Poker & Chess - Reading Your Opponent?

Can/should you try to read other players in chess as you would in a game like poker? In poker, players can be tight vs. loose and passive vs. aggressive. Similarly, I've heard the chess joke, "If Tal sacrifices a piece, take it and then think. If Botvinnik sacrifices a piece, think and then take it. If Petrosian sacrifices a piece, resign." Is there any real benefit to trying to read your opponent, or does that do more harm than good?

I play both chess and poker and both games have things in common, but also things in which they do not share. There is not much value in trying to read a person in chess because the moves are objective. You play the best move and now they must try to find the best move. There is a psychology element to chess, but "bluffing" in chess doesn't look the same and even if you "bluff" with a questionable move in chess, it doesn't matter if they read you perfectly and know you are "bluffing" because they still need to find the objective refutation to your move if they want to "call" you on your bluff.

Overall, chess mind games (at least in that way) probably do more harm than good. It is better to be utilizing your clock to find objective best moves and calculate yourself.

Extremely fascinating! Agreed - I think bluffs only work as a last-ditch effort in the spirit of complicating losing positions, rather than as viable long-term strategies. In fairness I think a bluff can provoke a weakness by causing a novice player to overreact, but even then they're not unprecedented on the master level - Nepo playing 31. Qh4 in Game 8 of the World Championship could be described as a successful bluff!

"I don’t believe in psychology. I believe in good moves."
-Bobby Fischer

In chess and poker, the concept of "reading" your opponent is significantly different. In poker, the ability to analyze the psychology and behavior of other players (read their "body") can be an important aspect of strategy. Especially in zero-sum poker, where success depends on deception and predicting the actions of your opponents. I read about mifinity, found https://casinosanalyzer.com/online-casinos/mifinity for this. Now I spend time there. In general, in both games it is important not to neglect the analysis of the situation, but the methods of analysis and important factors differ.

If you are very familiar with how someone plays, based on many games, you might "read" them and have a sense of what kind of postions they are comfortable or uncomfortable with, but this doesn't apply to one-off games with random strangers.

@KeSetoKaiba - Bang on. In chess, every aspect of the position is theoretically available to both players, if they´re good enough at calculating and have enough time. To take an example: Kasparov sacrificed his R in his Immortal game; Topalov took it after having calculated very far ahead in many variations in an extremely complicated position, but, as he said himself, he´d overlooked the seemingly innocuous but deadly move c3 9(!!!) moves after the sacrifice. That´s the difference; chess is ice cold and has nothing to do with bluffing or reading body language; it´s about pure precision. A poker player has no idea of the actual state of affairs, and has to rely on his knowledge of statistical probabilities and his ability to read the opponent(s). A bluff in chess may work if both players only have seconds left on their clocks, but otherwise: big risk of being called!

In poker reading your opponent is not optional, it is a crucial part of the game. There's no objectively optimal strategy in poker that does not rely on taking into account the way your opponent plays.

In chess reading your opponent, even though it can be useful to some extent from the practical point of view, is entirely optional. There's always an objectively best move (or moves) that is completely independent of your opponent's playing style. In fact, the best chess players, i.e. chess engines, never bother to read their opponents.

But some human players do take their opponents' strengths and weaknesses into account. Karpov was known for doing it and so is Carlsen.

A successful bluff in chess:

https://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/gamesmanship.html

Scroll down to C.N. 2761.

It's an interesting comparison between poker and chess! While poker involves reading opponents' behavior and tendencies, chess is more about analyzing the board and anticipating your opponent's moves based on strategic principles. In chess, understanding your opponent's style can help you anticipate their plans and counter them effectively. 
However, it's more about analyzing the position rather than trying to "read" your opponent in the same way as in poker. If you're interested in learning more about chess strategies and styles, you might find this resource helpful. See here for more insights.

'When you sit down to play a game you should think only about the position,
but not about the opponent' - Capablanca