Author: Otello Gnaramori
Date: 10:42:54 07/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 2001 at 13:38:24, Mark Young wrote: >On July 23, 2001 at 13:13:04, Kevin Stafford wrote: > >>>>Kramnik is a positionally player >>> >>>That doesn't mean nothing. >>>Chess is 99% tactics , you can be a very strong positional player but you will >>>fail miserably against a strong tactician. >>> >> >>Well, Kasparov is by all means a strong tactician, and Kramnik faired pretty >>well against him, so your point doesn't really mean much in this context. >> >>-Kevin > >This is a silly argument, "strong tactician" and a "positional player" is more a >matter of style. To say GM Kramnik is not a strong tactician is just inaccurate. >All the best positional player in chess history were also great tacticians. To >be a great positional player you must be a strong tactician. Thanks, Mark. Infact I have not said that Kramnik is not a strong tactician ! I was just replying that to be a great positional player without tactics ability is worthless. Regards.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.