Which is the best chess playing style in your opinion? Please note that this is a non-scientific question 🙂
– Positional (Smyslov, Petrosian, Karpov, Kramnik, etc.)
– Attacking (Tal, Shirov, Topalov, J. Polgar, etc.)
– All around (Spassky, Botvinnik, Fischer, S. Polgar, etc.)
Chess Daily News from Susan Polgar
all round
All around!!
Fredrik from Sweden 🙂
attack!
I guess Anand and Kasparov will also come under all round.
I’m thinking that the answer to this question very much depends on the context and the level of play: most beginners favor attack because it is the most exciting and doesn’t, at that level, require great understanding of positional aspects of the game. Positional play underscores the depth of chess and demonstrates a player’s profound understanding of the game. I would think that in terms of practical results in competition, an all around style would reduce the number of discernable weaknesses in a player’s game and would be most difficult for opponents to prepare for. So rich is chess as a game that such a variety of replies is possible!
I’ll say defense.. just cuz someone has to!
I think “all around” players are the best…Kasparov, Fischer, Capablanca!
I’m a huge Tigran Petrosian fan, so I’ll have to go with positional.
to me, the most exciting style is the “attacking one” – remember Adolph Anderson, Michail Tchigorin, Paul Murphy, Frank Marshall, Rudolf Spielmann, Mikhail Tal (to me, the most exciting chess player of all times, next to Aljekhine – maybe the first “universal style” player) – the masterpieces of Alexeij Shirov, Judit Polgar or even Veselin Topalow (whom i would not put in a line with Tal, Shirov or J.Polgar!)suffer from fritz & co., as the masterpieces of their great predecessors do …
top level chess 2006 is – with all respect – “computer software” driven (even on top level chess!) – and even a “patzer” as me, weaponed with a deep fritz running on a P4 dual core – digging for the truth – may find it, more over – the “patzer” may disenchant intuitive sacrifices as blunders.
thus, the all round style may exhibit more success – but what is success in a real life match human vs. human?
i whished Tal would come back to wipe out those computer lines …
sincerly, Vohaul
My favorite players are
Fischer
Morphy
Tal
I like fischer the best
Morphy I like for his simple killer games.
Tal gets too complex for me to understand. even when I am reading the explanation of the moves. but he does have some great games.
but there are many present players that I really enjoy watching their games on the internet live. Nakamura, Kamsky, Magnus come to mind.
Best Style: one that wins!
ALL AROUND and to me these players come to mind: Fischer, Kasparov, Botvinnik, Alekhine, Capablanca, Lasker, Keres, Rubenstein, Anand, Karpov, Kramnik, Kamsky, Pillsbury, Morphy.
Anything from Mikhail Tal!
There should be a law that says if you give those choices and don’t list Karpov that you lose a norm or something.
well I lose a norm. I did not mention Karpov as one of my favorites.
What a lovely question!
1) Positional! Strangle your opponent to death.
2) Attack! Do unto others before they can do unto you.
3) All around! I feel it in my fingers, I feel it in my toes. Love is all around me and so the feeling grows
Peter, have you taken your medication today?
Love,
Mary
What an interesting question Susan! In my humble opinion, I think all three chessic styles are acceptible to use depending on the weaknesses and strengths of the player. Maybe all three styles could be implemented in a teaching program. I think learning attack first would teach a new player the basic concepts of chess, even leading to defense indirectly. A good example of the art of attack and lack of defense could be Paul Morphy. All around chess I think is best but would span much knowledge. Bobby Fischer and Kasparov would be good examples here. Positional would to me probably be the hardest to learn ie The French defense or The Reti. I think the best examples of this would be Petrosian and Ulf Anderson maybe.
Thanks for the format,
TFK
cool art!!!
A positional player seeks closed positions. A tactical player seeks open positions. I think the advantage goes to positional players as you can avoid open positions by not advancing your pawns too far. I think tactical players must develop some positional skills to force positional players to open up the position or accept inferior positions.
Susan, you ommitted Kasparov and Anand all together !
Actually, I purposely left some names out. That is for the next blog. What category would you put them and some others in? 🙂
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
http://www.PolgarChess.com
http://www.SusanPolgar.com
Interesting. the big names that you left out were Alekhine, Capablanca, Kasparov, Anand. I am interested to see the next blog.