English players lurch from genius to unsound. E.g. Blackburne and Short.
Talking about chess styles and nationality
Sort:
Apr 11, 2017
0
#3
Capablanca was an exception.
However, he did play many extremely sharp games that he's not recognized for.
Fischer described Capablanca having to play sharply to compensate for his ignorance of opening theory. But he was not a natural attacker, true.
However, he did play many extremely sharp games that he's not recognized for.
Fischer described Capablanca having to play sharply to compensate for his ignorance of opening theory. But he was not a natural attacker, true.
Lenier Dominguez Perez from Cuba is about as boring as Giri.
Bent Larsen could attack pretty well.
Latins and Scandinavians are not nationalities. They are multinational groupings.
SirFlintstone wrote:
Latins and Scandinavians are not nationalities. They are multinational groupings.
^ this
I remember my former GM coach telling me that he thought Indians played chess very weirdly and he could not understand them. Lol. Not sure how much truth there is to that
Apr 12, 2017
0
#7
dpnorman wrote:
I remember my former GM coach telling me that he thought Indians played chess very weirdly and he could not understand them. Lol. Not sure how much truth there is to that
From my experience against Indian flag players in Daily, this is absolutely correct.
It's a weird mix of logical moves and strange/illogical/dubious looking moves that can't be good yet aren't tactical blunders for the most part.
At the higher levels though, there's much more similarity - I'm talking about 1400-1900s on daily here. Two of my friends in chess are Indians, and their play is pretty typical for their level (expert, NM).
Apr 12, 2017
0
#8
Talking about exact names to backup your thoughts would be good because I dont think Wesley played like Fischer. And I think it is a joke to talk about non titled players or weak players or chess.com players when you are going to talk about styles and nationalities.
Anyways, I took classes with a Cuban GM, Gonzalez Zamora, and his games were pretty damn sharp, all of the time there was an emphasis on being sharp if the position asked for it and he showed us some of his games to illustrate it.
This was one of them:
Apr 12, 2017
0
#9
I think more positional-oriented games are true of Eastern Europe, but it's hard to pin a style on an entire area otherwise. Bent Larsen was the attacking-est player in the 60's and 70's. I remember a chessmaster back then saying something like, "Larsen has resurrected medieval weapons with which to attack rather than today's machine guns, but if you don't know how to defend against a sword or a mace, how can you beat him?"
Remember that the Grand Prix Attack against the Sicilian was originally called the Larsen-Santasiere Variation. Larsen was big on f4-style attacking and was a 10-ten GM.
Apr 13, 2017
0
#12
I have noticed that all players from the Philippines do is attack every move...can be very annoying....but you can beat them by running them out of pieces....
Apr 13, 2017
0
#13
Also wondering if a higher % of players play their "stereotype"...like French players playing French game....Italians playing the Italian game.....Scandinavians playing....bla bla bla , etc....
Apr 13, 2017
0
#14
Also what is caveman style???? What would be the Neanderthal opening????
Apr 13, 2017
0
#17
The Neanderthal Opening is 1.e4, but with the queen's pawn (because his buddies in the photo have the board turned the wrong way -- clearly these guys haven't studied under urk).
So my impressions...
Great American players generally favor open lines and clear play, as you can see in the games of Morphy and especially Fischer.
Russian players have a heavy style (Botvinnik, Alekhine playing on both sides of the board, etc.)
Latin players are very tactical and attacking (Mexican, Cuban...)
Scandinavian players enjoy slow endgame crushes ( Ulf Andersson, Magnus Carlsen)
Your thoughts on nationality and chess style?