@suzianne saidTheory and memorization are important, though. It is not as though you can reach master without studying openings, tactics, endgames, etc.
And then there's this, from Reddit r/chess:
Just to clarify, I’m not amazing at chess (1200 rapid chess.com) but I think I’m qualified to say this.
I’ve noticed a lot of beginners flock towards certain trap openings, which are bad with perfect play but often incite the opponent to make game-losing mistakes. The Stafford gambit, Englund gambit, Tennison gambit, etc ...[text shortened]... ould get into the habit of playing legitimate openings and assuming perfect play from your opponent.
A player who limits themselves to winning based solely on their own cleverness and learning based solely on their own personal examples is reinventing the wheel several times over. Their improvement will be far slower than one who uses existing theoretical knowledge, assuming they manage to improve at all.
@bigdogg saidCorrect, but focusing solely on "traps", for their quick win potential without studying fundamentals, is foolhardy.
Theory and memorization are important, though. It is not as though you can reach master without studying openings, tactics, endgames, etc.
A player who limits themselves to winning based solely on their own cleverness and learning based solely on their own personal examples is reinventing the wheel several times over. Their improvement will be far slower than one who uses existing theoretical knowledge, assuming they manage to improve at all.
It is a castle built on sand, instead of one built on rock.
@suzianne said>> The Stafford gambit, Englund gambit, Tennison gambit, etc come to mind. It makes sense that beginners are attracted to them. They’re different, fun to play,
And then there's this, from Reddit r/chess:
Just to clarify, I’m not amazing at chess (1200 rapid chess.com) but I think I’m qualified to say this.
I’ve noticed a lot of beginners flock towards certain trap openings, which are bad with perfect play but often incite the opponent to make game-losing mistakes. The Stafford gambit, Englund gambit, Tennison gambit, etc ...[text shortened]... ould get into the habit of playing legitimate openings and assuming perfect play from your opponent.
## Isn't that what it's all about? Having fun!
>> Regardless, if you want to genuinely improve, you should not be playing these openings.
## I’m not into improving, I’m into WINNING! And those traps work great for that!
>> If he falls into the trap, you win. If he doesn’t, you have an unenviable position, and have a high likelihood of losing the game.
## That holds true for instance for the Englund gambit. With about all the other traps if the enemy doesn't fall for it, I come out just fine.
>> Additionally, when you win because your opponent fell into a trap, it can hardly be claimed that you won because you played better than your opponent. Instead, you won because you had memorized a line that your opponent didn’t.
## And what is wrong with winning because you had memorized a line that your opponent didn’t?
As Sun Tzu says in his "The Art of War": "There is equal praise for somebody who wins through deceit as for him who wins by strength."
>> This means that a game won through an opening trap is a game whose learning potential was squandered.
## The fact of the matter is that the tactical tricks I learn from traps I often can use in totally different openings and positions. Traps make me a better chess player.
>> If you want to improve, you should get into the habit of playing legitimate openings and assuming perfect play from your opponent.
## Improving is useless. I’m never going to be a master, never a grandmaster, never the world champion. However, the traps give me the possibility to once in while brutally take down somebody who is much stronger than me.
And that is fun! And that’s why I play chess, not to improve, but in order to have fun.
And winning miniatures because of traps, that is FUN!
I once had a colleague who couldn't play chess, and I taught him chess. And then I said to him, "You should buy this book": https://tinyurl.com/schaakhandboek (chess handbook)
He bought that book, and I told him which sections and which traps to study.
One Monday he comes to me and said, "I played against my cousin over the weekend, and I caught him in that and that trap. It's so tremendously funny when you see someone get caught in a trap!"
And that's just the way it is.
Tim Krabbe, a Dutch chess player, writes on his homepage when talking about a trap: "Amazing what fun it is to win a game where you haven't played chess."
https://tinyurl.com/platy-pus
And so it is. You keep on laughing when you see someone fall into a trap.
"Winning a short game is a particularly enjoyable experience"
H. Bouwmeester, in his book "Schaakboek 11, 100 miniatuurpartijen" (Chess Book 11, 100 miniature games) https://tinyurl.com/Bouw-boek
Hans Bouwmeester was shared first in a Hoogovens tournament: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Bouwmeester_(chessplayer) (Dutch)
Chess is not about improving, it is about WINNING!
https://tinyurl.com/only-winning
Behold! The Almighty just blessed me again with an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile variant of the Budapest gambit.
Normally in that variant I win the queen for a knight and a bishop, which is 3 points gain. But in this game the queen managed to escape.
No problem, because in exchange for that I got first a rook, which is 5 points gain, and then I got the king, which is the game win. On move 10. 😆 😆 😆
https://tinyurl.com/Bud-killer
@suzianne saidThe things that make traps work are fundamentals: pins, forks, skewers, trapped pieces, etc.
Correct, but focusing solely on "traps", for their quick win potential without studying fundamentals, is foolhardy.
It is a castle built on sand, instead of one built on rock.
Stronger players don't fall for traps very often. The trap-lover may hit a wall against those players and not improve any further unless they learn how to win in more 'boring' ways.
But most people stop improving at some point. Chess is a lot of work with scant financial reward and hardly any mainstream recognition. Unless you're trying to become a good enough player or teacher to earn a living from the game, it can be argued, if you're not enjoying playing, you're doing it wrong.
And I had a nice Tennison gambit. The enemy didn't accept the gambit, maybe he was afraid of a trap or something. In stead he pushed his pawn forward in order to irritate me. But on move 6 I sacrificed my queen, but also that he refused to take. That was a good idea of him not to take my queen, because taking it would have been mate in one.
But it didn't help him much, because he resigned on move 7. 😀 😀 😀
@bigdogg saidYou're getting the picture Bigdogg. Improving is a whole lot of work, with very little to no reward.
The things that make traps work are fundamentals: pins, forks, skewers, trapped pieces, etc.
Stronger players don't fall for traps very often. The trap-lover may hit a wall against those players and not improve any further unless they learn how to win in more 'boring' ways.
But most people stop improving at some point. Chess is a lot of work with scant financial ...[text shortened]... arn a living from the game, it can be argued, if you're not enjoying playing, you're doing it wrong.
However, as you can see, traps give plenty of reward, are easy to learn, and make a man happy.
No matter how much we try to improve, 99% or more of us will never become a master, and IM, or a GM. You have to be born with a special brain for that, and most people don't have that. Tough luck. Learn to live with it.
Still, everybody on his or her level can have a lot of fun with chess. Just don't take it too seriously, enjoy your wins, and forget your losses ASAP.
Trying to improve like crazy and getting nowhere is the best way I know to get disgusted with chess and quit the game.
Here is what a GM writes on Lichess about "The secret to lasting love for chess"
https://lichess.org/@/Avetik_ChessMood/blog/the-secret-to-lasting-love-for-chess/gvoomnBH
And that's what it's all about, having fun and loving the game. Otherwise, what are you doing it for?
Carlsen doesn't want to play word championships anymore. Kasparov quit the game. Kramnik quit the game. Judith Polgar quit the game. Bobby Fisher quit the game.
What is the use of your enormous chess powers if you don't enjoy yourself and quit the game?
Just don't stress out too much about getting better, and just play the game and enjoy the game.
And it just happens to be so that traps add an enormous amount of fun to the game.
https://tinyurl.com/pity-no-traps
It is with great happines and much thanks to the Almighty that I inform you that I just had a heart warming Stafford gambit in which the enemy bit the dust on the 11th move. I had to sacrifice a horse for the intended result, but the result was absolutely worth it.
The enemy desperately tried to avert disaster, but he overlooked a nasty pin, and that did him in. On move 11. 😀 😀 😀
https://tinyurl.com/Deadly-StaffG
"Winning a short game is a very pleasant experience"
Thus spoke Hans Bouwmeester, winner of the 1954 Hoogovens tournament.
I must be doing something right, because the Almighty keeps showering me with these wonderful experiences.
Just another 1749 that was kind enough to help me get a Tennison Gambit on the board, and then gobbled up the bait greedily, hook, line, and sinker.
Needless to say, this didn't end well for him.
He also protected his plus pawn with his queen, and we all know now that that is a big No No.
He made it to move 9, and then quickly left the game because he was going to lose his queen.
I don't blame him. I completely understand:
https://i.ibb.co/9gmdLjL/resign-rage.png
@carnivorum saidTo be fair, Carlsen, Kasparov, etc. made millions of $$ playing, so this argument doesn't apply to them.
You're getting the picture Bigdogg. Improving is a whole lot of work, with very little to no reward.
However, as you can see, traps give plenty of reward, are easy to learn, and make a man happy.
No matter how much we try to improve, 99% or more of us will never become a master, and IM, or a GM. You have to be born with a special brain for that, and most peopl ...[text shortened]... be so that traps add an enormous amount of fun to the game.
https://tinyurl.com/pity-no-traps
That was kind of my point. Most of us aren't talented like those guys so we're never going to earn any kind of livable $$ from the game. The fun is the main reward.
Lately, even those with low ratings refuse to fall for Tennison gambit. I just had another 1800+ where I did get a Tennison gambit on the board, but I had the horrible feeling that he would not fall for the simple trap.
So I thought: Let's try that complicated trap again.
No sooner thought than done. I went for the complicated trap which usually does not work as fast, often yields less profit, but I did it anyway.
Because that trap is a lot more complicated this time no miniature of 10 moves or less. It took all the way until the 14th move before the enemy realized there was no saving the mate in 1. Well, he could delay it by giving away his queen, and then his rook, and then his other rook, and then his bishop, but then the mate would still be a unavoidable.
So he just gave up.
On move 14 😃
I admit; it's not 10 moves or less, but I still kind of like this one, too. 😄
https://tinyurl.com/drug-pleasure
Thanks to the Almighty and with help from the enemy, I got another Tennison gambit on the board.
The enemy played very slowly and thoughtfully, so I had little confidence in playing the simple trap, I thought he would see right through it. So I went for the complicated trap again.
The result was satisfactory. On move 11 the enemy was mate. 😀 😀 😀
https://tinyurl.com/Tenn-snake
And I got another one! A good beginning of the new week. Got myself a classical Stafford gambit. Unfortunately in this game I had to sacrifice my queen. Quite early actually, on move 6 already.
But the result was worth it!
On move 8 the enemy was mate! 😀 😀 😀
https://tinyurl.com/Stafo-8
And now a Tennison gambit! I went for the simple trap, and it worked OK. I gave him a pawn, he brought out his queen to protect it, and that was the beginning of the end.
On move 7 he lost a bishop, then two moves later he blundered away a horse, and then he surrendered.
Another miniature in a Tennison gambit. 😀 😀 😀
https://tinyurl.com/Tennison-deadly
Last night I had some nice traps. It started out with a Tennison gambit, in which the enemy started to protect his extra pawn with his queen, by putting his queen on d4. And as we all know by now, that is just not done. That move costed him a bishop, after which I exchanged everything, and we went into an endgame in which the enemy had no pieces, and I had a horse. That was of course easily won for me.
After that one, I was blessed with a mate of Legal. I sacrificed my queen, and two moves later, on move 8, the enemy was mate. 😀 😀 😀
The enemy took a real long time thinking before he took my queen. He thought for almost a minute, to be exact 54.6 seconds, but still he didn't see the mortal danger hidden in the shadows, and he took my queen.
And he paid the price. 😀
http://tinyurl.com/Qsac-rejoices