Why do some players seem to become more Tactical and others Positional players?

In my short experience, I'd have to agree wholeheartedly with dsarkar.

 I find the tactical games are easier for me to calculate and are more "comfortable" if I can choose forcing moves to mere "positional enhancements" which are often very vague to me and uncertain.  With tactics you at least have a choice of doors to open...with positional play, I imagine it's like being in a big forest and not knowing which way to go.  I estimate so much needs to be considered if you're playing positionally.  Sharp lines tend to have a definite "best move", I think.  I said tend because I don't know any definites.  yes?

hahaha.  you're both funny.

the same question has been asked about the subject of making love.....but i digress....

In Yermo's book (Road to Chess Improvement) he relates [paraphrased, book is lent out] how he learned about the Botvinnik vs Tal matches as contests of iron strategy against wild intuitive tactics. Everywhere he read, he saw those characterizations of the players, it was a complete clash of style.

Until he sits down and analyzes the actual match games, and decides that both players attacked when the position called for an attack, sacrificed when there was a good sacrifice, and endlessly milked a tiny positional advantage when that was what was called for. At most there was a small difference in opening repertoire.

So in his opinion, even the biggest difference in style ever was a fabrication by the press, who needed a good story.

And there's a quote by some eminent GM along the lines of "players below 2500 have no style". Chess is first about finding the best moves, style only comes into play with tiny preferences between others equally good moves. Us patzers make too many mistakes to have a style.

Scarbiac.  I laughed when someone asked about my playing style for that very reason...I don't have a style, I'm just trying to grasp for some sense of what's going on.  

Yet...I've noticed that I beat some people who are much higher rated consistently...and lose to some players who are lower rated consistently...and when I asked an authority about it he said "it's a matter of styles sometimes"...

in this situation....positional are important...

 It is hard to know the true tendencies and why a chess player prefers a Tactical style or a positional maybe is due to the players attitude ..

 A more aggresive person would play more on the attack and would prefer tactics? or a more patient player would prefer a slow positional style?

It was said that Capablanca, despite his slow positional style was an over calculater.  He calculated everything out!

Tal the wild attacker of whom another GM said, "His (Tal) style is easy to explain, he develops his pieces to the center of the board, and then he sacrifices them somewhere."  Tal was not a huge calculater, he went a lot on intuition.  

I think this makes more sense.  In a "quiet" position I oftentimes can see 3-5 moves ahead (accurately) while in tactical slugfest I'm good for at most 2 moves ahead, and we won't even talk about the in between moves!  When you are about to sacrifice if you can't see exactly what the board will look like in 12 moves then I think you'd let your intuition take over.

But here's the thing, Tal did calculate and Capablanca did use his intuiton.  Many an opponent had their feelings hurt trying the engage Karpov in tactical fisticuffs, and Kasparov kept his crown in 1987 against Karpov with a "quiet" opening (The Reti).  So alot of this stuff intermingles.

I don't think you can take your style too much to heart.  I am a more positional player, but I spend 60%-70% of my study time on tactics.

I think Kasparov wrote something or referenced something in his book which is like this, can't remember the proper wording:

Tactics/ hence tactical player: know what to do when there's something to do.

Strategic/ hence positional player I guess: know what to do when there's nothing to do.

Hope that made sense to you guys.

I have learned that a simpler approach is best for me so I look at strategy rather than pure position, and what tactics do i need to accomplish to gain an advantage of quality or quantity (space) in a position.  Therefore the two are intertwined and not independent but rather dependent on each other.  One can not be a pure tactician at the higher levels of the GM's, nor purely positional.  I think that most of them are excellent at both strategy and tactics and therefore use position to achieve their strategic goals and their tactics to achieve their desired positional goals (strategy). 

 I don't even know where to start with this. 

 It  does!

Tactical players have a better eye for calculation and tactics. They are good at board visualization, and good at sensing when an attack is "in the cards". They are good at seeing in-between moves and good at sensing when a material imbalance provides a long term advantage.

Positional players have a more keenly developed evaluation function. In theory, this can be a beacon which lights the way through a murky position, where a tactical player would reach a similar conclusion by brute force calculation.

I can't think of a better example of each style than the Botvinnik v Tal world championship matches.

In that case, I guess I'm neither.  :(

Here are some litmus test questions I just came up with.

Are you more likely to attack the opponent's kingside or queenside?
When it's your turn do you ever make a move which "just looks good"?
Do you concentrate more on your plans or your opponent's plans?
Do you see a kingside pawn storm as weakening your king's position or as attacking your opponent's?

Also, why do some people play chess for decades without ever bothering to learn the difference between tactic and position play?  (I mean, I have this friend who's like that.)  Worrying about that stuff is like being a mailman and constantly getting weather forecast updates.  Who cares?  You're going to be out there tomorrow delivering the mail again no matter what the weather, so why bother drawing a distinction between open and closed weather systems on the chessboard?  If the board closes up, play through it.  If the board stays open, play through.  This way you're not wasting time watching the weather channel, which is just a god-awful nightmare of a channel really intended only for those over the age of 70 to watch while their final days escape them.

I'm more likely to attack the side where the King is sitting...but neither side tends to be the focus for me...depends on where the opponent's pieces are presenting themselves with a weakness?

I will make a move that just looks good when I can't find any other move to make...but a lot of times I start to feel antsy making moves that don't have strong intent behind them.  

I think it's safe to say that every beginner focuses more on his/her own plan instead of the opponents...hence all those backrank mates I've suffered.  :(

kingside pawn storm...if the queens are off the board, I feel like it is weakening my opponent's position...if they are still on the board, I feel like I'm asking for trouble.

oooh, so what do I score?  Sadly even answering the questions, I don't feel like I know on which side of the line I'd fall.

In one of John Watson's chess.fm interviews he had Jonathon Rowson (author of the excellent 7 deadly chess sins and chess for zebras) on the show and they were discussing the idea of "style" and what it means. Jonathon had a very interesting and well informed take on it and I encourage all those interested to listen to both parts of that interview on http://www.chessclub.com/chessfm/

You have to sign up with the ICC to listen to them but it's possible to get a 7 day free trial if you aren't already a member and have full access to everything. Happy listening!

• The distinction helps as a shortcut to assess your strengths and weaknesses, and therefore where you may want to spend your time improving.
• That's hilarious about the mailman watching the weather channel.
• You must be well under the age of 20 to consider that people over the age of 70 have only their final days remaining.

Please all join: "Playing Styles!" the group is exactly about that join and we can keep with this very interesting forum topic.