In light of the recent Pompeo Chess tweet...
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (5)
sorted by:
You'll find a lot of poor chess players playing the war of attrition. Reducing the number of variables in play. This leads to predictable outcomes and is easily countered by the skill player with foresight.
The best players set up their forces in advance of any major attack. There may be the odd skirmish, but both sides will withhold their main attack until they feel they will have the upper hand once the battle truly commences.
In this type of game it can look like not much is happening, but each move is being thought about in terms of the whole battle outcome with all the other pieces in play and (hopefully) achieving dominance at the end of it.
When the attack happens it involves a lot of things happening very quickly and a lot of pieces being removed from the board in a short space of time. At the end game it is usually quite easy to see who will win.
If Q is confident they have counters for all their opponents moves then it's just a question of time, but sometimes you can't start the final battle yourslef because it might put you out of position.
The enemy knows this and will try to stall as long as possible, hoping that their enemy will amke a mistake that will allow them to turn the tide.
Patience is key.
Example: I was in a losing position in a game recently, totally outplayed. However, my opponent had left his King vulnerable to a surprise attack. If I had attacked this weakness straight away it would be easily countered. What I had to do was draw his pieces into an attack that would take his mind off his weakness.
He eventually did exactly that and I won a checkmate, completely at odds with how the game went. This is what I believe the Cabal are trying to do. As long as Q doesn't take his eye off his own position/weakness it shouldn't be a problem.
So I hope anyway.
Thank you.
Mass respect. I just played a game and re watched it with hints to get a feel how a pro match would go and I discovered a very interesting thing when the computer plays itself.... thesis and antithesis
For every move the counter was equally the opposite. If one guy tempted the other responded with a corresponding tempt. Of one guy was in attempt to remove say a bishop then the other was preparing to equally remove the same. And in other cases the opponent would respond to defensive moves with offensive moves.
Ultimately I found that each piece moved had a corresponding intent or goal. Say a horse moving to the right side of the board. There's no telling that early in the game where they're heading but towards the end you can tell if they plan to set up blockage, attack, or distract. As the game progresses and the further the pieces get from each other, the clearer the plan of the enemy becomes.