Queens Gambit
November 19th, 2020 at 1:47:01 PM
permalink
I just finished the Queens Gambit, great netflix series.
I've been playing a lot of chess on my switch now
I'm a pawn to King 4 opening person my whole life
Been playing a lot on my switch using Queens gambit opening and really loving my position.
The series is fascinating as it uses real historical games picked by Gary Kasporov. I've watched analysis of those games on youtube.
I've been playing a lot of chess on my switch now
I'm a pawn to King 4 opening person my whole life
Been playing a lot on my switch using Queens gambit opening and really loving my position.
The series is fascinating as it uses real historical games picked by Gary Kasporov. I've watched analysis of those games on youtube.
Its just a forum. Nothing here to get obsessed about.
November 19th, 2020 at 3:33:31 PM
permalink
Quote: terapinedI've been playing a lot of chess on my switch now
I'm a pawn to King 4 opening person my whole life
"Pawn to King 4"? Are you using a Switch, or flipping switches on an Altair 8800?
November 19th, 2020 at 4:08:28 PM
permalink
Quote: ThatDonGuy"Pawn to King 4"? Are you using a Switch, or flipping switches on an Altair 8800?
Holy Cow! Early 1970s, if I recall, Howdy, Ol'Timer!
Young folk will never understand what it was like to be front-and-center at the computer techology revolution.
November 19th, 2020 at 5:05:56 PM
permalink
Quote: terapinedI just finished the Queens Gambit, great netflix series.
I agree 100%. Just outstanding. I loved every second of it. It is on my list of near-perfect television like Breaking Bad and Mad Men.
In your other post, T, you mentioned they used real games, chosen by Kasparov, for the show. I'd be interested to study the games more carefully.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
November 19th, 2020 at 6:22:13 PM
permalink
Quote: LuckyPhowHoly Cow! Early 1970s, if I recall, Howdy, Ol'Timer!
Young folk will never understand what it was like to be front-and-center at the computer techology revolution.
Not quite "early" 1970s; I read about it in Popular Electronics when I was in middle school, so around 1975. The first computer I programmed was a big iron IBM 1130; the first one I owned was an Atari 800 (with a whopping 48 KB of RAM) in the early 1980s.
November 19th, 2020 at 7:07:47 PM
permalink
No doubt the show will take home a basket full of Emmys.
I was kind of impressed by the VFX. Did you see how they recreated the Las Vegas Strip of the mid 1960s? Few viewers will appreciate how much work must have gone into what was essentially some minor ambiance backdrop.
I was kind of impressed by the VFX. Did you see how they recreated the Las Vegas Strip of the mid 1960s? Few viewers will appreciate how much work must have gone into what was essentially some minor ambiance backdrop.
Have you tried 22 tonight? I said 22.
November 19th, 2020 at 7:24:10 PM
permalink
For those of you who enjoyed the series, I highly recommend you read the novel by Walter Tevis. It's even better than the series. And yes, the series was EXCELLENT! For the most part, it was very, very true to the novel, something I was very happy to see.
I've probably read The Queen's Gambit a half dozen times... or more. I often read it just before a large tournament. It would help to put me into that "competitive chess mood." (I've entered about 80+ chess tournaments over the past 25 years.) The novel came out back in 1983 and I'm probably one of the few who read it way back then. It's one of my favorite novels of all time. So to see a miniseries made from the novel, and to see the miniseries doing so well and being so well received, is a dream come true for me.
I've recommended reading the novel to many of my chess buddies over the years, and everyone who did take me up on my recommendation also enjoyed it very much. Of course, the subject matter was an interest to us, and that helped.
The novel goes into much more depth regarding Beth and her addition, the thoughts going through her head, etc.
If you're not familiar with Tevis, three of his six novels were made into movies. (The Hustler, The Color of Money and The Man Who Fell to Earth.
I've probably read The Queen's Gambit a half dozen times... or more. I often read it just before a large tournament. It would help to put me into that "competitive chess mood." (I've entered about 80+ chess tournaments over the past 25 years.) The novel came out back in 1983 and I'm probably one of the few who read it way back then. It's one of my favorite novels of all time. So to see a miniseries made from the novel, and to see the miniseries doing so well and being so well received, is a dream come true for me.
I've recommended reading the novel to many of my chess buddies over the years, and everyone who did take me up on my recommendation also enjoyed it very much. Of course, the subject matter was an interest to us, and that helped.
The novel goes into much more depth regarding Beth and her addition, the thoughts going through her head, etc.
If you're not familiar with Tevis, three of his six novels were made into movies. (The Hustler, The Color of Money and The Man Who Fell to Earth.
November 19th, 2020 at 7:38:37 PM
permalink
Quote: WizardI agree 100%. Just outstanding. I loved every second of it. It is on my list of near-perfect television like Breaking Bad and Mad Men.
I definitely agree with this sentiment. It was truly great. I will, however, forever argue against anyone that it should be considered a movie and not a TV show.
November 19th, 2020 at 8:18:57 PM
permalink
Late in the series, the some of the chess boards had numbers and letters on the edges, as the players were shifting from descriptive to algebraic notation.
"Pawn to King 4" becomes "e4"
"Pawn to King 4" becomes "e4"
November 19th, 2020 at 8:36:02 PM
permalink
Quote: EdCollinsThe novel goes into much more depth regarding Beth and her addition, the thoughts going through her head, etc.
Addiction being Beth’s biggest adversity was one of my favorite parts of the story.
I kept waiting for some kind abuse since that’s the direction 99% of orphan stories go, and was pleasantly surprised when it never happened.
The circumstances leading to her orphanage were pretty dark, and her adoptive father was a jerk (but not abusive). However the rest of her relationships were amazingly wholesome. Hopefully that is true in the book as well.
I kept waiting for some kind abuse since that’s the direction 99% of orphan stories go, and was pleasantly surprised when it never happened.
The circumstances leading to her orphanage were pretty dark, and her adoptive father was a jerk (but not abusive). However the rest of her relationships were amazingly wholesome. Hopefully that is true in the book as well.
November 19th, 2020 at 9:29:18 PM
permalink
Question -- A description of the series I read said that Beth's superior chess ability was a result of tranquilizers. Personally, I didn't come away with that interpretation watching the show. I don't deny it, but don't necessarily agree either. Does the book address this in greater depth? Opinions?
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
November 19th, 2020 at 10:01:31 PM
permalink
I think the idea is that the tranquilizers allowed her to hallucinate the chessboard on the ceiling (the source of her analytical brilliance). Later in life, when she finally gets sober, she loses the ability.
Then, at the Moscow match, she stares at the ceiling (to everyone else's confusion) and the chessboard reappears suggesting she had the ability all along and the drugs were merely a mental crutch.
Have you tried 22 tonight? I said 22.
November 20th, 2020 at 7:25:22 AM
permalink
Quote: Dalex64Late in the series, the some of the chess boards had numbers and letters on the edges, as the players were shifting from descriptive to algebraic notation.
"Pawn to King 4" becomes "e4"
Pedantic Alert: Black's P-K4 is "e5".
I don't know when algebraic notation became "universal," but Raymond Keene's 1978 book on the first Karpov-Korchnoi match used descriptive and his 1985 book on the second one used algebraic.
Speaking of pedantic, if you look closely at the floor of the gym where the Kentucky State Championship is being held in episode 2, you'll notice that not only is there a 3-point circle, which didn't exist in the 1950s, but both it and the free throw lane are the current (well "current" as in "as of 2011") international versions, so obviously that scene wasn't filmed in the USA.
November 20th, 2020 at 8:29:57 AM
permalink
Quote: ThatDonGuyNot quite "early" 1970s; I read about it in Popular Electronics when I was in middle school, so around 1975. The first computer I programmed was a big iron IBM 1130; the first one I owned was an Atari 800 (with a whopping 48 KB of RAM) in the early 1980s.
I started on the IBM 360 with punch cards. The first game I wrote was a checkers game on it where every move required punching a card with the coordinates and a new board would be printed on the line printer for every move. I believe I wrote that one in COBOL but it may have been Fortran 66.
At my age, a "Life In Prison" sentence is not much of a deterrent.
November 20th, 2020 at 11:00:37 AM
permalink
I’ve heard a lot about Queens Gambit. I’ll have to see it. I play chess on Lichess.org under the handle Greasyjohn where I’ve played over 14,000 games in the last 4 years.
I thought I might have played Mike a while back. The handle was WizardsChess64. I ask if he was Mike but got no reply. Wizard was born in ‘65, but still, what a considence.
I always play queen’s gambit declined as black. And I always open with e4 when white.
Anyone heard of the Fried Liver?
I thought I might have played Mike a while back. The handle was WizardsChess64. I ask if he was Mike but got no reply. Wizard was born in ‘65, but still, what a considence.
I always play queen’s gambit declined as black. And I always open with e4 when white.
Anyone heard of the Fried Liver?
November 20th, 2020 at 11:31:20 AM
permalink
Sure. I believe the Fried Liver Attack is:Quote: Greasyjohn...Anyone heard of the Fried Liver?
1. e4 e5
2. Nf3 Nc6
3. Bc4 Nf6
4. Ng5
And White sacrifices his bishop on f7.
November 20th, 2020 at 11:43:49 AM
permalink
Fried Liver attack:
1. e4 e5
2. nf3 nc6
3. bc4 nf6
4. ng5 pd4
5. pxp nxp... then
6. nxf7.
How about the Reti chess puzzle from 1921. The most famous chess puzzle of all time.
1. e4 e5
2. nf3 nc6
3. bc4 nf6
4. ng5 pd4
5. pxp nxp... then
6. nxf7.
How about the Reti chess puzzle from 1921. The most famous chess puzzle of all time.
Last edited by: Greasyjohn on Nov 20, 2020
November 20th, 2020 at 12:07:42 PM
permalink
Would this show be interesting for someone like myself that doesn't know or play chess?
At my age, a "Life In Prison" sentence is not much of a deterrent.
November 20th, 2020 at 12:18:10 PM
permalink
My neighbor Lori said she binge-watched it the first day it premiered. She loved it... and she's never played a game of chess in her life. Someone else I talked to also doesn't play chess (let alone play in tournaments), and they enjoyed it very much too. So the answer is, yes, it's very possible you will enjoy it anyway.Quote: DRichWould this show be interesting for someone like myself that doesn't know or play chess?
November 20th, 2020 at 12:22:31 PM
permalink
Quote: DRichWould this show be interesting for someone like myself that doesn't know or play chess?
Yes. It’s a great show.
The race is not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong; but that is the way to bet.
November 20th, 2020 at 4:13:22 PM
permalink
Nearly all of it. The speed that the games were played in almost every scene where they showed moves was absurd. As a tournament player and expert, every move I made was carefully written down, double checked, and only after I was fully satisfied did I move the piece. Other players followed similar double checks. Those who blitzed were following an intimidation strategy that almost always got punished.Quote: WizardI agree 100%. Just outstanding. I loved every second of it.
Of course in time trouble, all hell would break loose. But this show makes it seem like top players blitzed out moves all the time. That never happens.
Oh, and they talk like 1800 is a good rating through multiple episodes. 1800 is class A, hardly grade school.
Other than that, fabulous. :)
But I have to add, I was in Athens Ohio in 1983 as a new young professor, and Athens was the home of the author of the book on which this show was based, Walter Tevis. I was an avid chess player back then and read the book in 1983 and loved it.
Just played in my first tournament in years last week ... finished 4th out of 13 in a field with masters and experts. My wife said I should get my game up to speed again. She has no idea what that takes. But still, I play games in my head in the middle of the night when I lay awake in bed. I've done that my whole life. Chess has been the one steady thing I have kept in my life, since age 5 when I first learned the rules.
Chess is an obsession, if you are not the kind of person who needs obsessions in their life, then don't bother.
Climate Casino: https://climatecasino.net/climate-casino/
November 20th, 2020 at 4:32:59 PM
permalink
Dylan Loeb McClain mentions this in his article I’m a Chess Expert. Here’s What ‘The Queen’s Gambit’ Gets RightQuote: teliot...But this show makes it seem like top players blitzed out moves all the time. That never happens.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/03/arts/television/chess-queens-gambit.html
Despite the efforts to make the chess scenes believable, there are still areas in which the series comes up short. The most apparent is in how fast the players move during the tournaments. As one tournament director tells Beth before a competition in Cincinnati, each player has two hours to make 40 moves, which was, and still is, a standard time control for such games. But in every match, Beth and her opponents make each of their moves after taking only a few seconds to think about them. At such a tempo, they would finish their games in minutes, not hours. The speed is understandable for filmmaking because watching players sit at a board for hours, barely moving, is not riveting. But it is also not accurate.
November 20th, 2020 at 4:34:43 PM
permalink
By the way, the November 2020 issue of Chess Life, with an article or two on the miniseries, is being made free to the public:
https://new.uschess.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/cl_2020.11_promo.pdf
https://new.uschess.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/cl_2020.11_promo.pdf
November 20th, 2020 at 5:14:01 PM
permalink
I should have become a life member in the early 1990's when it cost about $350. Thanks for the link.
Climate Casino: https://climatecasino.net/climate-casino/
November 20th, 2020 at 6:02:09 PM
permalink
Quote: GreasyjohnI thought I might have played Mike a while back. The handle was WizardsChess64. I ask if he was Mike but got no reply. Wizard was born in ‘65, but still, what a considence.
It wasn't me.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
November 21st, 2020 at 11:35:56 PM
permalink
Quote: teliotNearly all of it. The speed that the games were played in almost every scene where they showed moves was absurd.
Agreed, it was ridiculous. Pure Hwood
fantasy crap. I played in tournaments
in the late 60's and they would bore
the hell out of a non chess person.
I thought it was silly that they had
a 9 year old girl pull a Bobby Fischer
and play a dozen people at once and
then never mention it again. At 9
not even Bobby Fisher could do that.
Quote:Other than that, fabulous.
The production values are fabulous,
Nflix spent a lot of money reproducing
the 50's sets. I've only seen the first
3 ep's and so far the acting is flat,
the story is slow and tedious, and
the main character is as likeable as
a wet mop in the first 2 ep's and
gets a little better in the 3rd. I
suspect this is Nflix's answer
to Prime's wonderful 'The Marvelous
Mrs Maisel'. Set in the same period,
and the production values are both
excellent. The difference being Maisel
has a stellar cast and story, and Gambit
does not. I'll probably eventually see
the entire Maisel series 10 times and
Gambit only once.
Quote:Chess is an obsession, if you are not the kind of person who needs obsessions in their life, then don't bother.
Absolutely the reason I haven't played
a game since 1970. I was obsessed with
it. I was thinking about everyday life
in chess moves. Chess is dangerous,
you waste a lot of time doing nothing.
Chess doesn't make your life better,
it wastes your life. Better to turn the
obsession energy into something
useful. Just watching the chess scenes,
as silly as they are here, makes me yearn
to play. Ick... Chess is the older version
of today's video games, something else
I've stayed totally away from.
Last edited by: EvenBob on Nov 22, 2020
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
November 22nd, 2020 at 12:11:19 AM
permalink
Fischer might not have been able to. His skill really didn't take off until he was 11 or 12... but there have been lots of chess prodigies over the years that could. For example, Reshevsky was giving simuls at an even younger age.Quote: EvenBob...I thought it was silly that they had a 9 year old girl pull a Bobby Fischer and play a dozen people at once and then never mention it again. At 9 not even Bobby Fisher could do that.
Couldn't you say that about just about anything? Does poker make your life better? What about blackjack? What about baseball? What about watching movies or reading or playing golf or gardening?Quote: EvenBob...Chess is dangerous, you waste a lot of time doing nothing. Chess doesn't make your life better, it wastes your life. Better to turn the obsession energy into something useful.
Chess is a recreational pastime, enjoy by millions of people all over the world. It's been said chess develops perspective, improves memory, increases intelligence, deepens focus, elevates creativity, boosts planning skills, increases self-awareness, and even protects against dementia, among many other things.
November 22nd, 2020 at 12:37:57 AM
permalink
Quote: EdCollins
Chess is a recreational pastime, enjoy by millions of people all over the world. It's been said chess develops perspective, improves memory, increases intelligence, deepens focus, elevates creativity, boosts planning skills, increases self-awareness, and even protects against dementia, among many other things.
Sure it does. You forgot that it
also cures baldness and gives
you hours of wood when you
need it. And wastes a lot of time.
I'd rather read a non fiction book
where I actually learn something.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
November 22nd, 2020 at 6:53:05 AM
permalink
The mind is like a parachute. Nothing but dead weight if you choose not to open it.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
November 22nd, 2020 at 6:58:22 AM
permalink
I'll tell you the one that I keep thinking about: the Wizard has a story about playing a blind-folded kid in Australia and losing badly [I think I have those details right]Quote: EdCollinsFischer might not have been able to. His skill really didn't take off until he was 11 or 12... but there have been lots of chess prodigies over the years that could. For example, Reshevsky was giving simuls at an even younger age.
Naturally at first I was just thinking "wow that kid must have been awesome"
Since then I've wondered if it was a scam, since the Wiz was a tourist. That aspect keeps me wondering. Did a player have to pay to challenge the kid? I've concocted ways cheating could be done pretty easily.
Nonetheless googling it shows there are grandmasters who can do this, and I can hardly claim they are all cheats.
PS, he talks about blindfolded chess at 3:50
the next time Dame Fortune toys with your heart, your soul and your wallet, raise your glass and praise her thus: “Thanks for nothing, you cold-hearted, evil, damnable, nefarious, low-life, malicious monster from Hell!” She is, after all, stone deaf. ... Arnold Snyder
November 22nd, 2020 at 7:17:34 AM
permalink
In the mid-90s, I had a day bartender who started playing chess while behind the bar. Word got around and before we knew it, he would play six or seven games at the same time and business picked up as people came to see it. He said he never played in tournaments but he was one of the best players I ever saw. He had an uncanny ability to trap people into doing his bidding for him. The game would develop and he would seemingly make a mistake but what he was really doing was making his opponent react to him rather than have a strategy of his own. Even knowing this, he'd still suck people into his traps. It was actually fun to watch.
I enjoy playing chess but it's hard to find people who play at my level. I'm good enough to destroy most casual players but not talented enough to play anyone at the top levels, so I mostly play computers and it's just not the same as watching your opponent slowly realize he is outclassed and outgunned.
I enjoy playing chess but it's hard to find people who play at my level. I'm good enough to destroy most casual players but not talented enough to play anyone at the top levels, so I mostly play computers and it's just not the same as watching your opponent slowly realize he is outclassed and outgunned.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
November 22nd, 2020 at 8:03:23 AM
permalink
Lots of players, hundreds of thousands of players, can play blindfolded. Heck, I myself was able to play a single game blindfolded when I was younger. It's not hard at all. Even now, I could play a dozen moves or so, without sight of the board. However, after that, at my age, the picture in my head becomes "muddled" a bit... and is not clear anymore. I lose track of where some of the pieces are.Quote: odiousgambit...Nonetheless googling it shows there are grandmasters who can do this, and I can hardly claim they are all cheats.
However, I was never able to play many games blindfolded, at the same time, like many players can do.
But it's definitely not a "scam." George Koltanowski was popular for his ability to do it. He often took on 30 or more opponents, playing them simultaneously, blindfolded. (Before he passed away I was fortunate enough to watch one of his Blindfold Knight Tour demonstrations at a tournament in Vegas.)
Back when I lived in Arizona I played against a local master at a club, who took on me and two other club members, and played each of us simultaneously, blindfolded. (He won all three games.)
And yes Timur Gareyev is very, very good at it, as is Marc Lang. Of the modern day players, Vladimir Kramnik, Viswanathan Anand, Alexei Shirov and Alexander Morozevich have proven themselves to be particularly strong at blindfold chess.
Last edited by: EdCollins on Nov 22, 2020
November 22nd, 2020 at 8:06:27 AM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobChess is dangerous,
you waste a lot of time doing nothing.
Chess doesn't make your life better,
it wastes your life. Better to turn the
obsession energy into something
useful.
All things considered, I think chess is a wonderful game. However, like anything, people can overdo it. I have known people who I would say had an unhealthy addiction to chess, where they found it difficult to not play.
At times, I have gone through chess phases where I would play a chess computer much of my spare time. However, after a few months of this and seeing little improvement I quit cold turkey to turn my attention back to real life. It has been a while since my last chess phase and think another one may be coming on soon.
"For with much wisdom comes much sorrow." -- Ecclesiastes 1:18 (NIV)
November 22nd, 2020 at 8:08:22 AM
permalink
You could play online. No matter what your level is, there are an endless number of players who also play at your level. After a short number of games you'll be given a rating and then after that you can play against players with a similar rating.Quote: billryan...I enjoy playing chess but it's hard to find people who play at my level.
November 22nd, 2020 at 8:18:33 AM
permalink
My last tournament was the U.S. Open five full years ago, back when the city of Phoenix hosted it.Quote: WizardIt has been a while since my last chess phase and think another one may be coming on soon.
I used to LOVE playing in chess tournaments. I'd play in six or seven major tournaments each year. As soon as one tournament ended, I started planning for the next one, and couldn't wait for that next tourney to begin. As soon as one tourney ended, I couldn't wait to get home and analyze all of the games just played with an engine, to find out what I did right, what I did wrong, and what I could have done differently, throughout each game.
I loved seeing all of my chess buddies, and hanging out with them in between rounds. I loved the free lectures the major tournaments offered, and watching the grandmasters and their simuls. I loved studying each day and watching my rating slowly increase.
Alas, I took a break from all of it. Not sure why. Someday, probably in a few years when I retire, I hope to do all of this again. I've played in more than 70 tournaments in my life and loved every one of them. I hope to capture that fun and magic again.
November 22nd, 2020 at 8:24:28 AM
permalink
My collection of chess books.
November 22nd, 2020 at 9:07:00 AM
permalink
Quote: EdCollinsMy collection of chess books.
You illustrate perfectly what I avoided.
Addiction to a game. Just watching the
silly girl in the red wig makes me nervous,
chess is such a giant waste of time. Like
video games, or internet porn. Chess has
no point except as a useless exercise
to waste time because you can't find anything
better to do. I smoked opium once and
realized feeling this good could be addicting.
I never did it again.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
November 22nd, 2020 at 9:39:24 AM
permalink
Here's my collection:
USCF Official Rules of Chess, 2nd Edition (1987 - the current edition is 7th)
FIDE Official Laws of Chess (includes Regulations) (1985)
Batsford Chess Openings (first edition - never did get BCO2)
Batsford Chess Endings
My System (Nimzovich)
Karpov vs Korchnoi: The World Chess Championship 1978 (Larsen)
Maneuvers in Moscow: Karpov-Kasparov II (Keene & Goodman)
The Centenary Match: Karpov-Kasparov III (Keene & Goodman)
Showdown in Seville: Kasparov-Karpov IV (Keene, Goodman, Spanier)
Battle of the Titans: Kasparov-Karpov, New York/Lyons (Keene)
USCF Official Rules of Chess, 2nd Edition (1987 - the current edition is 7th)
FIDE Official Laws of Chess (includes Regulations) (1985)
Batsford Chess Openings (first edition - never did get BCO2)
Batsford Chess Endings
My System (Nimzovich)
Karpov vs Korchnoi: The World Chess Championship 1978 (Larsen)
Maneuvers in Moscow: Karpov-Kasparov II (Keene & Goodman)
The Centenary Match: Karpov-Kasparov III (Keene & Goodman)
Showdown in Seville: Kasparov-Karpov IV (Keene, Goodman, Spanier)
Battle of the Titans: Kasparov-Karpov, New York/Lyons (Keene)
November 22nd, 2020 at 9:42:38 AM
permalink
Quote: EdCollinsMy collection of chess books.
What should someone who only knows how the pieces move read first?
November 22nd, 2020 at 9:53:58 AM
permalink
From my collection I wouldn't have a whole lot of books to recommend, because most of mine would be above your level. However, I see a few I'd recommend immediately.Quote: gamerfreakWhat should someone who only knows how the pieces move read first?
Logical Chess Move By Move (Chernev)
Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess (Fischer)
The Complete Chess Course (Reinfeld)
The Complete Chessplayer (Reinfeld)
Chess The Easy Way (Fine)
Chess For Beginners (Horowitz)
How To Improve Your Chess (Horowitz / Reinfeld)
Basically, any basic beginners book that teaches general overall strategy would be fine for a start.
November 22nd, 2020 at 10:04:14 AM
permalink
Again, you can make a case for that about anything. If I had instead collected 600 books that were not chess related, I would have been better off and not have wasted my time?Quote: EvenBob...Chess has no point except as a useless exercise to waste time because you can't find anything better to do. I smoked opium once and realized feeling this good could be addicting. I never did it again.
Chess is no more or no less of a waste of time than any other pastime or hobby. Many "addictions" can be positive addictions. Positive addictions strengthen us and make our lives more satisfying. They also enable us to live with more confidence, more creativity, and more happiness, and usually in much better health. Positive addictions, unlike their negative cousins, enhance life.
November 22nd, 2020 at 10:33:35 AM
permalink
When I moved to Bisbee, people would play in the town park and I figured I'd join them on occasion. With the virus, they removed the tables with the built-in boards but hopefully they return. i'd like to play slightly better players on a regular basis. I think it's the best way to improve.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
November 22nd, 2020 at 12:19:58 PM
permalink
Quote: EdCollinsYou could play online. No matter what your level is, there are an endless number of players who also play at your level. After a short number of games you'll be given a rating and then after that you can play against players with a similar rating.
I tried, but it's not the same thing. I can play chess in person for hours on end, but after one or two games online, I'm done.
In NY, I had a friend that would play online, while using a computer program to dictate what moves to make.
The difference between fiction and reality is that fiction is supposed to make sense.
November 22nd, 2020 at 12:25:39 PM
permalink
Because of Star Trek I played 3-D chess
in the late 60's. It was made of plastic
and a neighbor and I had ongoing
games. Until one day as we were
playing the cat jumped on the
table and swept the whole thing
onto the floor breaking it into
pieces. So ended 3-D chess for me.
in the late 60's. It was made of plastic
and a neighbor and I had ongoing
games. Until one day as we were
playing the cat jumped on the
table and swept the whole thing
onto the floor breaking it into
pieces. So ended 3-D chess for me.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
November 22nd, 2020 at 2:52:49 PM
permalink
Quote: teliotI should have become a life member in the early 1990's when it cost about $350. Thanks for the link.
Gosh, I think the life member cost was higher. Back in early Bobby Fischer days, the US Chess Federation had an option in the early 1970's to become a Life member by making 10 annual installment payments. That's what I did. IIRC, regular adult annual membership at the time was $10/yr or $1,000 one-time payment for Life membership. I made 10 payments of $100 each. By the time I finished the 10th year, I think the adult membership cost $50/year.
I played tournaments until I realized that chess was not a static target, but instead was forever morphing as different variations were discovered. My rating had me almost exactly on the 50th percentile. I enjoyed playing, but caught flack from my GF after one tournament. I would put my elbows on the table and use my hands like the brim of a hat. I came home with raw, bloody elbows, plus I chipped a tooth grinding my jaw in tough positions. She said that for future tournaments I might have to wear elbow pads and a sports tooth protector.
I liked Aron Nimzovich's books and games. Also those of Pal Benko. They each took an out-of-the-box perspective on chess.
Question: Frank Marshall sacrificed his queen to win a game later called the "Shower of Gold" chess game. Observers were so surprised by the unexpected queen sacrifice, they reportedly started tossing (then standard?) gold coins onto the floor in his direction. The game was real. But, I think I've seen stories both ways as to whether or not the "shower of gold" was real. Does anyone know? I don't think I've ever seen a definitive source.
November 22nd, 2020 at 6:44:50 PM
permalink
Reinfeld is an instructor par excellence. I first encountered his gentle style as a newbie youngster 50 years ago. Within a year I was able to upset a few opponents in a city tournament.
"I suppose I was mad. Every great genius is mad upon the subject in which he is greatest. The unsuccessful madman is disgraced and called a lunatic." Fitz-James O'Brien, The Diamond Lens (1858)
November 22nd, 2020 at 7:33:09 PM
permalink
I remember reading that the players tossed gold coins on the floor... because they lost a bet!Quote: LuckyPhowQuestion: Frank Marshall sacrificed his queen to win a game later called the "Shower of Gold" chess game. Observers were so surprised by the unexpected queen sacrifice, they reportedly started tossing (then standard?) gold coins onto the floor in his direction. The game was real. But, I think I've seen stories both ways as to whether or not the "shower of gold" was real. Does anyone know? I don't think I've ever seen a definitive source.
However, I've also read the following:
According to legend, the magnificence of Marshall’s move inspired spectators to shower the board with gold pieces, thus giving this match the name of the “gold coins game.” In his book My Fifty Years of Chess published in 1942, Marshall wrote this comment about his game against Levitsky:
Perhaps you have heard about this game, which so excited the spectators that they “showered me with gold pieces!” I have often been asked whether this really happened. The answer is – yes, that is what happened, literally!
And no, I've never seen a definitive source. I do remember enjoying that move when I was first saw it as a 12-year-old.
More on that game here:
https://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/marshall1.html
November 22nd, 2020 at 7:58:12 PM
permalink
Here's an article at Slate where Garry Karparov discusses his role as technical advisor for The Queen's Gambit including how some of the games were selected. Obviously he specialized in the Russian parts of the story such as: Is it possible that an American in 1960's Moscow could take a phone call from New York without the KGB writing down everything that's said?
He also mentions other chess films he likes.
Slate Kasparov Interview
He also mentions other chess films he likes.
Slate Kasparov Interview
Have you tried 22 tonight? I said 22.
November 22nd, 2020 at 9:28:05 PM
permalink
IIRC it takes about 15 Captains for you beat me. (-:Quote: billryanIn the mid-90s, I had a day bartender who started playing chess while behind the bar. Word got around and before we knew it, he would play six or seven games at the same time and business picked up as people came to see it. He said he never played in tournaments but he was one of the best players I ever saw. He had an uncanny ability to trap people into doing his bidding for him. The game would develop and he would seemingly make a mistake but what he was really doing was making his opponent react to him rather than have a strategy of his own. Even knowing this, he'd still suck people into his traps. It was actually fun to watch.
I enjoy playing chess but it's hard to find people who play at my level. I'm good enough to destroy most casual players but not talented enough to play anyone at the top levels, so I mostly play computers and it's just not the same as watching your opponent slowly realize he is outclassed and outgunned.
♪♪Now you swear and kick and beg us That you're not a gamblin' man Then you find you're back in Vegas With a handle in your hand♪♪ Your black cards can make you money So you hide them when you're able In the land of casinos and money You must put them on the table♪♪ You go back Jack do it again roulette wheels turinin' 'round and 'round♪♪ You go back Jack do it again♪♪
November 22nd, 2020 at 10:34:00 PM
permalink
The first time I ever saw a woman play
chess was in the Thomas Crown Affair.
I'd never seen a woman play, it was
very sexy. We had no girl players
in the tournaments I was in, I don't
even know if it was allowed. To be
beaten by a girl in pre feminist days
would have been the ultimate
humiliation. That the guys in the
mid 60's in the movie took it so well is very
unrealistic. We were all nerds and
if a girl as beautiful as Beth was playing
us, no way could we have concentrated
on the game.
chess was in the Thomas Crown Affair.
I'd never seen a woman play, it was
very sexy. We had no girl players
in the tournaments I was in, I don't
even know if it was allowed. To be
beaten by a girl in pre feminist days
would have been the ultimate
humiliation. That the guys in the
mid 60's in the movie took it so well is very
unrealistic. We were all nerds and
if a girl as beautiful as Beth was playing
us, no way could we have concentrated
on the game.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
