I dare to suggest that the desire to punish the opponent for White's 6th move (game1) helped Steinitz create a strategic masterpiece.
@Triangel Thanks for the game! It shows the importance of classical games. b4, cxd3, control of d4 ideas simply amazing. What even more amazing is that these ideas are still relevant in our time.
Do you guys enjoy the study about Steinitz? I ll try to add and analyse more games of Steinitz later on.
Do you guys enjoy the study about Steinitz? I ll try to add and analyse more games of Steinitz later on.
<Comment deleted by user>
@Triangel
Yes, i hear strong GMs talking about the importance of Classics all the time. I kinda regret having not studied them when i was young and active chess player. Thats why i got interested in chess culture and classics recently.
Defence etc. was weaker in the old times, so when players like Alekhine had a clear plan, they could execute it perfectly, which makes up a great demonstrative material for an example. Therefore you can see those ideas being realised perfectly in classical games and that makes them so valuable. In our modern computer era, defence and resources are so advanced that top players often sense possible dangers and prevent them before they even appear on the board. Therefore when you study todays game, lot of ideas stay unnoticed by the spectators.
Carlsen has an exceptional memory, just like many top players. But i think there are also some factors that help them remember stuff easily. Firstly, most of them study in teams and analyse, so it becomes are thing for not only photographic memory but an episodic memory. They are professionals and chess is their life, they spend much more time on positions and discuss them.
For me it has always been hard to remember games etc. Nowadays i read chess books without a board, simply laying on a couch and read like a novel. I noticed this way somehow i remember games more. I read the moves of the game Steinitz- Mongredien couple of days ago, i still remember all the moves played as well as some possible lines. But if i simply go through a game on computer by clicking, it stays less in my memory. You can also try.
Also people remember better in patterns and when there is logical connection than simply a sequence of moves which you cannot put into a logical context simply. There had been studies about this.
Yes, i hear strong GMs talking about the importance of Classics all the time. I kinda regret having not studied them when i was young and active chess player. Thats why i got interested in chess culture and classics recently.
Defence etc. was weaker in the old times, so when players like Alekhine had a clear plan, they could execute it perfectly, which makes up a great demonstrative material for an example. Therefore you can see those ideas being realised perfectly in classical games and that makes them so valuable. In our modern computer era, defence and resources are so advanced that top players often sense possible dangers and prevent them before they even appear on the board. Therefore when you study todays game, lot of ideas stay unnoticed by the spectators.
Carlsen has an exceptional memory, just like many top players. But i think there are also some factors that help them remember stuff easily. Firstly, most of them study in teams and analyse, so it becomes are thing for not only photographic memory but an episodic memory. They are professionals and chess is their life, they spend much more time on positions and discuss them.
For me it has always been hard to remember games etc. Nowadays i read chess books without a board, simply laying on a couch and read like a novel. I noticed this way somehow i remember games more. I read the moves of the game Steinitz- Mongredien couple of days ago, i still remember all the moves played as well as some possible lines. But if i simply go through a game on computer by clicking, it stays less in my memory. You can also try.
Also people remember better in patterns and when there is logical connection than simply a sequence of moves which you cannot put into a logical context simply. There had been studies about this.
Here is a spectacular problem that is composed by Sam Loyd for a tribute to Steinitz and his gambit:
<Comment deleted by user>
<Comment deleted by user>
<Comment deleted by user>
I didnt know the games in detail but i had seen this interview of Anand before :) Thank you!
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.