what type of player are you

  • #161
    rmurray wrote:
    jmandell wrote:
    rmurray wrote:
    jmandell wrote:

    I would say that right now I am what I would call an "experimenter".  I am still relatively inexperienced with low ratings.  I experiment with ideas that I read in books, watch on youtube, etc. and see what happens.  As I do this I figure out what works and what doesn't.  While I do many different ideas, I'm more of an attacker and tactician.  As I develop my skill this is what I expect my style will be.

    Dude.... you are an "experimenter", and a .....loser.  Why not try standard chess, and think about what your doing.  Isn't "experimenter", experimentor?

    First off, I have been playing seriously for about 2 or 3 weeks, so don't expect me to win every game.  As I said in my original post I try different openings, endgame strategies, ect.  to find out what works and what doesn't - that is how I learn.  That is the way new things come about and people learn new things, so please explain to me what is wrong with experimenting.

    I'll leave you with this:

    "If I find 10,000 ways something won't work, I haven't failed. I am not discouraged, because every wrong attempt discarded is another step forward". - Thomas Edison

    Yeah.....like i said..."take another step forward", and play standard chess and think about what youre doing.  You will learn more.

     "It is advisable to ....Think ...before doing....Anything"   Sidhartha

    What is "standard chess"?  I didn't know that everyone has to play the exact same way. 

  • #162

    [ What is "standard chess"?  I didn't know that everyone has to play the exact same way. ]

    We all have to try to mate the opponents King to win.

  • #163

    I'm kind of ADHD and impulsive, so I tend to play fast.  My brain makes connections fast and patience and thinking the decisions through is one of the things that I'm working on.  I am playing some day long turn games, but I try to play a lot of live chess to better suit my high speed brain.

  • #164
    rmurray wrote:
    jmandell wrote:

    I'm kind of ADHD and impulsive, so I tend to play fast.  My brain makes connections fast and patience and thinking the decisions through is one of the things that I'm working on.  I am playing some day long turn games, but I try to play a lot of live chess to better suit my high speed brain.

    That is lovely, Mr. HighSpeed, but don't plan on winning a whole lot.

    challenge me to an online game, and we will see. 

  • #165
    rmurray wrote:
    jmandell wrote:
    rmurray wrote:
    jmandell wrote:

    I'm kind of ADHD and impulsive, so I tend to play fast.  My brain makes connections fast and patience and thinking the decisions through is one of the things that I'm working on.  I am playing some day long turn games, but I try to play a lot of live chess to better suit my high speed brain.

    That is lovely, Mr. HighSpeed, but don't plan on winning a whole lot.

    challenge me to an online game, and we will see. 

    Sorry, bub....unfortunately for you,  you aren't good enough yet to meet the criteria.  

    Fine by me.  I play for fun, not for money.  If I'm having fun that's all I care about. 

     

    And sorry for derailing the thread, lets get it back on track.Smile

  • #166

    I don't enjoy losing, I enjoy the playing of the game and if I lose, that is part of the learning process.  Like I said before, I'm 16, and I have been playing for 2 or 3 weeks, and I havn't had time to read all the books and practice all the tactics.  I'm working on becoming a serious player, and I'm aware of all the work I will have to put in.

  • #167

    I find that now my style appears to be that of a concretistic tactician in the sense of Alekhine or Tartakower. However, being completely realistic, my style is currently marred by remarkable blunders and, truthfully, not really formed yet :)

  • #168

    rmurray wrote:

    chessman1504 wrote:

    I find that now my style appears to be that of a concretistic tactician in the sense of Alekhine or Tartakower. However, being completely realistic, my style is currently marred by remarkable blunders and, truthfully, not really formed yet :)

    A "blundering, not formed, concretistic tactician".   .....I'm sure we all know exactly what that is.....? ......right?......?  

    Yes, it's complicated ;)

  • #169

    Well...

    Eh, I have to go to bed now, but I kind of " borrowed" the idea from this article on chess style:

    http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/playstyle1.htm

  • #170

    I don't know what type I am, I'd prefer to have no style but in reality, I'm just the usual blundering style of player.

    Defining a chessplayer's style essentially means enumerating his preferences - narrowing down the way he prefers to play. What is left out of such list is his weaknesses. Therefore, ideally, a player shouldn't have any definite style at all - a perfect chessplayer is completely universal and simply plays (or at least attepts to play) the best plans in whatever situations. The world elite is quite close to that, you cannot find a positional or tactical player up there - these categories exist in our patzerland, a grandmaster is inevitably a positional player, and he is also an outstanding tactitian.

  • #171

    i'm more of an attacking player

  • #172

    Anybody rated under 2000 here calling themselves positional really means passive, you wouldnt know what positional chess was if it kicked you in the nuts, your style is woodpusher... I know, because thats my style too.

  • #173

    I don't think I have a specific style, I just take it as it comes. If I'm in the right frame of mind for chess, I play well, if not, guess what. ;)

  • #174

    I would like to take back my answer and say that my style is to search for the strongest move or continuation in any position. I believe that thinking of myself as a certain player, at this stage of my chess development anyway, can only serve to hinder me :)

  • #175

    I'm a woodpusher... No. A cat playing with the mouse Cool

Top
or Join

Online Now