It was a slow day today, I was down with a slight fever, had to take a medical leave from work and thus were unable to do much on chess.
I did teach, though. Had a class and, seeing that I am a dedicated coach, did not cancelled and went on to teach.
💓Why do I love chess?
I find joy in learning the small, minute differences that will only become apparent in a long run. The most famous example is the explanation/calculation/flexing done by the ex-World Champion, Garry Kasparov.
In this famous game, Kasparov, in the heat of the attack, suddenly tucked his king away to h2 on his 31st move. This “tempo-losing” move was explained by him in the famous “Kasparov mind-boggling calculation” video circulating on Youtube. He simply said that “now knight can go because my rook is hanging without check”.
Why this is baffling? Because normal player like me would “unpin” my heavy artillery by simply moving them. Not Kasparov, though. He move his king instead so that the pinned piece can move and the opponent can capture the piece behind it without a check.
The player that takes risks may lose, the player that doesn’t always loses. – Savielly Tartakower.
ChatGPT suggested for me to journal “Why do I love chess?” Seeing that I have this old blog at my disposal, I might as well use this to journal them.
💓Why do I love chess?
One of the reason is that it is one of the escape I had from the real world when I was a young lad.
Due to situation in the family (nothing negative, I’m just too lazy to include them here), I usually spent my time alone in my home from after school until around 8pm/9pm. The chess board was my company, apart from the books and occasional video games.
I prefer the board.
⚒️What I worked on today
🐴Revised on how to checkmate using a bishop and a knight against a lone king.
Can’t believe that I forgot the method; and I was more baffled when I realize that I am able to pick it up in less than 5 minutes.
They played the …a6 variations of the King’s Indian Defense, Sämisch Variation. I remembered having the note to this variation, courtesy of one of my coaches, NM Dan from the UK.
The idea? Simply to give up a pawn on b5 and loosen white’s central grip.
The way Rapport attacks, ignoring materials, is superbly stunning. I can feel the funny glittery feelings when I was studying the game – is that what “inspired” feels like? lul
And check out the accuracy:
If this was played on Lichess or Chesscom, Rapport would be… rapported, for cheating. (see what I did there?)
I guess that’s just about it. I hope I have the energy and time to continue this journaling thingie tomorrow.
There is a believe that the computer will “solve” chess and render the game unplayable. Some has strong believe to this and started to play another variation of the game, named Fisherandom. What is does is that it randomizes the starting lineup of the pieces; abiding only by these two rules:
The bishop pair must be on a different colours
The king must sit in between the two rooks.
However, I believe that the problem is not that machine will solves chess, but rather machines are taking the soul of chess away.
How the machine sees position
The machine doesn’t really see positions, it sees numbers of evaluation.
20. Rxf2! +2.34
22. Kb6! =
15. …Qxe5! -3.44
The numbers denotes the computer’s analysis of the move; a + means white has the advantage, a – means black has the advantage, and a = means it’s equal.
A stronger engine can do more analysis based on certain knowledge coded inside it’s algorithm (which are still numbers); for the endgame the developer can load what we call “tablebase”, a precalculated table of endgame positions.
What the machine can never do
These numbers are the end results that chess players seek – am I winning, or am I on the verge of defeat? Yet, the machine can never do a simple task unique to humans:
WHY does this move gives me a winning position?
WHY does this move saves me from defeat?
WHY is this move bad?
The machine, as strong as it is, can never explain to a human being why such move is winning. Machines are devoid of emotions and only do one thing – calculate. The end results is based on the algorithm set by the developer.
The problems that I see
The threat machines has on chess is not solving the game; the issue is that the machine takes away the soul and beauty of the game. I encounter numerous students who give out a conclusion to a position:
White is better because the engine says it’s +1.34
Yet when a simple question – “Why did the engine says that?”, surprisingly, even strong students were unable to answer. They will make up their own theories to support their claim.
The process is now in reversed; you are suppose to gather evidence first and then make a conclusion based on the deduction process you made on the evidence.
Using an engine, we arrive at the conclusion first, then we find evidence to support our claim.
This reliance on chess engine is actually a bane to chess players especially young players.
Take this example, on how Bobby Fischer sees the position:
Byrne – Fischer, New York 1963
On move 14, white played 14. Rfd1, which Fischer mentioned that it is the “wrong rook”. Why?
He understood that the rook is needed on f1 to defend f2 – something which no chess engine can tell us. He went on to win the game in a beautiful way. You can view the game here:
Everybody dreams of playing like Fischer, but we rarely put in the effort like how he did.
Solutions?
Players are suppose to develop their understanding first prior to using any chess engines. Without strong basic understanding, they cannot progress far.
Sadly, developing this basic understanding takes time, and time is one thing that players do not want to invest in. Players wanted an “easy way out” or “an easy win”. The engine is the quick solution.
Chess960, or Fischerandom, doesn’t solve this issue – it only solves the issue related to opening preparation and memorization.
We should learn how to look at the game from a human’s perspective and embrace the fact that humans are creatures that were created to make mistakes. The great Tigran Petrosian even blundered a queen, that did not deter him from being a World Champion (yes he did blundered a whole queen. Check out the game here.)
I really like how Aron Nimzowitsch explains the beauty of chess:
The beauty of a move lies not in its appearance but in the thought behind it.
Aron Nimzowitsch, My System
We have to face the fact, that there is no easy way to master chess. What we can do is enjoy the learning process, and in due time we will be amazed at how strong we can be.
Embrace the fact that we are humans – do not be afraid to make mistakes. Learn from them.
Understand that the beauty of chess is not the move, but the thought process and reasons behind the move.
Enjoy the learning process, focus on challenging your past self instead of the opponent in front of you.
Use the engine when we are strong enough and has build our own thought process and foundation.
