The Principle Of justice Emanuel Lasker mentioned in Lasker's Manual Of Chess ... there was a Chapter in Gary kasparov's The Test Of Time entitled In Search Of The Truth & Geller loved playing well like many do . Players like Rueben Fine Capablanca & nowadays Carlsen . Lev Poulegevesky 's Books Grandmaster Preperation & Grandmaster Pervformance were nice works as well
@SOJB said in #2:
>
There’s Qxd5 instead Bxd5. And the end position is still ok for White after Bf4...
Elementary stuff, don’t call it psychology.
>
There’s Qxd5 instead Bxd5. And the end position is still ok for White after Bf4...
Elementary stuff, don’t call it psychology.
"... A game of chess, after all, is a fight in which all possible factors must be made use of, and in which a knowledge of the opponent's good and bad qualities is of the greatest importance. ..." - Emanuel Lasker (~1925)
@Sarg0n said in #22:
> There’s Qxd5 instead Bxd5. And the end position is still ok for White after Bf4...
>
> Elementary stuff, don’t call it psychology.
That’s exactly the point of me posting the example of a game. There was Qxd5 and is it not psychological that my opponent resigned after their blunder because they were so cross with themself. It’s not 2300 rated chess it’s 1600 rated chess, but I thought it was a good example that I didn’t play the best move , there was no need to belittle it . It’s still chess.
> There’s Qxd5 instead Bxd5. And the end position is still ok for White after Bf4...
>
> Elementary stuff, don’t call it psychology.
That’s exactly the point of me posting the example of a game. There was Qxd5 and is it not psychological that my opponent resigned after their blunder because they were so cross with themself. It’s not 2300 rated chess it’s 1600 rated chess, but I thought it was a good example that I didn’t play the best move , there was no need to belittle it . It’s still chess.
This game of mine proves that sometimes you shouldn't always play the best moves
If you define "truth" as the engine move... then you would be stupid to deny it exists. Turn on a machine and see it.
However, if you are defining truth as something "hidden from your view while you play - that you have to have faith that it exists" (which is belief in something you can not always see) - then I suppose the strength of your faith in the position will tell you when to stop searching.
I think you all believe in truth in chess, even if you deny it exists - because somehow you are all still searching for a better move pretty often, and while you search you have faith it is hidden there.
However, if you are defining truth as something "hidden from your view while you play - that you have to have faith that it exists" (which is belief in something you can not always see) - then I suppose the strength of your faith in the position will tell you when to stop searching.
I think you all believe in truth in chess, even if you deny it exists - because somehow you are all still searching for a better move pretty often, and while you search you have faith it is hidden there.
@DrHack said in #26:
> If you define "truth" as the engine move... then you would be stupid to deny it exists. Turn on a machine and see it.
>
> However, if you are defining truth as something "hidden from your view while you play - that you have to have faith that it exists" (which is belief in something you can not always see) - then I suppose the strength of your faith in the position will tell you when to stop searching.
>
> I think you all believe in truth in chess, even if you deny it exists - because somehow you are all still searching for a better move pretty often, and while you search you have faith it is hidden there.
I agree.
> If you define "truth" as the engine move... then you would be stupid to deny it exists. Turn on a machine and see it.
>
> However, if you are defining truth as something "hidden from your view while you play - that you have to have faith that it exists" (which is belief in something you can not always see) - then I suppose the strength of your faith in the position will tell you when to stop searching.
>
> I think you all believe in truth in chess, even if you deny it exists - because somehow you are all still searching for a better move pretty often, and while you search you have faith it is hidden there.
I agree.
www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1104043
[Event "Bundesliga 1995/96"] [Date "1996] [White "John Nunn"] [Black "Martin Pribyl"] [ECO "C50"] 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 d3 Bc5 5 O-O d6 6 c3 O-O 7 Nbd2 a6 8 Bb3 Ba7 9 h3 Nd7 10 Bc2 f5 11 exf5 Rxf5 12 d4 Rf8 13 Ne4 exd4
"... The position does indeed look promising on purely strategic grounds, but the wide range of moves at White's disposal indicates that a complete analysis will be very time-consuming. In the end I decided on a straight-forward forcing continuation [(14 Neg5)] which gives White a slight positional advantage. In fact White could have secured a larger advantage by another line [(14 Nfg5!)], ... I would certainly have taken my time had there not been an advantageous alternative. ..." - GM John Nunn (1998)
[Event "Bundesliga 1995/96"] [Date "1996] [White "John Nunn"] [Black "Martin Pribyl"] [ECO "C50"] 1 e4 e5 2 Nf3 Nc6 3 Bc4 Nf6 4 d3 Bc5 5 O-O d6 6 c3 O-O 7 Nbd2 a6 8 Bb3 Ba7 9 h3 Nd7 10 Bc2 f5 11 exf5 Rxf5 12 d4 Rf8 13 Ne4 exd4
"... The position does indeed look promising on purely strategic grounds, but the wide range of moves at White's disposal indicates that a complete analysis will be very time-consuming. In the end I decided on a straight-forward forcing continuation [(14 Neg5)] which gives White a slight positional advantage. In fact White could have secured a larger advantage by another line [(14 Nfg5!)], ... I would certainly have taken my time had there not been an advantageous alternative. ..." - GM John Nunn (1998)
"... I examined the problem from all angles, and it was plainly hopeless. Logic informed me that, under the circumstances, the only possible action would have to be one of desperation. ..." - Spock
httpscolon//wwwperiodyoutubeperiodcom/watch?v=pj-ZPoP0-Lw
httpscolon//wwwperiodyoutubeperiodcom/watch?v=pj-ZPoP0-Lw
@MyBodyAteItself said in #1:
> What I mean is, is trying to play the absolute best move a bad idea?
It greatly depends on game format & how much time a player has got left. Ideally, you'd want to be not making bad moves while spotting if any were done on the opponent's side. That's the method the engines employ in their play.
> What I mean is, is trying to play the absolute best move a bad idea?
It greatly depends on game format & how much time a player has got left. Ideally, you'd want to be not making bad moves while spotting if any were done on the opponent's side. That's the method the engines employ in their play.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.