Why is current World Champion Magnus Carlsen simply so much better than his counterparts(most of them super grandmasters)? He refutes popular opinion and says he is not a genius and that he plays against his opponents' weaknesses. This would seem like the ideal strategy in possibly every sport but it isn't as easy as it looks in chess. Some players are often so solid that the attacking opponent often gets ahead of himself and reaches too far and loses material. They play simple, theoretical chess and don't look for too many deviations. They often adopt openings which are either draw-ish or exchange a lot of the material on the board. An example of this strategy is using the Berlin defence from black as a response for the Spanish opening.
However, players like Kasparov and Carlsen play a different kind of chess. They incorporate many novelties into their game and play not just different moves, but completely different lines so that their opponents get confused. They aren't afraid to take risks. Dutch no. 1 Anish Giri said,' If you calculate well, you can get away with a lot of nonsense'.
There's a lot of psychology involved in various moves of the game. Many factors have to be taken into account when considering a move(or trying to decipher the opponent's move). If an odd looking move is played, it could be a trick, which is the case most of the time, but it could simply be the case that your opponent is tired and is trying to confuse you. In these cases, overthinking is inadvisable. As Occam's razor suggests, the simplest explanation is always the best. When you can't find anything in your opponent's plan, it's usually because he hasn't got one.
So why does Carlsen manage to slither through his opponent's defences? I've seen a fair share of his games and a lot of his moves go unnoticed, when they are actually crucial. When the position seems deadlocked, he often shifts wings and tries to expand by moves like a4 and f4. He launches offensives on the opponent's king when it is least expected. He usually does this when a major portion of the board is locked up. He encourages his opponent to reach too far and make mistakes. He achieves this as he is a fan of the hyper-modern school of chess thought. Some of his notable victims in this respect are Mamadyerov and Vladimir Kramnik(the latter called him 'something close to a genius').
The surprise element in chess can make all the difference, I think. It is, however, imperative to calculate and consider every variation before engaging in sacrificial play or random pawn storms. Players like Vishy Anand like sedate positions with few positional irregularities. They prefer to push forward slowly and capitalise on the advantages provided to them by their chosen openings. Anand, for example, recognised the usefulness of factors like the a- file in the Ruy Lopez and the counter attacking chances in the Slav defence.
How a player wants to stand out is his/her choice.
However, players like Kasparov and Carlsen play a different kind of chess. They incorporate many novelties into their game and play not just different moves, but completely different lines so that their opponents get confused. They aren't afraid to take risks. Dutch no. 1 Anish Giri said,' If you calculate well, you can get away with a lot of nonsense'.
There's a lot of psychology involved in various moves of the game. Many factors have to be taken into account when considering a move(or trying to decipher the opponent's move). If an odd looking move is played, it could be a trick, which is the case most of the time, but it could simply be the case that your opponent is tired and is trying to confuse you. In these cases, overthinking is inadvisable. As Occam's razor suggests, the simplest explanation is always the best. When you can't find anything in your opponent's plan, it's usually because he hasn't got one.
So why does Carlsen manage to slither through his opponent's defences? I've seen a fair share of his games and a lot of his moves go unnoticed, when they are actually crucial. When the position seems deadlocked, he often shifts wings and tries to expand by moves like a4 and f4. He launches offensives on the opponent's king when it is least expected. He usually does this when a major portion of the board is locked up. He encourages his opponent to reach too far and make mistakes. He achieves this as he is a fan of the hyper-modern school of chess thought. Some of his notable victims in this respect are Mamadyerov and Vladimir Kramnik(the latter called him 'something close to a genius').
The surprise element in chess can make all the difference, I think. It is, however, imperative to calculate and consider every variation before engaging in sacrificial play or random pawn storms. Players like Vishy Anand like sedate positions with few positional irregularities. They prefer to push forward slowly and capitalise on the advantages provided to them by their chosen openings. Anand, for example, recognised the usefulness of factors like the a- file in the Ruy Lopez and the counter attacking chances in the Slav defence.
How a player wants to stand out is his/her choice.
Comments
Post a Comment