What does the style mean?

Opinions vary as to what can be considered a chess playing style. Abstract matter, but not void of meaning.

Technically, the style in chess is about the natural tendency of a player to develop an offensive or defensive strategy as common factor of the positional approach to the battle. Conceptually, it would be his voluntary predisposition to complicate the strategy or not.

The style could also be defined as a versatile thinking approach, made up by:

  • Basic Positional Knowledge
  • Strategic Perception vs. Tactical Instinct
  • Pragmatic Thinking

As a resource of strategic criteria, the style can only be considered as influential in the game if these elements are developed in the chess player and applied to his practical planning focus and technique.

It is neither a question of favoring some nuance of technique over another, but after all, it may seem to certain players that attacking or defending is easier than the opposite, and that is where it becomes essential to reflect on what factors of the strategy are required to refine, improve and perfect according to the own results and the rudimentary knowledge of the game.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

TRAIN LIKE YOU MEAN IT! Apply the 5 elements of efficient training in chess... They cannot be missing from your system!!!

Image
Often much of the time spent trying to perfect a skill is dissipated in ambiguous practices that have no long-term educational value. Particularly if one is self-taught, a beginner, and does not have the support of a reliable mentor to guide their interest in developing this or that skill. Even more so in the game of chess, for instance, because one cannot overlook the vast array of technical and conceptual nuances involved. Despite the simplicity of its configuration and the rules that govern it, playing chess is a demanding activity that requires sharp mental acuity and creative thinking. It is a vast intellectual field—a complex system in which multiple intuitive, operational, and philosophical dimensions converge. Thus, when approaching the study of its intricacies, it’s possible—as the popular saying goes—that “one misses the forest for the trees”. In other words, the abundance of principles and rules in chess can distract the player from the simple goal of making a good move. An...
Read more

Cognitive psychology: its role in learning and practicing the royal game

Image
Cognitive psychology studies the mental processes underlying perception, memory, language, reasoning, and decision-making. Applied to chess, it allows us to understand how players think, learn, and solve problems over the board. In this context, chess becomes an ideal laboratory for observing two fundamental types of thinking: Convergent thinking , which seeks a precise, logical, and determined solution—such as finding the best move in a tactical position. Divergent thinking , which explores multiple possibilities, ideas, or plans—such as evaluating structures or imagining long-term strategic plans. Both types of thinking coexist and alternate constantly during a game. Cognitive psychology has identified at least seven key teachings in this area: 1. Pattern Recognition Expert players do not calculate move by move from scratch; instead, they recognize familiar configurations, such as mating nets, defensive schemes, or pawn structures. This quick recognition activates convergent t...
Read more

How to read chess books?

I found it redundant to title this entry 'Why Read Chess Books' in contrast to the arguments presented in the previous post, as even the slightest introspection into the subject might suggest to any practitioner that the fundamental and evident motivation for tackling the reading of chess literature is none other than to deepen and improve one’s independent understanding of the game. What a boast! Right? But there is always room for improvement. In any case, I don’t believe it’s an entirely dismissible topic, especially for those who enjoy reading as their primary learning method or as a complementary resource to didactic training. A couple of parallel reasons could be argued in favor of this relatively naïve thesis, particularly when considering the collateral nuances to such basic utility. I will formulate three reasons and then proceed to scrutinize the issue raised in the entry's title question. For those who already have some knowledge of chess, reading specialized boo...
Read more