lendav_rott
- 232
- 10
Lots of discussions about whether chess is a science or an art. One of the best attacking players, Mihhail Tal, said that chess is an art. To him it really was, since he played with his opponents' heads, not caring whether his combinations were 100% foolproof, what he wanted was chaos. Then a player like Fischer, who played extremely positionally while showing off some great tactical skills, his play was very often very sound - there are some moves even the current engines couldn't understand. Nowadays, though, you can't really pinpoint that "something" about a player - sure they are all very talented, have extremely accute memories, but something is missing.
I always considered chess as an art, though, I like to play chess myself and while I do use engines, I mostly analyse games without them and try to understand moves from the human perspective - not to say I don't appreciate soundness in a position, but engine chess is not chess, sorry :(
I always considered chess as an art, though, I like to play chess myself and while I do use engines, I mostly analyse games without them and try to understand moves from the human perspective - not to say I don't appreciate soundness in a position, but engine chess is not chess, sorry :(