I always play the board. If I'm making the best move I can possibly think of in a given position I'm guaranteed to give myself the best chances I'm capable of no matter what my opponent's response. If I were to play for cheap tricks, psychological or otherwise, I'd be upset with myself if I ended up throwing away a game on an inferior move.
I choose if they're alive!
Sort:
May 28, 2010
0
#3
TheGrobe wrote:
I always play the board. If I'm making the best move I can possibly think of in a given position I'm guaranteed to give myself the best chances I'm capable of no matter what my opponent's response. If I were to play for cheap tricks, psychological or otherwise, I'd be upset with myself if I ended up throwing away a game on an inferior move.
I don't have your discipline, TheGrobe. There are all kinds of ways I play throughout the game, especially when it's turn-based, and my mood or levels of intoxication allows me to change the way I approach the different positions
May 28, 2010
0
#4
Kerrianne wrote:
hi Sharon, that is really really interesting. There have been lots of debates about the psychology of how we react in a new online game. do we see a person - or a rating, and if their rating is higher than ours do we play more defensively? They could just have had a run of easy games! And I am sure more people lose against lower rated players online than in otb games. But then again long may the fantasy continue. I was talking to a friend a couple of years ago who is a brilliant coach and writer and former British champion, he was playing online (not here but in internet chess club) He was playing one minute blitz games. His opponent playing under some weird name was absolutely killing him. It was after he analysed the games because he had never lost so badly so many times that he became convinced that his secret online player was actually Bobby Fischer!
Hi, Kerrianne! It's sweet of you to read me
Was he serious about Fischer, or just saying that?
Hah, I have to say that one of the first bits of dicipline I instilled in myself was refraining from making moves (or posting in the forums) when there was any level of intoxication involved.
That was a lesson learned the hard way.
May 28, 2010
0
#6
TheGrobe wrote:
Hah, I have to say that one of the first bits of dicipline I instilled in myself was refraining from making moves (or posting in the forums) when there was any level of intoxication involved.
That was a lesson learned the hard way.
TheGrobe, if I'm not intoxicated, I'm not posting
May 28, 2010
0
#7
Fiveofswords wrote:
I dont tend to look at the rating, but I usually can tell very early based on the moves my opponent makes what sort of player they are, how strong they are, and if they are a computer or not (i haven analyzed my openings with a computer a lot i know exaclt what moves engines recommend in many different lines) I then tend to play the person. Or if I suspect they are using a computer I tend to direct the game into some position where it would be more obvious to me if they are using a computer or not (not concerned if i lose).
Just like Kerrianne implied, there is a lot going on in an online game of chess, Fiveofswords! You have such an understanding of your choice of opening, that you're quite aware of computer infiltration. It's like you're saying, "Prove you're a person!"
n
May 29, 2010
0
#9
TheGrobe wrote:
Hah, I have to say that one of the first bits of dicipline I instilled in myself was refraining from making moves (or posting in the forums) when there was any level of intoxication involved.
That was a lesson learned the hard way.
OK but where's the fun in posting sober?
May 29, 2010
0
#11
I try to play to or against the concept embedded in the opponent's name. For instance, if I was playing trysts, I would be on heightened alert for linked pieces e.g. a pair of knights operating in tandem.
May 29, 2010
0
#12
artfizz wrote:
I try to play to or against the concept embedded in the opponent's name. For instance, if I was playing trysts, I would be on heightened alert for linked pieces e.g. a pair of knights operating in tandem.
It's more like a pair of 'nights' operating in tandem
Short played someone online that he thought was likely Fischer, but he later recanted on that.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=11
May 29, 2010
0
#14
I play moves that stay true to my style,not necessarily the best moves.in other words,I "keep it real"
May 29, 2010
0
#15
goldendog wrote:
trysts wrote:
Hi, Kerrianne! It's sweet of you to read me
Was he serious about Fischer, or just saying that?
Short played someone online that he thought was likely Fischer, but he later recanted on that.
It points towards a computer but remains unresolved. Interesting.
When you are playing a game of chess online, are you playing a person? Do you play the board, or the rating, or a person? Are some of your moves made with the idea of some type of psychological effect?
I start a game playing the board. After a few moves, probably mid-game, I choose between playing the rating of the opponent(If a low rating I may simplify after a small gain of material, or position. If a higher rated opponent, I'll keep the complexities going, looking for more in the position), or I may make a move in the throes of tension, that is meant to make some type of psychological impact. As if, ratings be damned! I just wouldn't do this against a computer, it would be rather pointless. But I could easily play as if I'm playing a computer, as I play against a little hand-held computer all-the-time, when I'm out and about. Online, I act as if I'm playing against a person. But it's acting only, because I'll never know. I mean isn't playing against a computer just a mere piece of the fun of playing against a person? And isn't playing chess online even more facinating, because one is always presented with a choice whether they act as though they are playing a computer or a person?