Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006
18:09 UTC
| |
MatPlus.Net  Forum General Playing ability and composing ability |
| |
|
|
|
|
You can only view this page!
| | | (1) Posted by Steven Dowd [Monday, Jun 15, 2009 19:20] | Playing ability and composing ability
The chess historian Jeremy Spinrad posted this in a newsgroups regarding my assertion that I did not know of an individual who would be considered a great composer could not at least be a good player as well (good= "not weak", my numerical definition using Elo for a good player would be about Elo 2000).
I would think being able to beat Steinitz one-on-one ever would qualify as not being a weak player, but the obituary he mentions is interesting. Perhaps one of our historians here has some commentary:
I found the story about a problem composer being truly terrible over-
the-board, but it should not be taken as definitive since I can also
give counter-evidence on the player's ability. However, the story is
in the New York Sun of Dec 28, 1890, as part of an obituary of the
noted composer Walter Grimshaw.
The obit 1st notes that Grimshaw "was a famous Yorkshire problemist,
but he was never known as a strong exponent of the game in actual play
over the board. There is not a soltary game of his on record which can
take rank among games which live as specimens of good play."
After praise for Grimshaw as a composer, chess promoter, and person,
the article notes that "when a great match was being played by masters
the moves which he suggested were as a rule notable for their
exceptional weakness. It is rather difficult to reconcile Grimshaw's
undoubted talent as a problem composer with his extraordinary mental
poverty in the matter of chess play proper."
A few games of Grimshaw appear in the British Chess Magazine. By far
his most famous game, however, is a matter of dispute. There was a
widely published 14 move win over Steinitz. Steinitz objected
vigorously to the game attribution, saying instead that he had lost
once to Grimshaw but not that game. In Steinitz' version he was
"tricked" by Grimshaw, who induced Steinitz to play without
introducing himself, then prolonged the game into a tedious affair
which Grimshaw finally won; he only introduced himself afterwards.
Grimshaw, Macdonnell, and another witness swore that the game Steinitz
lost to Grimshaw was played at Simpson's for Steinitz' usual shilling/
game and lasted no more than 45 minutes. Even Steinitz' version,
however, hardly makes it seem that Grimshaw could be as weak as the
obituary seems to imply. I could give more evidence on either side,
but I would have to conclude that the question of whether Walter
Grimshaw was an example of a great composer who was a terrible player
is open to debate.
(by Jeremy Spinrad, posted here by Steven Dowd)
| | | (2) Posted by Michael McDowell [Monday, Jun 15, 2009 20:34] |
Why should a top class composer be a good player? Some very good composers have simply not been interested in the game.
Alain White wrote in ‘Memories of my chessboard’: “People who know of my fondness for chess problems and chess books always laugh when I try to explain that I know nothing of the game – yet such remains the case. At college I played what few games I have ever tried my hand at, in the tournaments that were held periodically, but I was invariably knocked out in the very first rounds.”
| | | (3) Posted by Steven Dowd [Tuesday, Jun 16, 2009 02:57] |
Was White a good composer? :)
My view came from the generally held view that composers are poor players, and I postulated that it was more likely that a good composer is also a good player, with there being exceptions of course.
| | | (4) Posted by Ivan Antonov [Tuesday, Jun 16, 2009 07:36] |
Soviet composers Kasparian, Birbrager, An. Kuznetsov were masters in composing as well as in playing, Kostas Prentos is FIDE master in playing, and the list of strong-playing composers can be continued...
| | | (5) Posted by Mihail Croitor [Tuesday, Jun 16, 2009 08:01] |
Mikhail Botvinnik was not so bad endgame composer. And played chess too 8-)
| | | (6) Posted by Ivan Antonov [Tuesday, Jun 16, 2009 08:09] |
Yes, many grandmasters compose studies (Reti, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Averbakh, Nunn...)
| | | (7) Posted by Michael McDowell [Tuesday, Jun 16, 2009 08:41] |
Yes, White at his best was a very good composer.
I have never heard anyone express this "generally held view" that composers are poor players. As composition and the game are two different things I don't see why there should be a connection.
| | | (8) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Tuesday, Jun 16, 2009 10:35] |
It's obvious that abilities in composing *studies* and
OTB chess should be correlated (unless you peruse EGTB...
owch, not the rusty chainsaw!). But also obviously no
serious science study exists* (or I'd knew :-)
For n# the correlation should be weak if any. As you
all know, I have an ELO of ~2300 and I am a very wacky
player. Can't say that I ever saw a combination because
I recalled some 2# motif but it is conceivable an open
mind helps. (So even the composers of Circe longestmover
imitator selfmate might benefit here :-)
Hauke
* None will give a grant for that. And how to overcome
any selection bias?
| | | (9) Posted by Michael McDowell [Tuesday, Jun 16, 2009 11:03] |
It's not obvious at all.
T.R.Dawson composed numerous studies (enough for John Roycroft to publish a collection), but I have seen no evidence that he had the slightest interest in the game, in fact he wrote a very humorous article for the Chess Amateur about "the problemist's (i.e. his) visit to the London tournament of 1922".
| | | (10) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Tuesday, Jun 16, 2009 17:24] |
A good chess composer need not be a good chess player. By far. Example: myself. I know it might sound immodestly, but well, let's assume I am good composer. Nevertheless, I am poor player. No, more exactly, I am terrible player. In fact I have turned to chess composition after finding I cannot play well despite my admiration of chess game. I have tried over-the-board, correspondence, nothing worked. And then, perhaps because it is easier to be good among hundreds than among hundreds of thousands, I have fallen in love with composition. Good luck :-)
| | | (11) Posted by Steven Dowd [Wednesday, Jun 17, 2009 14:02] |
" As composition and the game are two different things I don't see why there should be a connection."
They are as much similar as they are different. Chess playing is a billards competition, chess composition is a billards trick shot competition, to use an analogy. You can't be a terrible billards player and shine in the trick shot competition, but there are some "only good" players who are quite great at trick shots.
I have no doubt that there is a connection, with some exceptions of course. Juraj thinks he is one, but did not give any indication of how "weak" he was.
The question of how good a player once was since many who take to composition give up the game competitively.
I think it is an interesting question, and worthy of more than mere dismissal. But then again, I have never held the majority view in anything......
| | | (12) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Wednesday, Jun 17, 2009 16:18] |
How weak? Let's say I have been playing far below 2000 ELO level, hundreds of points below, with about even results.
| | | (13) Posted by Steven Dowd [Thursday, Jun 18, 2009 00:09] |
I do have a friend who has an interesting theory; that there are people whose chess knowledge far outstrips their ability to perform as a player. It's interesting because unlike physical sports, it is a different lack of ability: nerves, physical health, many things influence performance in a time-limited environment no matter how much knowledge and ability the brain has.
Of course, in composing the clock does not tick as fast ; one can years to polish a composition whereas an individual game might last two hours...... I know with my various ailments there is no way I could play in an American Swiss with 4 games in a day; one debilitates me enough that I need several days of rest to recover.....
| | | (14) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Thursday, Jun 18, 2009 11:53] |
@Juraj: I wisely only claimed a *correlation* which isn't
falsified by stray counterexamples :-)
Verifying is another matter - e.g. I don't expect GMs
to compose more than the odd study since you simply don't
have the time for composing then. So the approach
"Compare the ELO average of all composers with that of
all chessplayers" is hopelessly biased alone for that
reason.
Hauke
| |
No more posts |
MatPlus.Net Forum General Playing ability and composing ability |
|
|
|
ISC 2024
