Players taking vacation time. Sucks the living life from the game.
What is the most boring thing in chess?
Sort:
1. e4
Black VS White bishop endgames in which the oppenent refuses your draw offer!!!
Playing an someone over and over and they keep playing the same way
The French.
The most boring thing in chess is boring posts....
Apr 30, 2009
0
#68
thefox31 wrote:
1 move/ 2 day vote chess games that begin with the sicillian. 2 and a half months later and we're still in theory.
i have to agree with that. as much as i like the shveshnikov sicilian (and i am an ardent fan) playing three games that follow the same lines for over ten moves defeats the purpose of chess.
omeomy wrote:
jpd303 wrote:
no way chess player rule, we think about useless things like color complexes, waste our time playing a game we can never master, revere people that devote their lives in pursuit of achieving an impossible dream of creating a beautiful work of art that only a small percent of the populatoin can even appreciate, for very little money, and is of no consequence to the world in general. our attempts to legitimize this game, our holy grail, we pompusly abhor the plebian masses who ignorantly live thier lives without knowing what it is to behold a brilliant Tal sacrifice, or appreciate an artfuly played bronstein midgame, or wonder at the beautiful, natural simplisity of a Capa endgame. we brag about our esorteric understanding of a lucean position, or that we have 400 opening variations memorized til at least move 10, we can calculate variations and "see" 15 moves deep, we can speak of Nimzowitsch's "Hypermodern" revolution or Fischer singlehandly taking on the soviet chess machien, heck just en passant is enough to baffle the philistine masses...in the end its just a game that we take way too seriously and i wouldt have it anyother way
This needs more attention. kudos
That would be Lucena position. Not Lucean. Thanks. lol
Apr 30, 2009
0
#70
LordJones3rd wrote:
the most boring thing in chess is having to resist the temptation of shouting "charge" and tipping the board so that your pieces go crashing into your opponent's
lol. I gotta try that one sometime. When I resign, I send pieces flying everywhere...well, only at chess practice.
For me, the most boring part of chess is Opening... it's usually/always the same. O,o I try to hurry and get it over with, lol.
A VERY serious chess player 
Losing!
The widespread idea that OTB is the real thing, when really it's a blitz-style game littered with laughable mistakes.
when some one puts a mail chess time for 14 days and u don't notice it before its too late and he/she maves every 12 days so u had forgot the whole match.
my rating for one thing.lol.
Dec 16, 2009
0
#77
swiniaWkosmosie wrote:
Openings... learning openings is stupid work, neverending variations. Nowadays KID is analysed to 18 move, Sicilian about 20. Learning it by heart is stupid, because in chess you should think, and making moves you read in a book isn't thinking.
I disagree with that. Learning openings gives you more time to think later in the game, and prevents you from losing without even being able to give a good fight.
jpd303 wrote:
endgames rule i dont know what y'all are talking about, trading pieces off to get to an endgame where i milk the smallest advantage is a pleasure :) ...playing yet another ruy lopez is BORING...i dont play 1.e4 often because i hate the ruy
^Bravo!
I know ruy lopez is such a lame, garbage variation. It's so boring and standard. I'm an aggressive player who loves gambitting. And yes, to all of you who believe the endgame is boring and lame, looks like you haven't studied the HEART of chess yet! That's the heart of chess because that's where small advantages are converted. You finally make small nuances appear to be the most important thing, and lots of things matter in the endgame. Nice fun struggle to combat!
I want to face a tough bishops of opposite color endgame sometime soon, although I've almost NEVER encountered it for some reason. They are pretty rare...
waiting for a move in CC.
Trying to study chess books from dry authors... I wont say Nimzo's My System is a bad book, many swear by it as if it were the bible itself. But if i'm going to try and hit the books, I need an author with some character. I enjoyed Y. Seirawans books because they have personality and not just strings of variations. Pandolfini & Lev Albert are decent to work with too for that matter.
Playing against an opponent who believes he will win with developing queen & bishop alone. yawn.
Playing a won game where my opponent should just resign, but they insist on playing it out to checkmate, taking their full time allotment with each move, as if anything they do will save them. Just tip the king & set the pieces up again & go for a better game next time.
Being in a losing position against someone who seems to have no clue how to deliver checkmate with anything other than a queen, so they wander all over the board unnecessarily picking off material and trying to promote. Dude! you got a rook and 2 minor pieces! where are you going? My king's over here!
I can easily fall asleep to symmetrical play. Man, I just hate that.