everyone who has played chess knows how little sense the game makes at first until you devote a lot of practice to it. In a game like tic-tac-toe, the familiarity dries the game out; but in chess, the discoveries never stop!
Chess 960 goes back to that coldness that I felt when I wasn't a very strong player. I like to know that when I play d4 I know for sure that my knight on f3, should it want to go to g5, will be supported by a bishop on c1.
Meanwhile, blitz discourages precision, honest thinking, and creativity, because the best practical strategy in blitz is to go with what you know and have seen millions of times before. But then it's hard to make discoveries over the board. There is one concrete thing I can say about how blitz affects your chess: I have never, ever, to my memory, have learned a new concept in blitz. It's always a cliched concept that I have seen before but overlooked for a second.
Korey Stringer died.
Do the really have to die on the field for it to count?
Often complications from a broken neck take enough time for guys to get off the field before they perhaps, quit breathing from brain stem damage. I can remember one guy who hit another player so hard that, part of his vertebrae went out throught the back of his neck and he died shortly after they got him off the field. I can't remember his name.
Woops, sorry again for the second time in this thread... Somebody said:
"Besides, pads were mandatory. They were getting a huge number of cuncussions and deaths in the NFL when they weren't using them."
And I incorrectly focused on "the huge number of deaths in the NFL". When, in actuality, none have occurred. I apologize for all my transgressions.
Making the Chess.com Forums Better
by Conquistador 3 minutes ago
e3, K2, a3 - What is this crazy opening called?
by notmtwain 5 minutes ago
Is the "attack" enough??
by socialista 7 minutes ago
The King's Gambit
by batgirl 8 minutes ago
by Melanie-420 8 minutes ago
3/7/2014 - Mate in 4
by wyattthorson 8 minutes ago
Rate the username above
by SebLeb0210 9 minutes ago
If We Renamed the King to Queen, and...
by beerpatzer 9 minutes ago
Stiffness and Flexibility
by Monster-Bullet 11 minutes ago
how to invite a friend to play
by u_r_an_opportunist 13 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!