Single Comment

The truth is that chess programs have, historically, had a hard time
being creative because they simply cannot calculate whether a pawn
storm, or a positional exchance sacrifice, or a pawn sacrifice for
dynamic compensation, will lead to a concrete gain. It lies beyond the
horizon. So that's why computers have refrained from being creative,
and this is why Kasparov deemed Fritz to be a lousy program. Still
today, human grandmasters play better chess than Rybka, et al., but
it's not certain that it will always remain so.

Today, orthochess is becoming more and more dependent on preparation.
Soon it can be defined as a form of information science, with the
addition of an impressive calculating ability. This is a bad
development, and it's true that Capablanca chess, and many other
variants, represent a way out of this anti-creative and unadventurous
devlopment.

Today's chess is strongly dependent on encyclopaedic knowledgeability,
which follows from the computerization and the scientific study of
chess. A a consequence the world elite becomes younger and younger.
The average age in today's elite is below 25. At this low age people
are capable of stuffing their brains with knowledge, especially about
openings. Undoubtedly, the average age will continue to decrease.

I think that this is the expression of a form of neurosis that has
taken root In today's collectivity. It expresses itself in a wish to
develop into a perfect machine. An 'anal' attitude takes the
expression of a wish to be in total control. The ideal would be to
turn oneself into an automaton that needn't be creative, only applying
its own knowledge and exacting calculative ability on a well-known
concrete position.

Comparatively, in Anglo-Saxon checkers they randomly decide the three
first half-moves before tournament play begins, by the use of so
called ballot cards. In history, chess was most often played with long
dice. People had a different view on life back then, and were more
acceptant toward chance events. Unlike today, they weren't always in
for total control. I think that most chessplayers should begin to
loosen up their rigid standpoint toward chess, and perhaps life
overall.

'Chess holds its master in its own bonds, shackling the 
mind and brain so that the inner freedom of the very 
strongest must suffer' 
(Albert Einstein)

Mats