# Your chess style



## GnothiSeauton (Sep 11, 2011)

Continuing from the little discussion that happened at the end of the "4midable 4d" thread, I wonder if it's possible to draw a correlation between chess playing styles and IEs. I've always found chess a very interesting game; I think it was Garry Kasparov (I could be wrong) who said that he viewed it as a "violent game", a clash between minds. 

So every time I played it, I wondered if it was somehow possible to describe my opponent's play style precisely, and consequently understand something about his mind, about how they approach problems. Of course most people are poor chess players, so it's likely that everyone has a very erratic, haphazard play style unless they practice, and no significant conclusions can be reached this way.

But still, has anyone caught themselves analyzing their own play style in a similar way? Do you find that your approach relates to your IEs in some way? Do Reinin dichotomies (Tactical vs Strategic) or cognitive styles matter at all?

I used to play chess a lot with an ILE friend of mine last year. In typical Ne fashion, at one point he became completely obsessed about it, started studying it, buying books, and quote little facts he knew about famous chess players. Whereas I mainly played it for fun, so I almost always lost (I did manage to outsmart him on occasion, though). He was very adept at recognizing patterns on the chessboard and he memorized a certain number of strategies that he explained with an abundance of technical details (Ti).

As for my play style, I never followed any strict guideline, because I never found particular enjoyment in the actual process of learning and practicing chess (I own two books by Mikhail Tal, barely touched them). As a player, I was not very strategic, being reliant on quick, simple combinations to take advantage of opportunities of immediate potential. I was prone to commit many pieces forward and sometimes sacrifice them foolishly. For all intents and purposes, I either won in the mid-game, or my opponent was good enough and I'd get embarrassingly thrashed in the end-game. My play style was a slow, continuous process that built upon itself, but somewhat predictable and easy enough to disrupt.

What about yours?


----------



## MisterPerfect (Nov 20, 2015)

You can if you observe them I suppose. Everyone has unconsience patterns.


----------



## Blue Soul (Mar 14, 2015)

I like thinking three or four steps ahead and offer little trades for the opponent on purpose that lets me outmaneuver their board, if I have a thing that's it.

Apart from that just basic stuff. I throw in checks as often as I can for some nice middle moves. Always keeping my shit protected (preferably multiple times), and trying to be aware of key squares where the opponent can't move easily.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

My chess style is playing one or two games every few years.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I play strategy games very much based on gut feelings so there's very little thinking involved. I just do things and see if it works out or not, lol, but I always have my entire turn planned out before it's my turn. My playstyle has always been very reactive and more based on adapting to my opponent than trying to force a certain strategic vision on them. I think this is because I rarely actually have any specific win condition in mind which can make me very wishy-washy and throw away wins because I keep being dragged around objectives rather than actually taking them, though I think I'm pretty good at capitalizing on weaknesses when they manifest. I also like to play very aggressively rather than defensively.

tl;dr your strategic style tends to reflect tactical/strategic and result/process.


----------



## Recede (Nov 23, 2011)

I tend not to plan really far ahead but go with what feels right at the time, avoiding potentially unsafe moves. I don't tend to play chess or other strategy games much though. I think I enjoy coming up with ideas of combinations or strategies more than actually doing them.


----------



## Stickman (Sep 30, 2012)

First I build the strongest position I can. My first 8 or so opening moves are almost always the same(unless my opponent does something I don't like). I usually favor one side heavily. Baracading my king in the corner(on the side I favour). If my opponent is as good or better than me, the game gets 'stuck' at this point(sort of similar to checkers). Once it inevitably opens up again, I'm very aggresive. Very liberal in trading pieces, even if it's an even trade, even if it's an uneven trade(in my opponents favour) that gives me a positional advantage. I usually come out on top. Once you have the positional advantage and more/better pieces, it's easy to mate. nine out of ten I will mate with two straight lines (queen/rooks) on the side.

I mostly use my horses to take pieces, my bishops for their diagonal lines(I'll park those somewhere safe, just to limit my opponents possibilities(and occasionally take a rook if they're not paying attention, this almost never happens). My rooks and queen get out really late in the game. Mostly just to mate, or earlier if need be. Occasionally I go on a queen adventure, alternating between checking and taking pieces.

I value queen over rook over horse over bishop over pawn.

Of course this can all change depending on my opponent.

I don't get equal or better opponents too often. This makes me sad.


----------



## Graveyard (Oct 23, 2015)

I just wait and see what the other person will do. I move my pieces mostly to get to the other person's turn (simple moves, like a pawn moving one space into the nothingness or the king dancing between two squares), because that's where the real deal is. Truth being told, I never have a strategy, so I mold myself for the situations. This ends up with defensive chess plays ands overall avoiding. There's a lot of baiting, too. But when I have a clear shot, I go for it. My games end up being really long because of that.


----------



## Roland Khan (May 10, 2009)

My style is to allow my pieces to emigrate under a better ruler.


----------



## greattt (Dec 6, 2015)

All in! Horsey and Queen.


----------



## Ephemerald (Aug 27, 2011)

When I took Socionics initially, I may have been depressed, or stressed, so I tested as an ILI. I've taken MBTI many times. I've noticed that I trend towards INTP or INTJ depending upon my moods and priorities in life. E.g.: Sometimes it's best to stop making judgements and take in information for a while, discerning direction, and then move into execution again.

*Anyways*: I've always liked a Blackmar-Diemer Gambit as white. As black I'm usually more conservative with counter play. To be frank though, I've given up playing chess as it's normally played. I liked it as a kid, but as an adult, I find it boring. I usually play the variant Crazyhouse now at 0 1 or 1 0 online--or blitz and standard if I'm itching for a slower game. I usually rate between 1800 and 2100. Nothing too special. But I still open with f4 in Crazyhouse--like a boss.


----------



## Thomas60 (Aug 7, 2011)

I will sacrifice any style when it impedes my chances of winning.
My prepared arsenal is King's Gambit, Grand Prix, Modern Defense, and KID.
I use annotated games and 'create a plan' case studies to improve my game.


----------



## Freelancepoliceman (Dec 17, 2015)

My style is usually defensive. I try to build up a network of interconnected pieces, so I can prepare for anything unexpected that I can't check for. My worst type of opponent is probably someone ruthlessly aggressive, who doesn't give me a chance to build up a formation.


----------

