Author: martin fierz
Date: 13:47:42 10/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 11, 2002 at 16:30:33, Daniel Clausen wrote: >On October 11, 2002 at 16:15:21, Otello Gnaramori wrote: > >[snip] > >>That is exactly what is missing in those games just seen in the match >>Kramnik-DF... "the chess beauty" ! > >Game #2 was a fantastic game in my opinion. You seem to apply that "chess >beauty" is equal to incredible queen sacs and whatnot. > >Sargon i have often noticed that what people find beautiful in chess depends on their understanding of chess. to somebody who plays no chess at all, nothing is beautiful. to weak players, a queen sac forcing a mate in 2 is beautiful. to average players, a classic like Bxh7+ Kxh7 Qh5+ Kg8 Ng5 and mate in all forms is beautiful. for strong players, there is no beauty there - it's just routine. i have noticed that the stronger i got at chess, the more i could appreciate other forms of chess beauty. most of the 1600 hacks who post here can't enjoy those DF-kramnik games as much as i do. hmm, instead of complaining they should work on their chess :-) there's a nice anecdote on this thing: kasparov was once on german TV and they asked him about such a Bxh7 position - i'm not sure if he could see the board or not, i think not. it was a forced mate in 8. they wanted to show the viewers who knew nothing about chess that kasparov would see a mate in 8 in a split second, blindfolded. but he didnt! he was confused, and didnt give the solution in a second like anticipated. what happened? he thought: it was an obvious mate in 8 - how could they ask him to solve something as trivial as that? so he just refused to answer IIRC. 99 of 100 chess players would be glad to find a beautiful combination, but kasparov was insulted by it :-) aloha martin
This page took 0.01 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.