I've found many chess players, both amateurs and strong GMs, play chess in a way that contradicts their real life personality. Players that are adventurous in real life seem to play very positional and safe chess and people that are wimps in real life seem to play sharp, aggressive and very risk-taking chess. Has anyone noted the same thing. Is your playing style somewhat of a compensation for your real-life personality?
I think my style fits my personality.
Yeah I'm as lazy at the board as I am everywhere else.
I would love to see a study on the correlation between playing style and personality. I've heard similar claims in other sports, like some aggressive football player being a very modest person outside of football.
I can't imagine the correlation being that straight forward though. Personally I'm very theoretical and risk averse as a person, and very theoretical and risk averse as a chess player. However I find chess to be an outlet for my otherwise neglected sadistic nature. IRL I'm a something of a people pleaser, while on the chess board I love nothing more than making people suffer for hours. I like seeing my opponent unhappy and depressed over his/her position, as if they were sitting on a Judas cradle.
Winning by not letting my opponent breathe is to me infinitely more pleasurable than winning by some imaginative flurry of tactical strokes. Not because it makes me look better, but rather because it makes my opponent feel worse.
Perhaps I should talk to my therapist about this.
I can't imagine the correlation being that straight forward though. Personally I'm very theoretical and risk averse as a person, and very theoretical and risk averse as a chess player. However I find chess to be an outlet for my otherwise neglected sadistic nature. IRL I'm a something of a people pleaser, while on the chess board I love nothing more than making people suffer for hours. I like seeing my opponent unhappy and depressed over his/her position, as if they were sitting on a Judas cradle.
Winning by not letting my opponent breathe is to me infinitely more pleasurable than winning by some imaginative flurry of tactical strokes. Not because it makes me look better, but rather because it makes my opponent feel worse.
Perhaps I should talk to my therapist about this.
#4 Woah dude... that was raw.
My playing style is, frankly, as lame as my personality...
My playing style is passive like me!
Sollerman, I don't think it's only you who feels that way. I think you've tapped into a fundamental truth about the nature of the game.
I believe that it's not your personality, but rather your experience and innate talent which makes your own style evolve.
A guy who always develops his queen first will soon learn that this might not be soundest tactic and adapt, according to his means, to better opening choices. In Civilization V (a nation-building PC game) I always try to get to the Atomic Age first so I can threaten the AI players with all-out nuclear warfare, but only to win the game, because it is set up that way, but not because I'm a nascent mass murderer.
A guy who always develops his queen first will soon learn that this might not be soundest tactic and adapt, according to his means, to better opening choices. In Civilization V (a nation-building PC game) I always try to get to the Atomic Age first so I can threaten the AI players with all-out nuclear warfare, but only to win the game, because it is set up that way, but not because I'm a nascent mass murderer.
I agree rise. I believe the nature of chess is to play mercilessly, and without pity. A winner in chess always played more ruthlessly, coldly calculating, giving away less advantage than his opponent, and that can seem like sadistic behavior, but it's how the game should be played.
As for the schadenfreude Sollerman describes, the reason we are delighted by the suffering of our opponent is because we know it could easily be *ourselves* in that chair, and we are pleased by our success and feeling of strength/power.
---
As for the original question "Is your playing style somewhat of a compensation for your real-life personality?"
Not in my case. My play style is habitual, resorting to only a few openings, and in my real life I'm unfortunately a slave to habit as well. Chess can be paralleled to life in many ways, and I think it reflects life more than it "compensates" life.
As for the schadenfreude Sollerman describes, the reason we are delighted by the suffering of our opponent is because we know it could easily be *ourselves* in that chair, and we are pleased by our success and feeling of strength/power.
---
As for the original question "Is your playing style somewhat of a compensation for your real-life personality?"
Not in my case. My play style is habitual, resorting to only a few openings, and in my real life I'm unfortunately a slave to habit as well. Chess can be paralleled to life in many ways, and I think it reflects life more than it "compensates" life.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.