A draw - but one which you will never complain about!
"If we consider the two parties at the onset of a game, we see an exact balance of power, position, territory, and liberty of action. The first player usually threatens a destruction of this balance, while the second constantly seeks to maintain it, neither party gaining an advantage as long as it is conserved. Thus we recognise the 'Law of Equality, or of drawn game. All legitimate play, how long a game may be extended, or however varied, must end in a draw." - William Cluley
Came across this quote and his book recently.....
William Cluley lived in 1800's and wrote the book "The Philosophy of Chess" in 1857....the year when the rebellion began against the rule of British East India Company....
The contention here is about the ever increasing striving for finiteness in chess by the 21st Century masters....who as it is apparent....wants to equip them till 1/2 - 1/2 - assuming both sides use the same engine and powerful machine and the ability to remember every crap that it churns out....and/or 1 - 0 or 0 - 1 if the 'other' cannot remember a certain move in a certain line tucked deep in the database.....'file-reference'.
One may think this assertion as exaggerated....but one only needs to look at the games played....listless even in its apparent spectacular facade as the one Anish Giri and Nakamura enacted a couple of days back...
Yes, it cannot be denied that there are genuine fights and creations amongst these same players at other times....and it is precisely because of this, chess still retains the status of great intellectual pursuit - and not a mere game to entertain! ....but this umbilical cord is being rendered weak....progressively
Perfection and finiteness can never be sought....and never be attained - both in Chess and in Life....
.....and it should never be strived for....striving for perfection can at best remain at the back....just as a catalyst...but 'finiteness' should be abhorred....it will only drive humanity wild and mad....
Cluley wrote, "In the study of Mathematics, there is always an inevitable result, to be reached by a train of fixed and consecutive reasoning which admits no deviation. In Chess, on the other hand, although the result, i.e, the winning or the drawing of the game, in inevitable, yet, the modes of accomplishing it are almost infinite, and the reasoning (save in the openings, and many of the endings, which can be acquired mechanically) consists of a perpetual 'sifting and balancing of probabilities'. It is true, as we have already noticed, that Chess in its nature admits of the same determinate certainty as mathematics, but as it is also true that absolute perfection of play is possible only by the exercise of a degree of prescience, and a depth of combinative and calculative skill, of which the best organised brain must ever fall immeasurably short, this perfection, as far as we are concerned, cannot be said to have an existence.
To say that Chess in its nature admits of the same determinate certainty as Mathematics is one thing - that absolute perfection in play in unattainable quite another, and besides the question. Relative finite perfection is all that we have to do with....and is not play in such sense susceptible of a higher degree of improvement than it has yet attained?"
Nobody is bored or abhor draws....it is part of this great game...
.....but how it is attained is the contention!
Have a look at the following game....both the great masters were well past their youth, when this was played!
Mikhail Tal - Tigran Petrosian, USSR Ch, Erevan - 1975
A not so common position from the Ruy Lopez has been reached. Tigran played...
14.....Bc8; 15.g4!?
The center is closed. The general plan is to attack the center using the Bishop pawns, so as to open lines for the long range pieces; or indulge in a direct flank attack as the opponent has not the option of counter attacking the center so as to distract you from your flank offensive.
15.....h5!?
Petrosian is ready for a direct combat! What makes these players great....transcending time, is their willingness to take extreme risk and indulge in great experiments. To understand this, one needs to study those players complete game collection, quite deeply and not just be satisfied with a cursory look at their acclaimed games.
16.gh5!? Bh3; 17.N3h2 g6!?
Petrosian takes the bull by its horns!
18.Ng3 Kg7; 19.Kh1!
Tal gives, 19.Qf3 Rh8; 20.Nf5 Bf5; 21.h6 Kh7; 22.ef5 g5!
19.....Rh8; 20.Rg1 Kf8?!
The move gets a '?!' because it leaves the option of....
21.a4!
.....open! That Rook on a5 could have also joined his counterpart on the Kingside, but for this.....and White would not have had the option of what he did on his 24th move. And, of course....that Knight could have....(on hindsight)!
21.....Nb6; 22.ab5 ab5; 23.Ra8 Na8; 24.hg6 fg6; 25.Ngf1 Kf7; 26.Qf3 Qc8!
White's position looks vulnerable....he is saved on two counts: Black, by his choice on 21st move, rendered injustice to one of his Knights, which could have proved a nemesis to White and Black's Queen could not enter the fight without avoiding the option of White exchanging it.....voluntarily or involuntarily.
27.Bg5!
A fine option which removes one of Black's dangerous Knight, and the other one has gone on a Mars expedition!
27.....Bf1!
As Tal gave, White has the square g2 available for his Queen and his piece around the King are sufficiently well placed to prevent Black from intensifying his attack...as overtures like 27.....Bg4; 28.Qg2 Rh3; 29.Nd2 Qh8; 30.Ra1! (Tal) would be only rebound.
28.Rf1 Qg4; 29.Qg2 Nb6; 30.Bf6 Qg2; 31.Kg2 Bf6; 32.Ra1 Ra8; 33.Ra8 Na8
Probably, this Knight was destined only to remain or reach this square....in this game!
34.Nf3 Nb6; 35.Kf1
And both players decided that since the excitement is over and nothing tangible emerged....and if has to be this way, despite......so be it!
1/2 - 1/2
And who would complain this result...if such was the fight!
This draw was certainly not an enactment of what was rehearsed in front of computer monitors...... They were real battle on the field and both the players armed only with their guts.......there were enough pitfalls in the course, which the reader may try and explore for himself!
Came across this quote and his book recently.....
William Cluley lived in 1800's and wrote the book "The Philosophy of Chess" in 1857....the year when the rebellion began against the rule of British East India Company....
The contention here is about the ever increasing striving for finiteness in chess by the 21st Century masters....who as it is apparent....wants to equip them till 1/2 - 1/2 - assuming both sides use the same engine and powerful machine and the ability to remember every crap that it churns out....and/or 1 - 0 or 0 - 1 if the 'other' cannot remember a certain move in a certain line tucked deep in the database.....'file-reference'.
One may think this assertion as exaggerated....but one only needs to look at the games played....listless even in its apparent spectacular facade as the one Anish Giri and Nakamura enacted a couple of days back...
Yes, it cannot be denied that there are genuine fights and creations amongst these same players at other times....and it is precisely because of this, chess still retains the status of great intellectual pursuit - and not a mere game to entertain! ....but this umbilical cord is being rendered weak....progressively
Perfection and finiteness can never be sought....and never be attained - both in Chess and in Life....
.....and it should never be strived for....striving for perfection can at best remain at the back....just as a catalyst...but 'finiteness' should be abhorred....it will only drive humanity wild and mad....
Cluley wrote, "In the study of Mathematics, there is always an inevitable result, to be reached by a train of fixed and consecutive reasoning which admits no deviation. In Chess, on the other hand, although the result, i.e, the winning or the drawing of the game, in inevitable, yet, the modes of accomplishing it are almost infinite, and the reasoning (save in the openings, and many of the endings, which can be acquired mechanically) consists of a perpetual 'sifting and balancing of probabilities'. It is true, as we have already noticed, that Chess in its nature admits of the same determinate certainty as mathematics, but as it is also true that absolute perfection of play is possible only by the exercise of a degree of prescience, and a depth of combinative and calculative skill, of which the best organised brain must ever fall immeasurably short, this perfection, as far as we are concerned, cannot be said to have an existence.
To say that Chess in its nature admits of the same determinate certainty as Mathematics is one thing - that absolute perfection in play in unattainable quite another, and besides the question. Relative finite perfection is all that we have to do with....and is not play in such sense susceptible of a higher degree of improvement than it has yet attained?"
Nobody is bored or abhor draws....it is part of this great game...
.....but how it is attained is the contention!
Have a look at the following game....both the great masters were well past their youth, when this was played!
Mikhail Tal - Tigran Petrosian, USSR Ch, Erevan - 1975
A not so common position from the Ruy Lopez has been reached. Tigran played...
14.....Bc8; 15.g4!?
The center is closed. The general plan is to attack the center using the Bishop pawns, so as to open lines for the long range pieces; or indulge in a direct flank attack as the opponent has not the option of counter attacking the center so as to distract you from your flank offensive.
15.....h5!?
Petrosian is ready for a direct combat! What makes these players great....transcending time, is their willingness to take extreme risk and indulge in great experiments. To understand this, one needs to study those players complete game collection, quite deeply and not just be satisfied with a cursory look at their acclaimed games.
16.gh5!? Bh3; 17.N3h2 g6!?
Petrosian takes the bull by its horns!
18.Ng3 Kg7; 19.Kh1!
Tal gives, 19.Qf3 Rh8; 20.Nf5 Bf5; 21.h6 Kh7; 22.ef5 g5!
19.....Rh8; 20.Rg1 Kf8?!
The move gets a '?!' because it leaves the option of....
21.a4!
.....open! That Rook on a5 could have also joined his counterpart on the Kingside, but for this.....and White would not have had the option of what he did on his 24th move. And, of course....that Knight could have....(on hindsight)!
21.....Nb6; 22.ab5 ab5; 23.Ra8 Na8; 24.hg6 fg6; 25.Ngf1 Kf7; 26.Qf3 Qc8!
White's position looks vulnerable....he is saved on two counts: Black, by his choice on 21st move, rendered injustice to one of his Knights, which could have proved a nemesis to White and Black's Queen could not enter the fight without avoiding the option of White exchanging it.....voluntarily or involuntarily.
27.Bg5!
A fine option which removes one of Black's dangerous Knight, and the other one has gone on a Mars expedition!
27.....Bf1!
As Tal gave, White has the square g2 available for his Queen and his piece around the King are sufficiently well placed to prevent Black from intensifying his attack...as overtures like 27.....Bg4; 28.Qg2 Rh3; 29.Nd2 Qh8; 30.Ra1! (Tal) would be only rebound.
28.Rf1 Qg4; 29.Qg2 Nb6; 30.Bf6 Qg2; 31.Kg2 Bf6; 32.Ra1 Ra8; 33.Ra8 Na8
Probably, this Knight was destined only to remain or reach this square....in this game!
34.Nf3 Nb6; 35.Kf1
And both players decided that since the excitement is over and nothing tangible emerged....and if has to be this way, despite......so be it!
1/2 - 1/2
And who would complain this result...if such was the fight!
This draw was certainly not an enactment of what was rehearsed in front of computer monitors...... They were real battle on the field and both the players armed only with their guts.......there were enough pitfalls in the course, which the reader may try and explore for himself!
.jpg)
.jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment