19920 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(N/S)TJ, depending on the questions. I always have been crap at chess, but like to play.
I'm an ENTP. I'm not the loudest person around--but I am around the club! And everyone knows they can distract me by starting up an interesting conversation near me... I have a reputation for unorthodox openings and playing almost purely positional middlegames. Even my "respectable" openings are highly asymmetrical: Reti system, Nimzo, QID... Calculation can't be avoided, but I generally "feel" the squares and the pressure on them, rather than counting, and I put pieces "where they need to be" more than follow specific middlegame plans. My endgame sucks, partially because I focus more on getting a good, complex middlegame than a favorable endgame, and partially because it's BORING. I make speculative material sacrifices to improve my position more often than other players at my level (class B), and am far more likely to sacrifice excess material in a middlegame attack than I am to sit on it through a comfortable endgame. Also, I love analyzing games by discussing possibilities with strong players, and I think I learn a lot more from that than by reading books (which I also do).
Anyone who takes a Myers Briggs Test is crazy. Anyone who administers one is:
INTP here. I thought there would be more INTJ players, maybe because Bobby Fischer has such a big impact on chess perception as a pure INTJ. But I think again and see much chess masters of the past and present as INTP (Kasparov, Karpov, maybe Carlsen). Of course it is all interpretation and we could not know how they really are/were. Here is my take on the results:Introversion is not essential to be a good chess player, in my opinion, but I think much introvert people are attracted to this type of activity. It is thus understandable to see more introvert players.
Intuition, on the other hand, is quite useful when you struggle to find a good recovery or a suprising attack in a tense position. Sensing would be better when it comes to knowing patterns and perhaps reacting quickly in rapid games. I still feel intuition would be slightly superior in chess but that's my opinion.
As of thinking, it is quite obvious that we should see a majority of chess players with it, althought it doesn't mean you cannot have emotions and play chess.
Perception/Judgement would be the most diverse category regarding chess because good players could be either way. Perceptive players would imagine complex schemes and positions to blow the opponent defense while judging players might have a stronger sense of "correctness" regarding their own pawn structures and development. If you see a player say "you might have played this or that with different results" they are perceptive I think while someone saying "this was a bad move, Xyz is clearly winning here" would be more of a judging player.
INTP, INTJ and perhaps ISTX are the personalities we should expect seing in chess players but, again, it is just another test where the results may easily be far from reality. So nobody should be discouraged by these kind of classifications. If you like to play chess, it is still the strongest indicator that you should play it.
Between my MBTI judgment and my experience playing people I know well enough to type, I would say S helps a lot with memorizing opening lines, with playing endgames, and with utilizing traps and standard tactics. N is better for positional middlegames and strange positions. The TP combination signifies "introverted thinking" (Ti), which is probably best suited to finding the best move, while the TJ combination signifies "extroverted thinking" (Te), which is probably better at spotting potential tactical combinations
I am ISTJ. I just think this is a quick and dirty version since you can just select one style even if it is not in reality what you might be.
ISTP here. Took MBTI / Strong's twice. Was in chess club in school. Now pushing 50 and never get tired of it. I do better when I am not eating and playing chess at the same time. But i hardly have time so play during lunch and supper. Live in the 700 -800s blitzing. I think my functional stack keeps me from taking it too seriously and the tertiary Ni probably doesn't help. I am Ti dominant with auxiliary Se. The introversion probably keeps me coming back for more. I am betting on alot of Ni's here. Sis is an Ni and lots of fun to "take apart and put back together" but I have never been able to "fix" her. She likes chess too but won't play with me. Says I talk too much. ....Please be relevant, helpful & nice!
I am an ENXJ. Whatever the hell that means as regards chess playing styles. ALTHOUGH, as to my playing style - MY opening phase can go startlingly well, but then after about 15 moves, I start getting too involved in what I am doing, and conveniently forget about the threats from the other side. And, if I am lucky enough to get thru the middle phase, the endgame phase bores me to tears. Maybe I shouldn't play chess at all.
Maybe you should move someplace nicer.
I'm an INTJ. In one INTJ description I read, it said that INTJs 'see the world as a giant chess board' – which is not completely true for me, but still interesting.
Apart from the obvious objections to the validity personality typology (I know some other methods apart from the MBTI as well), I think it would be very hard, and potentially impossible, to pin down an 'ideal type' for chess players.
The stereotypes would probably indicate INTJ, INTP, INFJ, ISTJ, and ENTP; however, the world has seen extremely strong players that were most likely something entirely different, such as 8th world champion Mikhail Tal, whom I think I'd type as an ENFP.
If chess and personality types are related at all, I would be more inclined to believe that a person's general temperament determined their playing style – attacking vs. positional and all that jazz – rather than their playing strength.
Still, yours truly would be an obvious exception to that rule. My playing style is pretty much the polar opposite of my non-chess demeanour. On the board, I go for the flashy and spectacular, attack my opponent right away and am willing sacrifice pretty much everything. In all other areas of my life, I'm quiet, dispassionate, and avoid unnecessary risk as well as unnecessary drama.
1000 Worst Things To Do While Playing Chess
by dj1234dallas a few minutes ago
Drug testing at the Women's World Championship
by Jenium a few minutes ago
Guess my rating
by alekspachalov99 3 minutes ago
April: Pandolfini Mailbag Questions
by chesed1973 5 minutes ago
Step by step guide to thinking
by leiph18 6 minutes ago
the chess.com computer
by IsomTG 7 minutes ago
players needed :
by hynder 8 minutes ago
What is the best response to 1.c4?
by ARDJUNAJIN 8 minutes ago
3/29/2015 - Front And Center
by theawesomedude314 8 minutes ago
How do I go from 1750 to 2000
by Reb 9 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2015 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!