5 ms·

> The second part I think simply denotes a misunderstanding of what playing chess well means. The quote is from Paul Morphy, the best player of the 19th centur

> The second part I think simply denotes a misunderstanding of what playing chess well means. The quote is from Paul Morphy, the best player of the 19th century. He practically invented playing chess well. And he hated it, he felt he should have become a lawyer and did something useful with his life.

leto_ii 5y ago
> The quote is from Paul Morphy, the best player of the 19th century. The point was taken, see my comment below. I didn't know the context behind the quote, I understand that Morphy didn't mean it the way I took it. Nevertheless, I think that under the general interpretation of what it means to know chess well (which is surely different from Morphy's), I stand by my idea that knowing chess well can be a positive thing.
- thomasahle 5y ago
  Sounds like the disagreement is just about what is required for "playing chess well". If we raise the bar to 2500+ maybe you will agree?
  - leto_ii 5y ago
    > Sounds like the disagreement is just about what is required for "playing chess well". I think so. I'm getting a lot of flak over it though :-< > If we raise the bar to 2500+ maybe you will agree? I can't say. I do have an acquaintance who is at ~2600 level who is also a well adapted guy. He's not a full time player anymore, though. I have no opinion on whether chess performance at a GM level is bad for you. All I wanted to say was that you can get pretty far with chess (I think a level of 2000-2300 qualifies as pretty far for the general population) without it affecting your life negatively.
    - Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
      There are currently only 267 players who have 2600+ Fide rating. That's extremely high bar. Are you sure your acquaintance is one of them? 2600 rating on sites like lichess or chess24 is much more plausible, it corresponds to roughly 2150-2300 fide rating.
      - leto_ii 5y ago
        > Are you sure your acquaintance is one of them? Yes. He's a pretty well known Australian player, not sure how active he is anymore though. Now has a full time academic career. Edit: After verifying on the FIDE website, I see his ranking is around 2500 now. He is a GM though.
        Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
        Hm, there seems to be just 2 Australian players with more than 2550 rating (3 if we take 2549!), and all of them have played rated games recently. (Two of them are from exUSSR, and the last one has a surname that sounds Chinese)
        leto_ii 5y ago
        See my edit. I just don't feel comfortable dropping his name here. I wanted to make a general point about my impression of the impact of playing chess on people, I don't want to turn this into some personal thing.
        Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
        Well the pool of 2500+ players is significantly larger. It just immediately raised my attention because 2600 is superrare, and prior to 1990s only select few ever had a higher rating: it is really something special. (Also, verifying the plausibility of statements by internet users is a personal hobby of mine, hope you understand)
        leto_ii 5y ago
cyberdynesys 5y ago
He did; he never played chess competitively past his 20's and was a lawyer until he died.
misja111 5y ago
+1, Paul Morphy might have been the most fascinating and influencing chess player of all time. When he was still actively playing, he seemed almost unbeatable, and nobody understood why. Somehow Morphy intuitively knew when to start an attack and when he did, it magically always worked out, while other top players at that time often saw their attacks turn into nothing and would soon lose afterwards. It took a decade until an a dedicated studier of his game, Wilhelm Steinitz, figured out the logic behind it. His theory of positional play changed the way people looked at chess and meant the start of the modern chess era. Morphy himself didn't live to see this, after quitting chess he became increasingly schizophrenic and eventually died penniless and alone.
thomasahle 5y ago
Can you recommend a biography on Morphy?

leto_ii 5y ago

> The quote is from Paul Morphy, the best player of the 19th century. The point was taken, see my comment below. I didn't know the context behind the quote, I understand that Morphy didn't mean it the way I took it. Nevertheless, I think that under the general interpretation of what it means to know chess well (which is surely different from Morphy's), I stand by my idea that knowing chess well can be a positive thing.

thomasahle 5y ago
Sounds like the disagreement is just about what is required for "playing chess well". If we raise the bar to 2500+ maybe you will agree?
- leto_ii 5y ago
  > Sounds like the disagreement is just about what is required for "playing chess well". I think so. I'm getting a lot of flak over it though :-< > If we raise the bar to 2500+ maybe you will agree? I can't say. I do have an acquaintance who is at ~2600 level who is also a well adapted guy. He's not a full time player anymore, though. I have no opinion on whether chess performance at a GM level is bad for you. All I wanted to say was that you can get pretty far with chess (I think a level of 2000-2300 qualifies as pretty far for the general population) without it affecting your life negatively.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
    There are currently only 267 players who have 2600+ Fide rating. That's extremely high bar. Are you sure your acquaintance is one of them? 2600 rating on sites like lichess or chess24 is much more plausible, it corresponds to roughly 2150-2300 fide rating.
    - leto_ii 5y ago
      > Are you sure your acquaintance is one of them? Yes. He's a pretty well known Australian player, not sure how active he is anymore though. Now has a full time academic career. Edit: After verifying on the FIDE website, I see his ranking is around 2500 now. He is a GM though.
      - Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
        Hm, there seems to be just 2 Australian players with more than 2550 rating (3 if we take 2549!), and all of them have played rated games recently. (Two of them are from exUSSR, and the last one has a surname that sounds Chinese)
        leto_ii 5y ago
        See my edit. I just don't feel comfortable dropping his name here. I wanted to make a general point about my impression of the impact of playing chess on people, I don't want to turn this into some personal thing.
        Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago
        Well the pool of 2500+ players is significantly larger. It just immediately raised my attention because 2600 is superrare, and prior to 1990s only select few ever had a higher rating: it is really something special. (Also, verifying the plausibility of statements by internet users is a personal hobby of mine, hope you understand)
        leto_ii 5y ago

cyberdynesys 5y ago

He did; he never played chess competitively past his 20's and was a lawyer until he died.

misja111 5y ago

+1, Paul Morphy might have been the most fascinating and influencing chess player of all time. When he was still actively playing, he seemed almost unbeatable, and nobody understood why. Somehow Morphy intuitively knew when to start an attack and when he did, it magically always worked out, while other top players at that time often saw their attacks turn into nothing and would soon lose afterwards. It took a decade until an a dedicated studier of his game, Wilhelm Steinitz, figured out the logic behind it. His theory of positional play changed the way people looked at chess and meant the start of the modern chess era. Morphy himself didn't live to see this, after quitting chess he became increasingly schizophrenic and eventually died penniless and alone.

thomasahle 5y ago

Can you recommend a biography on Morphy?