@Chiksan said in #10:
>
Correspondance might be the best compromise. The argument of who has an hour. The same time one puts in a fast, game that one might have in a day, can be put into one move, of a longer game. Obviously, the point is to use that time on that move selection (which also allows a higher level of thinking above turn by turn that faster time control will force any player to zoom in, limitations of human brains). Faster time controls appear to me like showcases for chess learned otherwise elsewhere...
It might not even be the same chess (strategies might be less about long term arcs, they might be other strategies not of the board to master the art of, well congrats to those who do that, it might be its own thrill).
but the argument on having little time chunks on any day.. well I also have the same problem, but from the point of view of posture endurance (among others)... so yes. One can learn to play slow chess, without putting enormous time chunks....
I think there is an element of adrenaline thrill. And the pace of the next game will be better, something that random gambling also shares, in some cases (actually it might even be neurological, we might pay more attention to random wins, that to patterns of wins.. where the brain might find better cause for habituation, they mark the imagination more than patterns of wins or patterns of loss. something like that, might be old news too ... if anyone might correct I would appreciate, although maybe off topic).
edit: my first response was a joke. kind of making fun of myself, not getting the point of real chess!
>
Correspondance might be the best compromise. The argument of who has an hour. The same time one puts in a fast, game that one might have in a day, can be put into one move, of a longer game. Obviously, the point is to use that time on that move selection (which also allows a higher level of thinking above turn by turn that faster time control will force any player to zoom in, limitations of human brains). Faster time controls appear to me like showcases for chess learned otherwise elsewhere...
It might not even be the same chess (strategies might be less about long term arcs, they might be other strategies not of the board to master the art of, well congrats to those who do that, it might be its own thrill).
but the argument on having little time chunks on any day.. well I also have the same problem, but from the point of view of posture endurance (among others)... so yes. One can learn to play slow chess, without putting enormous time chunks....
I think there is an element of adrenaline thrill. And the pace of the next game will be better, something that random gambling also shares, in some cases (actually it might even be neurological, we might pay more attention to random wins, that to patterns of wins.. where the brain might find better cause for habituation, they mark the imagination more than patterns of wins or patterns of loss. something like that, might be old news too ... if anyone might correct I would appreciate, although maybe off topic).
edit: my first response was a joke. kind of making fun of myself, not getting the point of real chess!
