I pop on my most unassuming outfit-- A black baseball cap, a grey sweatshirt, khaki-casual dress pants, and well-worn white Reebok's to complete the ensemble. Am I dreaming? Wondering through a dark hall
confused, a large, grey Victorian-style door appears in front of me. "What's this?" I wonder aloud, a spotlight beams on me from above and Morgan Freeman's voice fills the chamber, "This is the door to insanity my son, you've been selected from a random sample of customers to participate in our survey." "What sur--" "Go ahead, it won't hurt". The door opens slowly to reveal a modest gathering of Ewoks, 8 short in stature, 2 with round heads, 2 with larger noses and hooves, another 2 clothed in Gothic robes, 1 with a crown, and the last a little more curvy than the rest. The crowned beast speaks in a strangely familiar Austrian accent -"Welcome to the party.. IT'S NOT A TUMA!"
My eyes dart open suddenly to a reveal a chess board beneath me, I wipe off my lip-crud, come to, and realize I fell asleep waiting for the pairings. Looking around, I notice Mike Zeggelaar blathering once again about his "attacking style" to some club veterans, I grin and sit patiently for a moment until a familiar voice pipes up "The pairings are now posted on the door, please have a seat at your board, and we'll start the clocks in 1 minute".
And back to reality~~What does it mean to have a chess style? Most take it to mean that a person has a disposition towards certain types of play, whether it be positional, tactical, defensive-prophylactic, initiative based pirate-like gambiteering, computer-like "correct" and so on, with many symbioses. These dispositions usually reflect on that persons personality to some degree and their approaches to combat and life in general, although there are many contradictions and situations where a preference must be put aside for practical reasons.
In the chess world we have many examples of great champions who had more or less clear-cut styles. Mikhail Tal was known around the world for his great attacking games and daring sacrifices- a gambler. Mikhail Botvinnik on the other hand was much more scientific in approach and generally preferred to play in a way that would be considered "correct", as did Bobby Fischer who's style would later be characterized as universal. Anatoly Karpov and Tigran Petrosian tried to clamp their opponents and reduce potential counter-chances, gently squeezing their opposition until they fell over. So who are you?
People play chess for a variety of reasons, to win, to smash, to grief, to prove, to create. So why do you? Simple enough question perhaps, but probably incredibly difficult to answer, with reasons that stem from the practical, artistic, competitive to psychological. I think this is an incredibly important question that may lead you to reconsider your approach to the game and may even lead you to play a better, but even more important, a more enjoyable game of chess.
Story time-- One of my favourite books is written by IM Josh Waitzkin titled "The Art of Learning". In it he discusses his disenchantment from chess before moving on to martial arts. In his youth he was considered a prodigy and won almost everything in sight, grade championships, state junior events, national competitions and so on. His meteoric rise up the junior ranks was impressive and many took notice. He played chess first and foremost because he loved the game. He loved to analyse deep endgames of the champions of old, and play dazzling attacking chess, relishing the moment when the positions would turn crazy and almost incalculable; An adventurer at heart. His play on the chess board was in-tune with who he was as a person and he enjoyed the process immensely. Fast-forward many years into young adulthood. Things got tough. GM's were big and scary, he had moved on from his long-time friend and coach Bruce Pandolfini, and chess became less about enjoyment and more about results and pleasing fans. "I felt like I was watching myself play chess from from across the room." These concerns coupled with his new trainer telling him to play like Karpov, instead of Kasparov whom he admired, eventually led him astray and out of the chess world. He wasn't playing chess for himself anymore, but for other people and for reasons that he didn't care for, like a hockey player being told and nudged to play tennis instead. You wouldn't play the clarinet if you loved heavy metal would you?
This little story should have some value for us. It illustrates clearly the idea that chess can be played in many ways, approached from different perspectives and meaning derived from a plethora of lenses. If you love playing dashing attacks, probably 1.c4 isn't for you, at least not all the time. If you're in love with solid, safe positional chess, gambits shouldn't be the first thing to pop into your mind. You should play chess in a way that satisfies your creative ambitions and excites you, and in the long-run you'll not only enjoy playing and studying more, but the results should follow as well. Don't try to be something or someone you're not, be you. Try to emulate your favourite players and play chess in a way that gets your blood pumping. Cultivate your strengths and shore up your weaknesses.
Remember when you would come home and tell your mom about how you got rejected by Jennifer, the cute girl that used to sit beside you in history class? What did your mom always tell you? "Don't worry hunny, she doesn't care about your new Nike's, just be you, there's always another girl." And what did you think at the time? "Bullshit". Well girl or no girl, new Air Jordan sneakers or not, no one likes a faker, especially you. Maybe mom was right..
