User Tag List

First 123 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 30

Thread: Chess

  1. #11

    Default

    As black, I play 1...c6, 2...d5 for almost everything (for 1.d4, I play 1...d5, 2...c6).

    This almost always transposes into a Caro-Kann or a Slav.

    1) I generally aim to lock up the center till I finish development. There are some notable exceptions, where I can actually take initiative or have to fend off rather nasty attacks on my king. One variation leads to an exchange of Queens very early in the game, where I end up loosing castling but have a more central king in a near end-game situation.

    2a) Once developed (castled king side), start a minority attack on the queen-side, while trading down pieces and creating pawn weaknesses.

    2b) Once developed (castled king side or queen side), launch an attack to win decisive material or a mate on the king side. Usually requires white to play passively, launch a premature attack, or just make a tactical blunder.

    As white, unless black gives me the ideal center (which your opening would), I play 1. d6 2. c6. If I have the opportunity, I will play 1.d6 2.e6 instead.

    After 1...d5, this is the Queen's Gambit. Most other black responses I've seen transposes later on the a version of Queen's Gambit declined (slav or semi-slav usually).

    I had stock responses for annoyances like the Benko Gambit, and Albin Counter-Gambit also (though I face them so little, I have forgotten them).

    1) The main plan is to control the center, take-up space and limit black's options, till (s)he is forced to make a blunder, or (s)he gives me enough tempo to either get a second queen or catch the king in a vice grip.

    2) If black manges to destroy my center (which right now seems much easier than I would have anticipated) I have a Q-B-B-N-N combo. in store to try to mate the king. As the saying goes "wang the h-pawn, trade off the bishop, and mate the sucker"

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  2. #12
    Wannabe genius Splittet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    632

    Default

    That's some rather clearly formulated plans, and it sounds like you would beat the hell out of me. It's interesting how your play is rather positional. I find the positional part of the game to be very Ti in nature, it's about applying principles. I think that's something INTPs would excel at, while I guess you use your Ne to explore tactical possibilities. In comparison, how does it work for INTJs? I guess I haven't fully figured out the tactical bit. :P I just look at the board for ideas, and I suck to such a degree, I don't get one at all as often as I like. As I get better at this, I imagine playing will get more and more enjoyable. I am very much into playing moves that look natural. If I don't see any concrete tactical dangers or possibilities, I will just play a developing move that feels good. Maybe that is my intuition at play. It helps having watched a lot of grandmaster games live, mostly those of Carlsen. I do apply principles, but in an unstructured way. I prefer to feel them, rather than to think them cold hard, which I guess is the Ti way. But that's kind of my way, thinking minimal in terms of words. Due to Te, my guess is INTJs would play more pragmatic than Ti players. I think the currant world champion, Anand, must have the Ni+Te combo, I don't know if he is I or E though. I actually heard him say he is an intuitive player, and he is also known as a pragmatic player. It's funny how he always begins his answers with "well". :P

  3. #13

    Default

    My main game plan is positional, and I advance to it slowly. However, I am cautious not to miss tactical opportunities for either side.

    I look for "markers" for tactical opportunities. An unprotected king, a hanging piece, two pieces on a "circle" the radius of a knight's reach, two pieces on a diagonal, a rank, or a file. Pins, and "cramped" pieces are more complex markers. I build up more complex markers for seeing deeper combinations (smothered mate, for example).

    One of my INTJ friends (who beats me more often than not) does very little of this. But he calculates incredibly accurately (still, he is human and makes mistakes). Usually, I have to think deeper than him to win (based on having a store of more complex patterns). Since he always carefully examines every option at each tactical position (he calculates wide, which is better than calculating deep), it is rare to exploit a blunder of his when we are both aware that we are in a sharp, tactical position. I have to start my combination before he is aware that it's time to calculate, or he will avoid the situation, or bring in reinforcements. If I try to simply out-calculate him, I get myself in trouble.

    I think xNTJ do have a more purely visual and less of a "modeled"/verbal component to their thinking than xNTPs do. So there are fewer transitions between the Verbal and Visual modes (leading to fewer mistakes, w/o the aid of "checksums").

    My direct calculation skills are rather week. I have a tendency to want to think too many moves ahead, and/or think it is only necessary to calculate when in forcing situations. I have to rely on "proven pattern" recognition to accomplish my tactical objectives.

    When my Ne is weak, I get demolished. When it is strong I beat (and get a lot of praise) from much stronger and more experience players.

    The way to beat me, is to get me into unfamiliar positions, where following the usual rules of thumb in chess would be ill-advised. Here I am forced to calculate directly.

    Even here, I may be able to do well, if it is a highly "constrained" situation. IOW, in some situations that are very sharp, there are certain things I need to make sure happen/don't happen, and I look for a move that makes only the desired things happen.

    This confuses people, in that, in these situations, I've been told I play like a Master. But then in less constrained, but still very sharp situations, I make very stupid mistakes.

    In tactical situations, my thought process is as follows.

    1) Scan for threats and opportunities (based on my pattern store).
    2) Model/prioritize tactical objectives based on threats and opportunities (keeping in mind the overall game plan)
    3) Think of ideas based on modeled tactical objectives
    4) Evaluate based on expected results of exploiting opportunities, providing prophylaxis for threats, etc.
    5) Repeat 3/4 till satisfied.
    6) If more complex calculation is needed, calculate outcome.
    7) Re-evaluate outcome. Repeat 4-6 till satisfied.
    8) Make move.

    Under time constraints, or out of habit, I often skip 6-7. For me, 1 and 2 are still weak, but with more experience, it should make 6-7 less necessary.

    For xNTJs I recommend, Imagination in Chess. It seems like it would be useful for Ni-Te style players earlier than for Ti-Ne style players. It is till well above my head. I don't have an USCF rating, but based on who I can regularly beat at the club, I think I am in the 1300-1400 range. I think this book would become useful for me when I get to the 1500-1600 range. But for INTJs, it may be good even for beginners.

    Experienced ENTPs usually beat me, because they seem to use the pattern recognition style also, but are faster at it. However, I seem to be able to model/prioritize objectives better, so I often have a pawn that can promote if I survive a middle game and tactical parts of the end games against ENTPs.

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  4. #14
    Member Hypomanic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    89

    Default

    My ENTJ mom and I played last night. I recieved a chess set for my birthday gift and I love it! I'm going to play often.. as a family tradition. Of course, my mom won me on my first game though. I think ENTJ's and INTJ's are more naturally inclinced to join chess club.. my mom was on chess club during college anyway. I think chess is appealing to iNtuitive Thinkers.

  5. #15
    Senior Member sriv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    JIxT
    Posts
    418

    Default

    I am not very great at chess because I do not have experience, but here is my style anyway.

    I usually follow conventional opening e4 when white.
    As black, I use conventional counter d5 for pawn movements. I develop my knights very early game, but I am not very good at using them. My openings often suck, because everything is too cluttered. In my midgame, my pawn structures are weak, but my bishops are good. In endgame, I shine. The overall strategy is aggressive. I often get trade knights and pawns when favorable.

  6. #16
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    I don't move anything except my knights. Ever. It's unnerving to my opponent.

    That's actually my style for a great number of games. I play in a highly unusual way. The opposition is confused, or spends too much time trying to figure out what the hell I'm setting up for (usually nothing... I just take advantage of whatever opportunities I'm given) and lose track of the rest of the game.

    I more play my enemy than the game. Psychological sparring.
    we fukin won boys

  7. #17
    Senior Member sriv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    JIxT
    Posts
    418

    Default

    The wise opponent never underestimates his opponent. You will lose to anyone who actually knows what they are doing simply by losing tempo.

  8. #18
    you are right mippus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    Intp
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    906

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Splittet View Post

    Anyhow, does anyone here play or watch chess? Are you any good? How would you characterize your style? Does it fit with your type? What types do you think would be best suited for chess? What do you think about the personality type of some of the leading chess players in the world?
    Be careful, chess, like bridge, can turn into a lifelong addiction (but your family history may already have told you that). But with in inspirator like Carlsen, it must be very hard to resist.
    I am not that strong myself, rated around 1850. Highly positional, as a result of some fairly dogmatic thinking. I play a lot of profilax doing what I can to control the position and reduce the possibility of tactical jokes. I actually have no idea wether that fits my INTP profile, I'd say it is more of an INTJ-style. As to typical types: I'd say INT, but I have met some masterclass ISTJ's as well...
    My best advice on improvement: play as much as you can with players rated 100-150 above you and take time to analyse the game together. The importance of books is highly overrated for minus 2200 players, I think. Have some basic knowledge of opening, tactics and endgames and start playing, you'll learn the rest quickly over the board.
    Good luck and enjoy!
    Vanitas vanitatum omnia vanitas

  9. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    98

    Default

    Chess is definitely an NT game; nearly all the champions I bet are Rationals of some sort. While I could easily conquer my INFJ sister, let alone my ENFJ mother, I've only beat my INTP dad a couple of times. I think the main difference between NTJs and NTPs is that NTJs tend to have a definite plan for how they're going to move in, NTPs construct "piece systems" that keep an eye out for eachother. In general, this means NTJs can more easily be defeated by unorthodox playing methods that they don't expect, while NTPs often suffer from a lack of a tentative goal when it comes to offense and can end up not taking some valuable opportunities.

  10. #20
    you are right mippus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    Intp
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Socionics
    ILI
    Posts
    906

    Default

    The "piece system" explanation is new to me, but it describes quite well what I do. Thanks Badlands...
    Vanitas vanitatum omnia vanitas

Similar Threads

  1. Which Chess Figure Are You? (Chess Mess Test)
    By Virtual ghost in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 262
    Last Post: 01-02-2015, 08:07 PM
  2. Here's To Chess
    By Brendan in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 05-17-2014, 07:41 PM
  3. forum chess game
    By mippus in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: 05-17-2014, 06:23 PM
  4. [NT] The Ultimate Chess Thread
    By Provoker in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 11-12-2009, 05:58 AM
  5. Open Source iPhone chess app... written by my friend!
    By file cabinet in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-04-2008, 01:14 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO