^ Click here to remove ads! ^

Positional vs Tactical

Jump to forum:
 
16th April 2008, 04:22pm
#1
by Bodhidharma
Australia
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 179


With the Tactics Trainer, I understand what being tactical is. I hope this is not a hair-splitting exercise - but can a chess player be solely tactical or solely positional ? Apparently, Mikhail Tal is a brilliant tactician ( I think for this, he was called the Magic of Riga ) but does it mean he threw caution to the wind with his pawn structure, etc. things that positional play emphasize ? On the other hand, Karpov is apparently positional - he will manoeuvre and manoeuvre until he gets the situation he desires - but does it mean he forgo tactical opportunities ?

I am curious because I like to know what these styles of play are - and also largely to understand what kind of player I am. I don't often do fancy stuff like X-ray, deflection, etc and my games get drawn out to many moves ( or maybe I just don't know what I am doing or maybe just waiting for the right opportunity ) - does that mean I am more inclined towards positional play ( ha ha - I know it may not be necessarily true as I may just be bumbling along ).

 I haven't come across a book examining this aspect of chess play so what do you think ? 

 

 

 

 


16th April 2008, 04:40pm
#2
by batgirl
NC United States
Member Since: Jun 2007
Member Points: 3015

I'd say, don't get bogged down in these terms.  When you say the term Chess Master,  understand that it means someone who has a mastership of the game. This means in all areas.  Masters considered tactical players are excellent positional players and Masters considered positionally inclined  must be excellent tacticians.   Other distinguishing terms apply also.   Both Karpov and Petrosian, noted for their positonal/defensive  abilities, were  great attackers while Morphy and Alekhine, known for their attacks, were great defenders.

 

Some players prefer open games which are more tactical in nature; some prefer closed games which require good positional sense.  Possibly their preferences more than any particular dominant skill might define Masters as tactically or positionally oriented.


16th April 2008, 04:52pm
#3
by likesforests
United States
Member Since: May 2007
Member Points: 2982

> Can a chess player be solely tactical or solely positional ?

 

Yes, but only at a lower levels of chess.  Wink


16th April 2008, 04:58pm
#4
by Bodhidharma
Australia
Member Since: Feb 2008
Member Points: 179
Thanks batgirl, likesforests - yea, I shouldn't pigeonhole someone just because they were described to be a certain way. I understand better now.
6th May 2008, 07:37pm
#5
by tmholp
long beach,ca United States
Member Since: Jan 2008
Member Points: 16
sometimes the best offence is a good defence..or the other way around...Cool
 

Add your comment:

Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.