… I’m terrible at chess. I’ve tried to learn it several times. I even got “Chessmaster 7000” for my computer. I perform well against the simulated four-year-old girl and the chimpanzee, but the stronger opponents walk all over me. (The simulation is of a “super” chimp, in that it knows and scrupulously follows the rules of chess, rather than eating the pieces and defecating on the board. Otherwise, it plays about as well as you’d expect from a lesser primate.)
All the Dopers here are smart, some incredibly so. I’d be interested to hear if you’re ever thwarted by situations to the point of starting to doubt your own brilliance.
Libertarian is, I believe, the man with whom to discuss chess. He might even suggest some good books that might help your predicament. Personally, I play a terrible game of chess. I’ve never really focused on perfecting my game, nor have I read any discussions of strategy. In chess, at least, my failure stems not from inability but from impatience.
There is only one thing in the world that causes me to doubt my own brilliance and capacity. Only one thing consistently stumps and befuddles me. That demon’s name is Woman.
I also suck at chess, despite other indications of intelligence, and even generally being “good at games.” I also blame impatience. I’d rather play NetHack…
Chess. I get bored in a slow game, after keeping track of all the moves. I get off the track and lose. Sims I do good in. I still have SimCity2000, but by this point I just hack it and play away.
I have yet to beat NetHack either, but that’s just dumb luck.
I am excellent at the more complex multi-player strategy games, like Risk, Junta, Diplomacy, and the computer strategy games, but I am only so-so at chess for some reason. I think is has to do with simultaneous mental strength rather than consecutive, or so I have been told. Chess has elements of both but seems to be strongly consecutive.
I should note that my most common opponent is my father-in-law, who travelled all over the world hussling chess (his brother hussled pool). Since he likes to play, and just whomping me doesn’t take long, he usually plays an un-named variant of chess that involves killing off all my pieces but the king, and then ending the game one move before stalemate. My objective about half way into our typical game is to get my king checkmated. We got him a ChessMaster 2000, and he can beat it hands down except on the highest level, where he does about 50/50. He likes live opponents because he can read their eyes and get info from facial/voice/body language.
I’ve lapped up the biographies of Morphy, Lasker, Pillsbury, Capablanca, and Fischer.
I own 15 or 20 of those books with titles like GREAT TOURNAMENT GAMES, LESSER-KNOWN GAMES OF TAL, CAFE GAMES OF NIMSOVICH, and GAMES ALEKHIN PLAYED WITH HIS GREAT-AUNT WHEN HE WAS EIGHT AND HAD TO STAY AT HER HOUSE, and I love to play them out, saying “AHA! THAT’S where he nails the bastard!” at move 34 or whatever.
But I too am one stinkeroo of a chessplayer. The British have a wonderful word for guys like me:
I love chess. I’m not a bad player, depending on who I’m playing. If I’m playing someone who doesn’t play very often, I pretty much always win. If I’m playing someone who’s really good, then I do alright, and usually get told that I have a lot of promise.
The one person who isn’t all that good of a player who usually beats me is my SO. He usually does this by taking 15 minutes to make a move. By the mid point of the game, I’m so bored that I usually commit chess suicide just to end the bloody thing. I’m here for a good time, not a long time.
As far as the mathematics/physics thing goes, although I enjoy math, I’m much better at physics.
Ok, I am a rank amature but I found the easiest way for me was to learn chess backwards.
Start with the endgame books. 80% of chess comes down to this, and whoever knows it better, wins. The reason its easier to learn, is that it IS solvable. You have so many pawns/pieces in a certain position and you can FIND mate, or FIND the promotion or stop the same. Once you have this down you can start to actually play for certain endgames that you know well.
This is what the GMs do. From the opening they are playing for an endgame advantage. Most players are playing for the middle game and hope a favorable endgame comes out of it.
Besides, I think the endgame puzzles are interesting and fun.
I got real frustrated trying to really learn chess, not just play it. I had bought Chessmaster 5000, and it didn’t really do it for me. I started to doubt that I would ever be any good. I ended up finding a guy locally who actually gave me lessons. I’m not great by any means, but I can hold my own now. I do own CM7000, though, and I would recommend going through all the tutorials. I went through a few just for the hell of it, and they’re really good. Some of them are VERY tedious, but probably worth it if you really want to improve.
I expected to hear about other intellect-humbling experiences, but instead everyone is just commiserating over chess deficiencies. Oh, well. I appreciate it nevertheless.
Tymp had the right idea. I might even say that “women” could “be” generalized to “people”.
I’m now consumed with just one burning question. Eve, what’s a “fainting coach”. I tried substituting “couch” for “coach”, but that led to no improvement in comprehension. If you did in fact mean “coach”, could you let me know when there is an opening? I might be interested in applying for the job. I could use a little scintillating conversation while being reclined on … and for a swallow of that tea I’ll tell you who shot Lincoln.
Um . . . er . . . what I meant, of course, is that Yogi Berra was over at my house for tea, and when someone (are you there, Ike?) mistook him for a cartoon bear, he passed out cold in shock and mortification.
He is so plump and comfy that I settled myself down on him and continued pouring tea.
I learned how to play chess when I was about 10 years old, when I used to go to Nerd Camp (anyone else here an alum of College Academy at Holy Cross in Worcester? I’m betting yes).
I taught my little brother, the one with all the learning disabilities, the one who has lived in homeless shelters off and on through his entire adult life because he can’t keep a job, the one periodically joins cults, the one who almost flunked out of our local vocational school, to play.
After about 3 games, he began to beat me. He got an electronic version and began to beat it - up to the highest levels. He brought it to school and beat everyone, including teachers. He still kicks my ass about 99% of the time.
I guess the game just fit really well with my brother’s particular type of intelligence.
Don’t feel bad, Greg Charles! While my idiot younger brother could vanquish you, you’d beat me hands down.
Law school has been my intellectually humbling experience. I have a BS and a PhD in engineering from MIT, and I now work as a patent agent and I’m good at it. My firm is sending me to the “other” school in Cambridge for law school. Admittedly, I’m working a lot of hours while I’m in school, but I just can’t seem to write law school exams the way others can. I can write a pretty good brief, but my very best exams, where I feel that I’ve really displayed everything I know, barely put me in the top half of the class. I’ve been that annoying girl who knitted in class and didn’t take notes and still aced all the exams for my whole life, and this struggle is starting to wear me down.
Two more years. School starts in two weeks, and my dread is growing.
Magdalene, I thought Nerd Camp was the Center for the Advancement of Academically Talented Youth (CTY). I used to teach there in the summers.
Nerd Camp is anything that takes the geeks off the streets for the summer. They can thrive in their natural environment, playing Dungeons & Dragons and learning computer programming languages and cooking skills instead of getting their asses kicked by neighborhood bullies.
