Yosh
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 26 |   |
Karma: 0
|
re:Longevity at chess - 2006/07/24 22:48
Three+ days before the above Jerzy's post,
Krzych from pl.rec.gry.szachy, see
has writen that by viewing ratings by Sonas one can run into chessplayers who distinguished themselves with chess longevity like: Steinitz,
Lasker, Botwinnik, Korcznoj. Then Krzych asks what should be credited for this? -- their chess style or their exceptional individual predispositions?
(Jerzy has joined that Krzych's thread on
Februray 2, while he has started this thread here on rgcm on Feb 4).
Now, about the Krzych's question. The most important necessary precondition for chess longevity is (simply) longevity. No example is known of a player who lived under fifty years and who would score a significant chess success when sixty years old.
It is rather clear that Alechine and Tal would keep playing long years after they had died if only they didn't die.
One may ask if positional players live/play longer than tactical players. That was the question asked and discussed (not too extensively) on the
Polish chess group, i the Krzych's thread.
Well, possibly, but as Capablanca's case shows, the positional style does not guarantee longevity. Fischer is another counter-example.
And what about Morphy? He was brilliant tactically, but then he was simply ( brilliant, while his success rested on his strategic superiority (plus excellent endgame).
Rubinstein is rather considered positional but he didn't last as long as the more tactical (or universal) Lasker.
There is the active and the reactive style (not to be confused with "reactionary" .
Capablanca and Karpov represent the reactive, more economic, less stressful method of playing chess, while Alechine and Kasparov the active style. it looks like Kasparov tires of chess more than Karpov, so Kasparov periodically gets active outside chess, or in the chess politics.
I don't think that the style of playing chess itself makes a difference to a player longevity.
I rather believe that we have in us several biological clocks. Thus there is one for remembering and telling jokes (anegdots). Many people lose that ability already in their late teens, others in their twenties, while only very few are good at remembering jokes at older age. Something similar holds for poetry. Some great poets stopped creating at a relatively young age (years before they died).
We all see what the biological clock does to our bodies. It is harder to see what it does to our minds. But I am convinced that there is one responsible for chess longevity.
The contrasting examples of philosophical Lasker, relaxed and pieceful Smyslov, the ever fighting
Korchnoy show that the character plays a secondary role. If you had enough of character to get to the top, then all you need for longevity is an internal chess clock set for long years of activity..
---------
The Churches must learn humility as well as teach it. - George Bernard Shaw, 1856 - 1950
Popular posts by Yosh
4 teams: 1.bums, 2.lawyers 3.comp.s...
Spassky
An example of horrific tactical ...
|
post new topic
