# Garry Kasparov makes a brief comeback for charity.

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/garry-kasparov-makes-a-brief-comeback-for-charity/616740>\
**Category:** The Game Room\
**Created:** [March 25, 2012, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/garry-kasparov-makes-a-brief-comeback-for-charity/616740 "2012-03-25T04:54:24Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\
**Post date:** [March 28, 2012, 10:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/garry-kasparov-makes-a-brief-comeback-for-charity/616740/21 "2012-03-28T22:04:47Z")

</div>

> [@glee](#):
>
> Chronos asked if psychology was Kasparov’s greatest strength, **not** if it plays some part in club chess.
> 
> if you would like to discuss psychology in all forms of chess in a new thread, I’d be happy to do so. (I have a copy of ‘Psychology in Chess’ by Krogius, who coached Boris Spassky.)

I understand the context, but you made a broad statement about chess in general. It was that that I was disputing:

> [@glee](#):
>
> I don’t know if psychology plays much part in chess. You can choose an opening your opponent is unfamiliar with, but chess is about calculation. (It’s not poker - there’s no bluffing.)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Maserschmidt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/maserschmidt/32/18829_2.png) [@Maserschmidt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maserschmidt)\
**Post date:** [March 29, 2012, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/garry-kasparov-makes-a-brief-comeback-for-charity/616740/22 "2012-03-29T00:42:46Z")

</div>

I can’t really follow **glee** ’s point either, but if he’s saying psychology doesn’t play a significant role at say Kasparov’s level, that just means he ( **glee** ) hasn’t read Kasparov’s _Great Predecessors_ books. Kasparov talks a lot about psychology at the highest levels of chess, and not just in his games…including altering choices of openings, or even selecting complicated but potentially unsound moves against certain opponents.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\
**Post date:** [March 29, 2012, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/garry-kasparov-makes-a-brief-comeback-for-charity/616740/23 "2012-03-29T01:01:54Z")

</div>

I saw one of his games vs. Deep Blue. He was feeling some time pressure, and offered a draw. Now, at the time, the computer wasn’t programmed to deal with such offers: The arrangement was that if a draw was offered, there was a human staff who would decide whether to accept it (the same team would decide when to concede). Well, Kasparov knew that they’d eventually decline the offer, but that it would take them a while to come to that decision-- Time that came off of Deep Blue’s clock, not his own. With the pressure taken off him, he eventually rallied and won.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/garry-kasparov-makes-a-brief-comeback-for-charity/616740.md?page=1)