reading that book does have it's drawbacks.
it messed up my chess for about 5 years cause I thought I could just take things because Tal was able to. lol
I have a game here somewhere where Tal had FOUR PIECES HANGING and his opponent could not take any of them! and he still forced mate!
reading that book does have it's drawbacks.
it messed up my chess for about 5 years cause I thought I could just take things because Tal was able to. lol
I have a game here somewhere where Tal had FOUR PIECES HANGING and his opponent could not take any of them! and he still forced mate!
can you post the game or give the players and date?
reading that book does have it's drawbacks.
it messed up my chess for about 5 years cause I thought I could just take things because Tal was able to. lol
I have a game here somewhere where Tal had FOUR PIECES HANGING and his opponent could not take any of them! and he still forced mate!
can you post the game or give the players and date?
no, sorry not off the top of my head. I would have to find it.
true. I was not advocating any particular style. I was merely stating that different people have different temperaments. and there are options available to every kind of player.
Tal liked to blow the board up from move one.
Karpov just wanted to be equal and then squeeze.
Petrosian did not care if there were any tactics on either side just as long as his opponent didn't have counter play.
EXACTLY!
I think i'm kind of a Tal style player
then I would highly recommend that you read Mikhail Tals 100 best games.
i also recommend this, it would show him how even the sharpest of players wont play the ¨monkey poop toilet¨ variation of whatever opening gambit hes trying out that day