Fiveofswords wrote:
We all just happen to be alive and someday we will be dead...what we do in the meantime ultimately makes no difference.
Today's Happy Thought brought to you by Fiveofswords.
Are most people too smart for chess?
Sort:
now_and_zen wrote:
What do I have to tell myself in others words to feel better about that fact that I will not discipline myself to study chess more seriously to get better and more consistent?
Games are meant to spend spare time to have fun. You might get better at playing a game by studying, but will you have more fun ?
With internet sites matching players with similiar ratings, the average win % will be roughly the same whether you're 1200 rated or 1700 rated, because you will always play players who are roughly the same strength as you.
So studying is work, not playing, and the result will probably not be more wins either.
Instead, the higher you get your rating to, the more knowledge of opening theory will be required, and for what ?
So you can play the first 23 moves by book and only get to play and enjoy moves 24-40 yourself instead of enjoying moves 5-40 ?
Have fun, enjoy the game. Only study it if you feel you absolutely must do so.
Just my 2 cents...
Dirty_Sandbagger wrote:
(...) Instead, the higher you get your rating to, the more knowledge of opening theory will be required, and for what ?So you can play the first 23 moves by book and only get to play and enjoy moves 24-40 yourself instead of enjoying moves 5-40 ? Have fun, enjoy the game. Only study it if you feel you absolutely must do so. Just my 2 cents...'That made a lot of sense to me. thanks pal.
leave it to a Zen miester to ask questions that have no answers :-)
My aim is to improve in Chess, to lessen my horrible defeats and improve my ratio of beautiful wins. It's a purely selfish pastime, but I'm not manufacturing weapons, and I do also give to foodbanks.
Yeah you're right Jbomber, he knows damn well that the average chess player is far smarter than the average non-chess player.
jbomber732 wrote:
The real question is if you'll ever stop spamming the forums with useless posts
Crystal ball says "Not likely".
But he does, on a rare occasion, get a good one.
"You have to mine a ton of rock to get a gram of gold."
-Kleelof (c. 8:30am)
tkbunny wrote:
kleelof wrote:
jbomber732 wrote:
The real question is if you'll ever stop spamming the forums with useless posts
Crystal ball says "Not likely".
But he does, on a rare occasion, get a good one.
"You have to mine a ton of rock to get a gram of gold."
-Kleelof (c. 8:30am)
"omg, kleelof's gone metric!" - bunny (who's got the time?)
Yeah, I just got it. ANd in a few days, I'll be back in the U.S. using the imerial system.
kleelof wrote:
Yeah, I just got it. ANd in a few days, I'll be back in the U.S. using the imerial system.
Didn't know you are involved with U.S. foreign policy ? Anyway, you made a spelling mistake there, it's called the immoral system. 
Dirty_Sandbagger wrote:
kleelof wrote:
Yeah, I just got it. ANd in a few days, I'll be back in the U.S. using the imerial system.
Didn't know you are involved with U.S. foreign policy ? Anyway, you made a spelling mistake there, it's called the immoral system.
----
Personally I would have corrected it to 'immaterial'. :)
kleelof wrote:
Fiveofswords wrote:
We all just happen to be alive and someday we will be dead...what we do in the meantime ultimately makes no difference.
Today's Happy Thought brought to you by Fiveofswords.
He is always happy
Fiveofswords wrote:
kleelof wrote:
Fiveofswords wrote:
We all just happen to be alive and someday we will be dead...what we do in the meantime ultimately makes no difference.
Today's Happy Thought brought to you by Fiveofswords.
i wouldnt call it happy. instead i would call it true. theres a difference :)
There is no difference
I don't think you can be "too smart" to play chess, nor do I think you can be "too dumb" to play chess. I believe that chess is a way to open the mind to a new perspective. Back in the day, generals used it to determine battlefield positions or something. Kings played it as a hobby and a pastime. Saying someone is "too smart" for chess reminds me of school. People get moved up a class because they are "too smart" for the class they are in. Chess is not a school topic. It is something for people to enjoy. Playing chess is like playing a piece of history, and it wouldn't be popular if people were "too smart" or "too dumb" for it.
Discipline, however, is a whole different topic. You do need a certain amount of discipline to reach the World Chess Championship or whatever it's called, but you can become a perfectly fine player without spending 8 hours a day studying tactics and openings and improving your "strats." (lol) Just keep your priorities straight, and if you really want to reach that top level, try making some more time for chess, but keep in mind that just because you can't make it to the top doesn't mean you can't enjoy and make the most of the skill you have.
________________________________________________________________________
This post was brought to you by Chess-0-Matic, a group filled with fun, dedication, and teamwork.
Is it that most people cannot dumb themselves down enough to spend vast amounts time in a sedentary position hunkered over a board with a bunch of squares smattered with strange archaic idols and get passionate about it, because there's a whole big world out there?
Or are chess players more like those guys who have nerves of steel and work on skyscrapers, with nary a thought of the extreme spiritual peril that woud have more prudent sorts exercising caution?
What do I have to tell myself in others words to feel better about that fact that I will not discipline myself to study chess more seriously to get better and more consistent?