I love how transpo rigorously avoids making any solid statements of his own.
I am not understanding the term "solid" in chess
Sort:
Oh, I wish linux hadn't said that...now I've got to go (back in a bit).
ivandh wrote:
I love how transpo rigorously avoids making any solid statements of his own.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is a solid statement. Or as I guess you mean a "clear" statement
There are 3 advantages/disadvantages in chess.
1. Time- which has both dynamic and static aspects to it
2. Space- which has both dynamic and static aspects to it
3. Material- which has only static aspects to it
The eigenvalues of the Jacobian about omega = 0,0 all lie on the imaginary axis.
Well, it's about time somebody said it.
transpo wrote:
ivandh wrote:
I love how transpo rigorously avoids making any solid statements of his own.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is a solid statement. Or as I guess you mean a "clear" statement
There are 3 advantages/disadvantages in chess.
1. Time- which has both dynamic and static aspects to it
2. Space- which has both dynamic and static aspects to it
3. Material- which has only static aspects to it
So what would constitute a static time advantage? A time advantage is dynamic. It generally only lasts a few moves before being converted to space or material, or vanishing.
Plus there are other kinds of tactical advantages, like a pinned piece or an attack on the king.
My material keeps getting allocated dynamically to the side of the board.
Yeah, my pieces tend to accrete in a pretty solid lump over by my opponent's elbow.
Berder wrote:
transpo wrote:
ivandh wrote:
I love how transpo rigorously avoids making any solid statements of his own.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is a solid statement. Or as I guess you mean a "clear" statement
There are 3 advantages/disadvantages in chess.
1. Time- which has both dynamic and static aspects to it
2. Space- which has both dynamic and static aspects to it
3. Material- which has only static aspects to it
So what would constitute a static time advantage? A time advantage is dynamic. It generally only lasts a few moves before being converted to space or material, or vanishing.
Plus there are other kinds of tactical advantages, like a pinned piece or an attack on the king.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Static- aspects on the chess board having to do with the physical
Pieces and pawns & the physical squares
Dynamic- Aspects on the chess board having to do with the imaginary powers of the pawns and pieces and the influence they have over the squares.
Time advantages are created over the board due to a combination of static and dynamic aspects. This is why time advantages/disadvantages have aspects of both static and dynamic.
Material advantages/disadvantages are only have static aspects because the piece and its power are off the boar. Only the physical square on which it stood remains.
I am wrong about material advantages/disadvantages. They have both static and dynamic aspects. The reason being that when the piece is removed from the chess board the dynamic balance/imbalance of all the other pieces on the board is changed.
Solid is robust and hard to defeat, which does not mean that the position does not allow for good attacking or a win.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Heidrich wrote:
I definately know whay dynamic and static advantages are. Are you saying caro kann is simply purely static
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symmetric pawn structures (pawn structures with the same number of pawns on both sides of the board and one or more open files in between) are a static aspect of a chess position. These types of pawn structures tend to be drawish because there are very few ways to create any dynamic imbalances in these types of pawn structures with your pieces and open files if your opponent does not want to allow it. That is one possible definition of why an opening might be described as solid. In many variations the Caro-Kann tends to be this way.
Sorry if it seemed like I got off topic.
Solid, safe cautious without risk, defensive following classic lines etc.
"Solid" depends on the position. This is where the pawn is closed or the pieces are somewhat impossible or hard to break on.
transpo wrote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is a solid statement. Or as I guess you mean a "clear" statement
There are 3 advantages/disadvantages in chess.
1. Time- which has both dynamic and static aspects to it
2. Space- which has both dynamic and static aspects to it
3. Material- which has only static aspects to it
So what would constitute a static time advantage? A time advantage is dynamic. It generally only lasts a few moves before being converted to space or material, or vanishing.
Plus there are other kinds of tactical advantages, like a pinned piece or an attack on the king.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Static- aspects on the chess board having to do with the physical
Pieces and pawns & the physical squares
No - static considerations are those that last many moves or have the potential to last many moves. e.g. pawn structure, material advantage, king trapped in middle
Dynamic- Aspects on the chess board having to do with the imaginary powers of the pawns and pieces and the influence they have over the squares.
No - dynamic considerations are those that are temporary lasting only a few moves. e.g. better piece development, tactics
Time advantages are created over the board due to a combination of static and dynamic aspects. This is why time advantages/disadvantages have aspects of both static and dynamic.
It doesn't matter how the time advantage was created. It's still a dynamic advantage. Maybe you used a static advantage to gain a time advantage, but the time advantage is still dynamic because it will go away in a few moves if not converted to another kind of advantage.
Material advantages/disadvantages are only have static aspects because the piece and its power are off the boar. Only the physical square on which it stood remains.
I much prefer wobbly openings. Solid is for sissies, much like castling
Berder wrote:
transpo wrote:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is a solid statement. Or as I guess you mean a "clear" statement
There are 3 advantages/disadvantages in chess.
1. Time- which has both dynamic and static aspects to it
2. Space- which has bothOo dynamic and static aspects to it
3. Material- which has only static aspects to it
So what would constitute a static time advantage? A time advantage is dynamic. It generally only lasts a few moves before being converted to space or material, or vanishing.
Plus there are other kinds of tactical advantages, like a pinned piece or an attack on the king.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Static- aspects on the chess board having to do with the physical
Pieces and pawns & the physical squares
No - static considerations are those that last many moves or have the potential to last many moves. e.g. pawn structure, material advantage, king trapped in middle
Dynamic- Aspects on the chess board having to do with the imaginary powers of the pawns and pieces and the influence they have over the squares.
No - dynamic considerations are those that are temporary lasting only a few moves. e.g. better piece development, tactics
Time advantages are created over the board due to a combination of static and dynamic aspects. This is why time advantages/disadvantages have aspects of both static and dynamic.
It doesn't matter how the time advantage was created. It's still a dynamic advantage. Maybe you used a static advantage to gain a time advantage, but the time advantage is still dynamic because it will go away in a few moves if not converted to another kind of advantage.
Material advantages/disadvantages are only have static aspects because the piece and its power are off the boar. Only the physical square on which it stood remains.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because our differing views on static and dynamic is off topic. We need to check with, Heidrich, the OP before continuing this discussion in his thread. I have messaged him regarding this.
linuxblue1 wrote:
Actually that's not true; you could be losing in an endgame by a pawn and be in a "solid" fortress trying to draw.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are describing one static disadvantage (being down a pawn- a physical pawn) and one static advantage of your physical pieces in a formation that is a fortress that guarantees you a draw