The_Ghostess_Lola wrote:
Oh, fill it with a twinkie....
....and let's try to not let the creativity of this game go the way of Hostess........
lol...bingo! Haywood it is.
Bobby Fischer Lacked Creativity ?....How Dare I !
Sort:
The_Ghostess_Lola wrote:
Well, I just won a legitimate 2279 player five minutes ago....so I'm really happy. I mean, doesn't that count for something ?
Do you have articles or quotes from BS ? I would like to read them.
And creative chess isn't crap Reb ! That is, unless you're one of them too.
It's real & it's important & it has its place in this game - I believe that. If its only place is in blitz and non-titled long games ?....then fine. I'll take that (altho' I'm kinda forced 'cuz our top players seem to play so scared these days....and that would include BF....)
Oh Oh Oh !....I can't test out my opponent. He might counterstrike my sacrifice & then win & then bruise my ego....oh no !....can't do that....I'm too afraid....(....wow, I never knew a touche could hurt so much....)
Do you know why I know this ?....'cuz when I play unrated games against players 1700 and up ?....many try to dissipate my attack w/ a forced Q trade, ruin the beauty & complexity of the game by trading down, and so on & so on.
So, noone's gonna tell me that this type of play happens only at the top level. Skardeekats are right here in unrated games on chess.com !
It's disgusting....
The mark of a very strong player is he know what pieces to trade and which to keep. Misconception is to be a strong player you need to beat other strong players, "true" but not true; a mark of strong player is the ability to beat a low-rated player always and that is hard to do. zakerzzahmed 2279 online rating miss in your game 8... Bf5! 9.a3 Qd7 10.b4 0-0-0 11.b5 Nd4 12.Nxd4 Qxd4 and black wins easy. Your opponent at best is 1800 elo, he can't form a correct plan and blunders a lot, how in the hell did he achieve a online rating of 2279. Like I say before I do not trust online rating. Yersterday zakerzahmed 2279 lost four games to a mere 1600 online rating, zaker was getting crush from his lower rated player; zaker's opening is coffeehouse, bad middlegame and worst he blunders a lot.
Every strong player needs to play accurate and give consideration to which piece to exchange to increase their advantage and eventually winning, the problem is when a player exchange blindly and don't give the neccesary consideration of what pieces to keep, what weakness to allow and with all this considerations a strong player is closer to a win. Every GMs play this way, GM Tal play this way to beat the inept Botvinnik, Tal was great every area in chess, can play positional and endgames, in one the game in world champion match, Tal play a brilliant positional game to beat Botvinnik. That is chess and strong player understand this.
Jun 17, 2015
0
#604
Okay....that's fine....you win....you took the happiness from my winning a 2279 player. Are you satisfied now ? And BTW, I really cannot believe you're still analyzing & talking about that one game - I've totally forgotten about it....why don't you ?
And something else....you're just a grandpatzer yourself. 1800 is nothing to throw a party over here at my bungalow. So, I suggest you get a title....then you can get mouthy.
Harvey, stop banging your head off a wall! that hollow sound ain't the best :(
The_Ghostess_Lola wrote:
Okay....that's fine....you win....you took the happiness from my winning a 2279 player. Are you satisfied now ? And BTW, I really cannot believe you're still analyzing & talking about that one game - I've totally forgotten about it....why don't you ?
And something else....you're just a grandpatzer yourself. 1800 is nothing to throw a party over here at my bungalow. So, I suggest you get a title....then you can get mouthy.
This grandpatzer is otb expert with a real otb rating of 2011 uscf; plus I do have a title " expert title". :) Why was I able to critique your opponent so call online rating 2279 moves if I did not have any chess knowledge. He not only miss good moves in your game, he also miss good moves his other games too. I was concentrating more on him than you, I am disappoint a player can play so bad with a 2279 rating, a real otb 2279 is a real master and his moves be master quality not a online rating of 2279. You should be proud of your win, he is at least 1800 fide. I am making a point, he did not know what pieces to exchange and trading down he eliminating his advantage; that is my main point. Strong player know when to exchange pieces, there is time you need to exchange queen to increase your advantage, it is all about winning. :) Even bohenian players exchange queens because it is the correct move!
NM Reb, he correct any liars; so he did check to see if I am expert; he never challenge my claim. I see him correcting players who lie and challenging them on their boast.
power_2_the_people wrote:
I would have liked to learn chess when i was young and i' ve not read a lot about chess either but I've just remembered an interesting passage in Lasker's Manual of Chess where he explains is conception of the aesthetic effect in chess. i'm sure it is not the same as creativity but it certainly is relevant to some of the opinions expressed here. It's a wonder nobody quoted Lasker yet. Or maybe it takes only a poophead --didn't know the expression--like me to confuse creativity and aesthetic?
Aesthetics (beauty) and creativity are express in a master game, they see opportunities amateurs miss; a lot time a master game is so complex a good annotator can brimg these hidden possibilities to light and we can appreciation the hidden beauty in a master game.
Jun 18, 2015
0
#609
Remember this test to find out if you are truly a Bohemian Chess Artist ?
True or False:
****
1. I take into consideration my opponent's national flag.
2. I find some knight designs unattractive.
3. Sometimes I become angry when playing chess.
4. Occasionally I let my games of chess blossom without a plan.
5. Sometimes I castle only because I believe in "Safety First".
6. I have captured pawns strictly to physically possess them.
7. There is something not quite right about letting my opponent win.
8. I don't care if my opponent is higher-rated.
9. Chess is an easy game because I fully understand its rules.
10. I have fantasized about my online opponent suddenly standing behind me.
11. Chess probably creates more harm than good.
12. I prefer to play in comfortable clothing.
13. I would like to walk in the shoes of my favorite chessplayer for one day.
14. Playing with a chess clock is important to me.
15. I prefer to checkmate my opponent than for her/him to resign.
16. I usually view my opponent as an adversary.
17. I am comfortable with my opponent temporarily holding the initiative.
18. Alternative rules for chess (e.g., capturing your own pieces, no en passant, etc.) are welcoming.
19. I prefer not to be disturbed when playing chess.
20. Planning is one of my assets.
21. I have played chess all night long before.
22. I like my knights to point toward the center of the board.
23. The number 64 is important to me.
24. I am ambivalent to reddish chess pieces.
****
Okay, give yourself:
(2) points if you chose (T) for questions 1, 4, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 17, 18, and 21.
(1) point if you chose (T) for questions 7, 19, and 22.
****
If you scored:
21-23....You are a World Class Bohemian Chess Artist (BCA)....Congratulations !
16-20....You should probably go live in Montparnasse (Paris) just to polish up a bit. You have all the makings of a BCA - you just hafta let go a little bit more.
11-15....You have some work ahead of you. And that's why you're wearing a watch, 'cuz you need more time. You see, BCA's don't need a watch 'cuz time is not their problem.
6-10....Your time is ticking away. And I hope you're not a giant bomb !
0-5....This is AKA the Bobby Fischer Dungeon. You just don't get the real reason behind chess. So....have you thought of giving checkers a try ?
....
....
First you must find one who plays the KG... don't count on me!
....
Anyone who believes Fischer lacked creativity needs to review his game against Donald Byrne which was dubbed, "The Game of the Century". Also, keep in mind that Bobby was only 13 years old at the time 
Jun 18, 2015
0
#614
I've already said that, but Lala and her co-dependents sneered. 
Fischer was the creativity of chess, lacking massive, hard training and deep concentration(european chess), holding only on his genius.
Jun 18, 2015
0
#616
Out to Tommy Gun:
BF was nothing more than an early version of Chessmaster 3000. He relied upon his near photographic memory (remind you of a brain box ?), concentration (a tower never tires....it might exhaust blue smoke, but it doesn't get exhausted), willpower (ever heard of chess software that resigns ?), and youth (old computers get outdated & slow & worthless....so we throw them out to the silicon boneyard).
What he didn't have ?....was so much as above average creativity (about C- or 1.9'ish)....just like a chessplaying computer. And so, he won most of his games using tactics (& traps too). Exactly what a computer does....'cuz of its limits. He really didn't have the depth to play positionally or strategically impressive chess. I mean, it was okay....but nothing special (whatever shrug).
I feel ppl here need to objectively oversee his games instead of getting all caught up & emotional about his OffTB hi-jinx & cheap diversions. You know, see his chess weakness truly for what it was....w/out being blinded with eyes that are lying to you. You owe it to yourself....you really do. And I mean that.
Jun 18, 2015
0
#617
You are very, very wrong on this, Lala. In his old age, Bobby said that he now hated chess and that it is dead because the art is gone and that people memorize lines and use computers. That, btw, is why he had invented Fischer Random Chess (aka 960).
I suppose that you should be pardoned for getting chess matters bassackwards because you are a girl. I'm OK with that.
One thing in Bobby's favor in terms of creativity is he had a lot of improvements over old discredited lines. It takes creativity and ingenuity to do that.
Jun 18, 2015
0
#619
Harvey....are we sure he invented Chess960. There's talk that it was made up years before him - but that he just pushed it and the timing was right. So, for lack of the true name of its rightful creator ?....
And BTW, the games he played against BS in 1992 was a howling comedy of errors from both sides. And they had the audacity to call it a world championship ? What a ridiculous...J...O...K...E...(up my nose my latte goes !)
GK would have absolutely embarrassed the man. And I can comfortably say the top 10 players ranked in 1992 would have serially reduced him to tears. My gawd....quit deluding yourself....
I would have loved to have seen Judit Polgar give him knight odds and subsequently pablum feed him his own words....with a pawn-shaped pacifier for dessert !
I believe you Reb....
....and I hope you understand my concern. Wilty chess resonates thruout....from my level and higher. And it sounds like it only gets worse !
And I understand their concern about the $....pathetic, yes....but I get that part. Still, there's no excuse in playing risk-averse w/ the "arcade" $ given out at nearly all of these tournaments.
****
....and I'm not this Haywood person Harvey....I'm me.