I posit chess is more fun if you are no good
Sort:
As a low level player, I can play almost any opening and not have to worry if black or white has a theoretical advantage because neither me nor my opponent will be playing theoretical moves, and in the middle game I can play clumsy but exciting swashbuckling tactics that would probably be severely punished by higher level players, but for which I can get away with against players of my own rating. I feel like the options available to low level players are much greater than those at higher-rated players' disposal. I thank my lucky starts I wasn't destined to be a good chess player and relish all the fun lines of play not available to those unfortunate enough to play in the higher-rated matches.
I absolutely agree. I used to sacrifice a whole army of pieces to attack the king, and play outright blunders, and still win a few times. now, I have to think and be careful, and thats fun as well, but not as fun
Apart from the fact better players win more, I see your point.
Well thats always fun once I played a guy who kept exchanging pieces and never let me use any theory. That was an face to face match and he looked very happy.
hmm.
I'm not convinced of Any of this "posit" stuff.
it seems to me that the freedom from knowing lots of stuff- is balanced by the fact that against the average tournament player (to say nothing about those much better at chess than that) - you basically have little chance of winning and will almost certainly crash and burn and plain up lose...
this is why personally, I would like to leave the ranks people that know a good bit about this game but play poorly.
sides more remarkable than any given level in chess IMHO is chess improvement. simply the idea that you can play much better than you could in the past.