In "The Book of Chess" by CHOD Alexander a master player discusses a tournament that he played in. He spent the knight playing cards. So when he played the next day he played 3...Bb4? in the ruylopez - a weak move for obvious reasons such as 4. c3. The Master decided to bluff and said out loud:
"Haven't you heard of the Kratz Defence?"
Of course this was absolutely baloney. The opponent used a lot of time to respond. In the end black still lost.
There are some moves that have bad reputations despite good results. Some of Kasparov's moves are unjustly revered because he played them even though there are objectively better moves. His reputation, combined with the weight of the occasion (World Championship or something) illicited a weak response.
In "The Book of Chess" by CHOD Alexander a master player discusses a tournament that he played in. He spent the knight playing cards. So when he played the next day he played 3...Bb4? in the ruylopez - a weak move for obvious reasons such as 4. c3. The Master decided to bluff and said out loud:
"Haven't you heard of the Kratz Defence?"
Of course this was absolutely baloney. The opponent used a lot of time to respond. In the end black still lost.
Is that a Freudian slip or a terrible pun?
On topic, no I don't think there is bluffing. Traps that look like blunders are probably the closest thing, especially if you make it look like you just blundered.
yes you can totally psychologically obliterate your opponent refer to josh waitzkin
If you have a history with the opponent I could see some mind games, but I think if I'd never met a person, it woudln't really matter what they did (as long as it was within the rules heh).
Only time something like this remotely happened was before the round started my opponent started talking about how he won some section with a great game and replayed the attack on the board. I really coudln't have cared less and I played completely normally lol :p We drew.
Well, you can make some sort of illusionary "attack" that looks dangerous, but it isn't. I.e. put your knight on g5, queen on h4 to target the castled black king. It is easy to defend against, but if you make it look that you know what you are doing, it might frighten the black player and cause him to blunder. This is what I would call a bluff.
I've seen people once or twice pretend to have made a mistake when they offer a poison pawn or the like. And of course the patzer who slams down pieces in an exclamatory fashion, when such practice should really be questioned.
I dare any of you to make a computer blunder by bluffing!
Can you make the computer blink???
Bluffing does exist in chess, especially in the lower levels inhabited by such as me and especially when the clocks are running down. For example I was playing a game the other day where I was losing so I sacrificed a Knight, in a Fishing Pole type of position. My opponent thought for a moment, took the Knight and I proceeded to attack him. My sacrifice and the entire attack was completely unsound and he should have demolished me right away. But because he had stopped to think a moment, he lost time on his clock and subsequently he lost the game.
"Bluffing" can happen in OTB chess. I personally do not have any strong objections to it. A chess player should make moves based upon the position on the chessboard. If they choose to let opponent's bluffing influence their moves, it is their own fault. My 2 cents, anyway.
I usually do not resort to bluffing, but I have tried it a few times. Here's the most memorable one. At one point, I sensed by looking at my opponent's face that he was trying for a back rank mate against my king-side castled king. I pretended that I did not see the threat, and kept pushing my queen-side pawns forward. He fell for my bluff and prematurely "sacrificed" his queen to lure out my rook, before his own rook was in position. As he was getting ready to checkmate me, I moved my h-pawn. I won the game comfortably after that.
I dare any of you to make a computer blunder by bluffing!
Can you make the computer blink???
Sometimes the moment after I have made a move otb I see that it is a silly mistake and I have hung a piece. But I try not to jump up from the board, say "ouch" or indeed do anything at all to show that I know I have blundered. Especially if the mistake has been made very early in the opening when traps abound I have watched while an opponent looks at the gift, look very worried for a while and finally doesn't take it. I'd go so far as to say that if the game is a decently serious one between opponents who expect to be fairly evenly matched, if they don't immediately take it they are not going to. As long as you can maintain your poker face that is.
In fact now I remember a refinement. You can get up. You wait a moment or two, as you would if your opponent was in a familiar line and was going to move quickly. But then you see that they are bamboozled and are going to take a while so now you get up and go to see how the other games are going. This must be done very casually exuding the sort of slight smugness that says you have directed the game into a line with which your poor opponent is unfamiliar.
Now that reminds me of another move. And this is a good one. Your opponent is taking a lot of time over a move. Too much time. He is getting behind on the clock. You are delighted because, like me, you are useless in time trouble.
Well get up and walk away. Go right away - out of the room. Go to the loo. He might have just about screwed up his courage to commit to a move but, with you away from the table it feels to your opponent that he has more time, the pressure is reduced, he will proceed to take another five minutes at least.
The opposite also works. If you are bored and you want your opponent to come out of his trance, return to the board. Virtually immediately he will make his move.
I remember I used to love controlling my opponents' actions like that. A bit trivial perhaps but for some reason rather satisfying. :)
Last one. A great master - forgotten which one (Alekhine?) - had a splendid habbit. He sat hunched over the board concentrating fiercely on the board and only the board. But at the moment the game was won he looked up straight into his opponent's eyes.
The psychological effect must have been considerable.
Unfortunately I think that one is only available to a great master so bluffing the same mannerism probably wouldn't help any of us.
Yes, bluffing is common when your opponent is short on time. For instance you can make a move that looks like your getting ready to sac a piece in order to make your opponent use time to figure out if it is sound or not. A common bluff occurrs in the main line Ruy Lopez after: 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 Black will often play 7...O-O (instead of 7...d6) bluffing the Marshall Variation. This bluff sometimes gets a timid 8.d3 out of White players or some other anti-Marshall move such as 8.a4 or 8.h3.
I dare any of you to make a computer blunder by bluffing!
Can you make the computer blink???
You can't bluff against computers. Bluffing only works exclusively against humans, due to the possibility of a human error. A bluff is therefore very risky and computers would have no problem proving that.
It used to be that you could play a weird move against a lower-end engine and it would blow up, start playing awful moves. But I don't think that's possible anymore.
Once I was playing at my local club and I blundered my queen away. Just before my opponent captured it I held a knife to him under the table. I wasn't actually going to stab him but he didn't take my queen.
Your move violated an important principle, mrguy - MAKE NO ADMISSIONS. (Especially not in writing).
But don't worry, we can always plead insanity.
do you really not know the answer or are you bluffing?
You can bluff, although I don't really bother. Generally, acting like you "blundered a piece," even though you actually want them to take it because it's a trap, is extremely unlikely to be convincing beyond beginner level. And even if they did think you blundered, they are going to check if it is a trap anyway.
I'm really more of a purist... I generally don't care to get involved with all of the psychological warfare. If I get up out of my seat, it's because I genuinely want to relax temporarily. And I only offer a draw when I think all of the play is drained, not to put psychological pressure on my opponent. What I will do however is insist on not giving signs of resignation. As others have said, if I know I made a blunder, I will try to act completely normal, or if I have a bad position, I will still act like everything is under control.
I am a beginner at chess and I would like to ask if there is bluffing in chess.
Chess is a game of complete information. There are no hidden pieces in the game. However, there are people who claim that there is bluffing in chess. Is that true? Does this happen in high level games? How often does it happen?
Thanks.