Today I was wondering what be my style of play? I am really confused because I can playing tactically, but also positional wise too.. But there are many styles out there. What be my style? Your opnion is appreciated.
Thanks.
Thanks.
in my opinion ure none of it, ,
many people try to attack always or to play posi just
you should better concentrate on doing what the position gives you
if your opp is weakened or bad developed attack if ur things are on the queenside or squares are weakened play posi
the best style is universal
best regards reti
many people try to attack always or to play posi just
you should better concentrate on doing what the position gives you
if your opp is weakened or bad developed attack if ur things are on the queenside or squares are weakened play posi
the best style is universal
best regards reti
After reviewing some of your games:
Typically compensate for loss with depth. Playing sometimes seemingly obscure/negative moves that end up turning the momentum to you for what is pretty much a surprise attack even if not having been necessarily planned out or on purpose.
High: Creativity, Compensation through Depth, Making people see Ghosts, activated acceleration
Low: Pawn play, defense in general as in low care not necessarily skill, tactical
Tendency for shallow logical mistakes, however again good at compensating by creating difficult decisions for your opponent.
Bottom line creative style with efficiency rather than complexity. You don't make what I consider insulting or weird moves nor just make the game too shallowly-logically complex (making as many minor pieces ready to take/be taken at a time as possible) like Mikhail Tal did.
Likely to have particular respect for play of Mikhail Tal or Nezhmetdinov.
Mikhail Tal vs Nezhmetdinov
www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7rznZmIXI0
Another difference between the two, specific tactical play(Nez) or rule play(Tal). You see Tal at the end of the game move his pieces just to avoid the chance of discoveries, as a rule, not because he necessarily saw a very probable but specific line that would end in those tactical shots. It doesn't mean Tal was wrong, just specific idea vs possibility play. Which also suggests you'd be more likely to let someone setup tactical shots if you see they won't actually be able to accomplish it in time vs someone immediately moving their queen/king out of the way as soon as there's an indirect pin on them (moving as a rule to avoid the tactical shot). Also probably more likely to have overall plans to make and execute in a high stakes game rather than just tactical focus or the "let's see what they do".
Most likely to perform poorly against people who play like Magnus Carlsen's style, defensive robots... great at end games, don't allow you to activate your creativity. You'll make small mistakes and they'll make sure they add up over time.
Typically compensate for loss with depth. Playing sometimes seemingly obscure/negative moves that end up turning the momentum to you for what is pretty much a surprise attack even if not having been necessarily planned out or on purpose.
High: Creativity, Compensation through Depth, Making people see Ghosts, activated acceleration
Low: Pawn play, defense in general as in low care not necessarily skill, tactical
Tendency for shallow logical mistakes, however again good at compensating by creating difficult decisions for your opponent.
Bottom line creative style with efficiency rather than complexity. You don't make what I consider insulting or weird moves nor just make the game too shallowly-logically complex (making as many minor pieces ready to take/be taken at a time as possible) like Mikhail Tal did.
Likely to have particular respect for play of Mikhail Tal or Nezhmetdinov.
Mikhail Tal vs Nezhmetdinov
www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7rznZmIXI0
Another difference between the two, specific tactical play(Nez) or rule play(Tal). You see Tal at the end of the game move his pieces just to avoid the chance of discoveries, as a rule, not because he necessarily saw a very probable but specific line that would end in those tactical shots. It doesn't mean Tal was wrong, just specific idea vs possibility play. Which also suggests you'd be more likely to let someone setup tactical shots if you see they won't actually be able to accomplish it in time vs someone immediately moving their queen/king out of the way as soon as there's an indirect pin on them (moving as a rule to avoid the tactical shot). Also probably more likely to have overall plans to make and execute in a high stakes game rather than just tactical focus or the "let's see what they do".
Most likely to perform poorly against people who play like Magnus Carlsen's style, defensive robots... great at end games, don't allow you to activate your creativity. You'll make small mistakes and they'll make sure they add up over time.
Also I don't claim to be nearly as good as you nor are these great games but here are examples of me first playing closer to your style, then me playing in the style that gives that style trouble.
Creative, see ghosts/compensation, 70 Average Centipawn loss
Tactical, solve-all defensive, 26 Average Centipawn loss
Creative, see ghosts/compensation, 70 Average Centipawn loss
Tactical, solve-all defensive, 26 Average Centipawn loss
Oh yes I never thought of that style! Indeed i am quit creative, I fight the whole game and try to shock my opponent and win! Yes i am low at defending.
Thx. I will like more players to review my games and let see if people have diiferent points of views.
Thx. I will like more players to review my games and let see if people have diiferent points of views.
Your style is like a rough hewn version of morphy's play... quick development and on to the attack... My guess is that you prefer open vs. closed games and you problably hate exchange variations against an opponent that happens to be an ENDGAME WONK. It may be good for you to invest some time on end game study not so much for winning endgames but rather to improve your ability to CALCULATE.... it would increase your overal accuracy and lead to sharper mating attacks. Just my opinion.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.