🚀 go-pugleaf

Umm.....just found this newsgroup....from the replies to this message there
seem to be a few megalomaniacs out there.

I love chess but I rarely play it (my life is very very very full)

I don't know any of the textbook moves.  Most games I've played have been
against erstwhile suburban chess champions.  Sometimes I win, sometimes I
lose.  C'est la vie.

For me it's the intellectual stimulation I receive from a good game - so
invigorating!

Bantari - ignore these tossers who don't appear to be able to enjoy the game
without winning....revel in the knowledge that balanced people can
appreciate this GAME for what it is  :-)

Cheers,


Rebecca.
=================================================

Bantari <bantari@mynet.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.13e1264cac9621f89896eb@nntp...
> liam@ork.net says...
> > In rec.games.chess.politics Bantari <bantari@mynet.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Ok.  Fine.  I am probably mistaken in my interpretation of your
> > > words.  Would you please explain to me what you mean by saying that a
boy
> > > "won't respect someone who just plays and loses" and how did you
figure
> > > out what the boy will and will not respect if such attitude is not
quite
> > > natural and obvious to you.
> >
> > If that is an accurate quote, that should probably have read "plays to
> > lose" or "plays without an intention to try to win (or draw, if the
> > opponent is much stronger)."
> >
>
> Maybe... you can check yourself if the quote was accurate or not.
> But this is beside the point - the example illustrated that there are
> people out there who play maybe not TO LOSE, but at least with NO
> EMPHASIS ON WINNING - i.e. to whom winning or losing a game is of
> secondary importance, or maybe even unimportant altogether. I just happen
> to disagree with Robert Hyatt's assumption (was it him?) that such people
> will not be respected by their opponents.
>
> Ultimately - we all have to answer the question for ourselves -
> why do we play chess at all?  Do we play chess because we like winning?
> Maybe then we could win more playing Spades, for example?  Or do we play
> chess because we simply like this game?  It seems to be a purely
> philosophical issue, and one which is entirely subjective.
>
> A side question - if winning is really all that matters, then what
> about these players who reached their peak?  Do they only play weaker
> opponents?  Do they stop studying because "What's the point, I won't get
> any better anyways?"  What do you think?
>
> Why did you started playing chess?  Because you felt the rush of
> winning and all you wanted to do was to win and win even more?
>
> Do not get me wrong, I agree that winning is nice, and winning can
> be motivating...  But winning is "The Main Thing In Chess" only for
> people who are obsessed enough to make chess their life, and who measure
> their value by how many games they win.  Not everybody is like this, I
> hope.
>
> Just remember what Chess is - its a game.
>
> G * A * M * E
>
> like many other games - spades, hearts, checkers, go, hide-and-seek...
> and so on... and the main point of playing *any* game is the simple
> pleasure of playing it.  Its to relax, to pass time, to have fun.  There
> is nothing more to this.  The fact that some people lost sight of this
> and got obsessed with things like winning, rating points, etc does not
> change the fact.
>
> That's all.
>
> --
> _____________________________________________________
>  Bantari
>  e-mail: r18b2@san666.rr.com  (remove the 666)
>  homepage: http://home.san.rr.com/rafgo