![]() A better example would have a lot more balance in it for both sides and a variety of different possible strategies. It's a bad example because this position is highly strategical, less need to evaluate. Here is the position again black to play and white has castled O-O-O: This thread is about evaluation which is different to strategising. I deleted it because it was a bad example of the point about evaluation. In the (now deleted) game, 1.c4 seems like one of the best first moves. I guess standard chess is too except we're used to it. What strikes me about 960 positions is how unorganized the starting position is. I think 960 would be fun, but I'd want to play it live. ![]() I welcome feedback on my opinions as I really enjoy debates of this nature. The more advanced you become at chess the more this tool loses value most likely and of course tactics trainer far outlasts chess 960 as far as that is concerned. I find this less appealing because I think it is harder to link this to intelligence in my opinion.īy taking random positions to evaluate and find a plan, I feel like you are simply using another tool such as tactics trainer to sharpen the related subject. Intuition is a less appealing but most likely an even bigger factor of one's chess prowess. Perhaps it could even be dubbed as more computer-like chess, which would seem to require an absured amount of mental capabilities. Evaluation is the more appealing aspect to chess in my metality because it seems to fall into the realms of "scientific theory" if you will. Let me talk about my thought process on what seems to be an evaluation vs intuition topic. I can understand how people get stronger in chess by memorizing positions that have commonly occured during their games of classic chess but I digress. As far as even players go though, in terms of ratings, I can see how a noticable difference in intelligence might actually be one of the deciding factors. ![]() The reasons intelligence doesn't play a huge factor in classic chess, namely intuition, still hold true for the most part in Chess 960 in my opinion. Your chess knowledge would still dictate the choices you make and I feel this becomes way more evident as the game goes on and the players get to build their positions around what the board is telling them. I feel like there is still too much in common for there to be a huge difference as far as how you go about evaluating a position with one or the other. some of the crazy positions resulting from the dutch), do you feel that your response is factored by intelligence or by chess knowledge? I personally believe it to be the latter. When you evaluate bizare positions in chess, perhaps even some that you haven't seen before in classic chess if you are an inexperienced chess player (e.g. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |