Conversation with a Chess Player?

Cuemaster98

Cuemaster98

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I had a nice conversation with a Chess Player the other day and we were talking about how Chess or strategy of a Chess player is similar to pool. He said Chess is much more complicated strategically compared to pool where you really don't have much option either make the ball or play safe. I thought for a bit and kinda of agreed but I said pool is a much harder game because the move where you decide to play safe or shoot the ball is basically infinite and on top of that you have to execute your strategy where as chess you just need to move your piece and don't have to worry about other physical reality of the game such as condition of the table, the weather etc. Essentially, I told him chess is designed for robot and pool is for human. Lol...he didn't take that too well.

What do you guys think?
 
Strategy in pool is very nuanced and must account for creativity to come up with good shots in difficult situations and incomplete information in the form of the probability of execution. It's not so overt as "my opponent wants to do this, so I will do this, and he will counter with this" etc. It's more like I'm going to play safe in this way because even if my opponent can see the ball, it will be difficult to do much with it, where as going for the snooker will sell out if I fail to hook him or leave a jump.
 
Human vs. Human struggle

Yes Chess can be automated because the squares can be numbered but the choices are nearly infinite considering the pieces, what they can do and the size of the board. Computer can play Computers and go on for days. Yeah I'd say you touched a nerve. You minimized the importance of something he enjoys and thinks is awesome.Pool is more physical, chess is more mental. The closest thing to Chess on the table is One Pocket but you have to have the skills to execute exact positions of the cue ball.
 
While the combinations and permutations of move choices is very large in chess, in 8 ball (not 9) the shot AND how you choose (strentgh of it, english, etc) execute it result in an infinite series if options over the course of a match. Pool is more complex because you ha strategy AND execution to consider.
 
In terms of strategy, it's not even close. Chess is orders of magnitude more complex and nuanced than pool. That may not me obvious if you play chess at very low beginner level, but at the level of a typical club player it's already more complicated strategy wise than anything pool has to offer. The club player level would be similar to the typical pool player that's going to enter local tournaments, Sunday 9-ball....that kind of thing. The casual, but serious, player.

Obviously, pool is generally more physical. Seems dumb to try and compare the two to figure out which is overall more difficult since they have nothing at all in common. That said, given how few elite players there are for both, they both seem to be pretty difficult to master.
 
I play both pool and chess and have for a good 50 years. In pool you have to have physical skills to execute your mental plan. In chess you just need to pick up and move a small piece. (Remember there are touch fouls also in chess) While the mental game is a huge part of pool, the mental game in chess is the only game. Pool is way harder to play because of the physical skills needed. But to be able to mate an opponent, even in class A or master level competition, is mentally more difficult than anything a pool player thinks about during a game. I think you should appreciate that both skills have their difficulties, and not which is harder.
 
maplecap said:
I play both pool and chess and have for a good 50 years. In pool you have to have physical skills to execute your mental plan. In chess you just need to pick up and move a small piece. (Remember there are touch fouls also in chess) While the mental game is a huge part of pool, the mental game in chess is the only game. Pool is way harder to play because of the physical skills needed. But to be able to mate an opponent, even in class A or master level competition, is mentally more difficult than anything a pool player thinks about during a game. I think you should appreciate that both skills have their difficulties, and not which is harder.
Click to expand...



Perfect.

I play both as well.


:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:



.
 
A lot of people who watch the UFC don't understand the ground game but it is very much like chess in that you want to stay ahead of your opponent, always having him reacting to your moves while you inch closer and closer to check mate.And that is one of the reasons why the game is so great imo. You want to stay ahead of your opponent but if his reaction is a counter that puts him into an attack causing you to defend then he gets ahead. Each position has numerous moves to choose from so you are left guessing at his game if you are not familiar with it and the flow goes back and forth with attacks defenses counter attacks etc. way more than stand up fighting.

I have time stamped this video below. Notice how Kron has successfully moved into position to where he is a threat for at least 3 attacks. He could advance to mount, he could choke with the gi, or he could attack the arm like he chose to do. Sousa was way behind here and left to defend against three possible attacks and while trying to defend the mount with his leg and the choke with his arms he gave up his arm.
https://youtu.be/LWdibPBhwcM?t=353


To me Chess is more complex in its strategy to control the game like Jiu-jitsu is in that you can get way ahead of your opponent with a wider selection of choices on every move while pool is more physical like jiu-jitsu in that you must develop the physical ability to perform what you want to do.

P.S. One pocket is more like chess too though.
 
Last edited:
chess vs pool

Cuemaster98 said:
I had a nice conversation with a Chess Player the other day and we were talking about how Chess or strategy of a Chess player is similar to pool. He said Chess is much more complicated strategically compared to pool where you really don't have much option either make the ball or play safe. I thought for a bit and kinda of agreed but I said pool is a much harder game because the move where you decide to play safe or shoot the ball is basically infinite and on top of that you have to execute your strategy where as chess you just need to move your piece and don't have to worry about other physical reality of the game such as condition of the table, the weather etc. Essentially, I told him chess is designed for robot and pool is for human. Lol...he didn't take that too well.

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

CHESS:
Yesterday was game 10 of the chess world championship. Magnus Carlsen, the defending champion, had to win either this game or possibly game 12 to stay alive and force a playoff. He is playing an opponent that defends really well, and in fact the first 7 games of this series ended in draws with Magnus tying in positions where he had managed advantages because his opponent just wouldn't give up the W.

So here we are, a 6+ hour game with the two of them playing a materially even position, but one in which Magnus controlled the pawn breaks. He had the initiative. And he used it to pile up pressure on both sides of the board, ultimately putting his opponent in zugzwang, meaning he had to make a move that would hurt his position and give up control on one of those breaks. He got his attack in, and then slowly broke his opponents position. Finding a way to force a win when you needed to against a machine of a defender is second to none.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdR9vIvaUTs

POOL:
Pool is an incredibly difficult game, and one of my favorites. It is mentally challenging, there are many doubts and demons to fight in order for your balls to drop. In fact, I even consider pool partly a religion. I think that the balls only drop if you're in the right state of mind, so it's almost like pool is a form of meditation/prayer, only one in which you actually have a thermometer to measure how well you're doing.

The rhythm you develop in straight pool that allows you to flow through rack after rack of ticklish situations, edging a ball to the break area, or going four rails in 9 ball crossing the line to get perfect shape, or breaking into one part of a cluster to create something from nothing. All simply awesome. And playing someone in an all day battle, fighting for any edge, waiting to see who will buckle. All amazing situations.

COMPARISON:
Personally I think chess is harder but I enjoy pool a little bit more. My 6 year old plays both. I think if she devoted her life to pool at this time she could potentially become elite. But if she devoted her life to chess, well, I don't know that she could become a top GM. And the amount of work it takes to become that strong at chess is incredible, it's like getting multiple PHDs, there's a lot of study which I could NEVER get through. So I think chess is very, very difficult. But pool is more fun to me. You get to move around, there is such a good feeling from executing a series of near impossible shots back to back, and getting in the zone where they almost look routine.

No, I think it's unfair to either game to compare them. They are both two great, great games. In the end, by the time you get to the top level of anything it becomes beautiful and prohibitively difficult!
 
Duc,

I think you made him feel insulted. Not unlike a banger getting unsolicitated advice from a higher skilled player on safety and strategy. Perhaps, a better way next time is please make me understand the complexity of chess.

Then again, ignorance maybe bliss.

-Henry
 
Cuemaster98 said:
I had a nice conversation with a Chess Player the other day and we were talking about how Chess or strategy of a Chess player is similar to pool. He said Chess is much more complicated strategically compared to pool where you really don't have much option either make the ball or play safe. I thought for a bit and kinda of agreed but I said pool is a much harder game because the move where you decide to play safe or shoot the ball is basically infinite and on top of that you have to execute your strategy where as chess you just need to move your piece and don't have to worry about other physical reality of the game such as condition of the table, the weather etc. Essentially, I told him chess is designed for robot and pool is for human. Lol...he didn't take that too well.

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

I played street chess for a few years....for money...I was untrained, but I could beat a lot
of players from chess clubs or those who played on chess teams in college.
I quit chess when I took up backgammon...seemed to satisfy the same urge, but moore
action.
I was good enough to beat a grand master once...but I hustled him, and he got careless
the first game. I made the mistake of playing him the second game where he gave me a
little respect....:eek:....we only played for a drink.

...not bragging, just giving a little background to voice my opinion...

I feel the number of moves in chess to be over respected....it's blind math.
A lot of those possible moves are ridiculous...looking at the winning moves pares the
figure down immensely.

Conversely, at pool, especially one-pocket, the game is more complicated than is
apparent at first look.
Table conditions, even weather conditions, and you and your opponent's style make
the game far more complicated than just looking at shot options.
Hell, some days you have to play different just on how you feel.

I think what chess, boxing, and pool have in common is that winning players look for
winning moves....not getting too hung up in abstract thinking.
At pool, the WINNING shot is superior thinking to the CORRECT shot.

Buddy Hall's method..."How do I win from here?" works at all these disciplines.
 
pt109 said:
I played street chess for a few years....for money...I was untrained, but I could beat a lot
of players from chess clubs or those who played on chess teams in college.
I quit chess when I took up backgammon...seemed to satisfy the same urge, but moore
action.
I was good enough to beat a grand master once...but I hustled him, and he got careless
the first game. I made the mistake of playing him the second game where he gave me a
little respect....:eek:....we only played for a drink.

...not bragging, just giving a little background to voice my opinion...

I feel the number of moves in chess to be over respected....it's blind math.
A lot of those possible moves are ridiculous...looking at the winning moves pares the
figure down immensely.

Conversely, at pool, especially one-pocket, the game is more complicated than is
apparent at first look.
Table conditions, even weather conditions, and you and your opponent's style make
the game far more complicated than just looking at shot options.
Hell, some days you have to play different just on how you feel.

I think what chess, boxing, and pool have in common is that winning players look for
winning moves....not getting too hung up in abstract thinking.
At pool, the WINNING shot is superior thinking to the CORRECT shot.

Buddy Hall's method..."How do I win from here?" works at all these disciplines.
Click to expand...

"You must spread reputation around before giving it to PT109 again."
 
Arete said:
"You must spread reputation around before giving it to PT109 again."
Click to expand...

snucar said:
+1

I get that too, a lot. I'm starting to think the AZB system doesn't like PT109 that much.
Click to expand...

Thanx, gentlemen....sometimes I stick my ass out....
....kinda nice when it doesn't get knocked off....:eek:

So here's a greenie for you both...I would suggest holding a pitching wedge short...
...3/4 backswing....hit down through the ball.

IMG_2532.JPG
 
I stopped playing chess in middle school, from there on I couldn't find people that wanted to play, I didn't seek them out, but I always enjoyed it very much

The fact that is so deep with mental strategy is very intriguing to me,

I wouldn't try to compare them, I don't need to feel superior by saying what I do is harder than what you do


I can appreciate different games for what they are without needing validation
 
Last edited:
I know how all the chess pieces move but I dont "know how" to play chess if you know what I mean. Are there not many different templates you can use to play chess based on what your opponent is trying to do? I think as far as the thinking component that pool does not even come close to chess but the combined skill set may make pool a little more difficult, there are people I played 5 years ago and they are no better today. When you shoot against an opponent you have a pretty good idea what his strategy is and you can usually see their weakness pretty quick, where in chess I would think this is pretty difficult.
 
fastone371 said:
I know how all the chess pieces move but I dont "know how" to play chess if you know what I mean. Are there not many different templates you can use to play chess based on what your opponent is trying to do? I think as far as the thinking component that pool does not even come close to chess but the combined skill set may make pool a little more difficult, there are people I played 5 years ago and they are no better today. When you shoot against an opponent you have a pretty good idea what his strategy is and you can usually see their weakness pretty quick, where in chess I would think this is pretty difficult.
Click to expand...

In chess, you have "opening theory", which is essentially a bunch of well known moves and positions, along with all of the traps and opportunities that go along with it, and that's how you typically start your game. There are also all of the ideas that go with the position...are you going for a win? A draw? With your pieces in place out of the opening, what sorts of ideas are you trying to push? King side attack? Pawn storm? Closed positions where you slowly try to strangle your opponent? Basically, it's just this gigantic database of games, dating back hundreds of years, along with the players that played them, and the outcomes. It's not unusual for grandmasters to have positions prepared 15 or 20 moves into a particular variation.

In the end game, there is, again, a lot of theory. It can be very technical because small advantages, like being a pawn up for example, translate into a decisive advantage in the end game. It's extremely technical because when there are few pieces on the board, everyone knows all of the theory and they all calculate very well, so you have to be extremely precise. This is where you see players at the top level resigning, or offering a draw, when it's hard to understand what's so bad or drawing about the position. But at higher levels, once you reach a certain kind of position, everyone knows the theory and techniques and you can definitively say "this game is lost", even if it would theoretically take another 50 moves to prove it.

And then you have the middle game. This is where things get interesting because there is really very little theory available for it. You wouldn't think it, but there are so many chess positions available that you have to look at things like pawn structure, piece development and things like this to try and evaluate the position. This is traditionally where computers have been very poor, though they've gotten so good these days that even a chess engine running on your phone can play at grandmaster levels, and it's accepted as fact that reasonable engines running on a normal computer are so strong that the human player simply doesn't have a chance anymore.

Young grandmasters today have grown up with computer analysis, and a funny thing has started happening. They're starting to play like computers, especially guys like Caruana. They find the very deep ideas in a position. The computer does it by brute force. The human players are starting to get good at combining freakish calculating skills with this new computer guided intuition. It's really pretty amazing to watch a game where the computer recommends a move on the analysis board, the player actually plays the move, and all the grandmasters doing commentary can't figure out for the life of them exactly what the idea behind the move is.
 
Last edited:
Cuemaster98 said:
I had a nice conversation with a Chess Player the other day and we were talking about how Chess or strategy of a Chess player is similar to pool. He said Chess is much more complicated strategically compared to pool where you really don't have much option either make the ball or play safe. I thought for a bit and kinda of agreed but I said pool is a much harder game because the move where you decide to play safe or shoot the ball is basically infinite and on top of that you have to execute your strategy where as chess you just need to move your piece and don't have to worry about other physical reality of the game such as condition of the table, the weather etc. Essentially, I told him chess is designed for robot and pool is for human. Lol...he didn't take that too well.

What do you guys think?
Click to expand...

You are both right and wrong.
Pool is not that simple , and chess is not that difficult.
Most chess moves are basic in nature, developing , protecting pieces and squares and trying to gain an advantage in one area , without giving one up in another.
A lot of moves are "natural", meaning , it is fairly obvious to a player of any strength to know what his next move should be.
There may be 2 or 3 candidate moves but usually there is only one or 2 obvious ones based on your style of play, "aggressive attacker, or laid back counterpuncher.
Sometimes between very good players , the first 20 or 30 moves are "book", they play them automatically from memory against the opponents well known opening .

The added element of performing the shot in pool vs just moving a 1 oz chess piece.
It may not seem a big factor until you become limited in your mobility, even at the worst times of being ill, I could play chess.
For several years I could neither stand up for very long or use my shoulders for more than 1 shot before I was in excruciating pain, hard to play like that!
 
On Chess one makes smart moves within rules.
On pool one can make any move he can execute within rules. So better poolplayer have more moves available. Could be also smart player does not to execute harder moves.
 
I was really into chess when I was in high school, back in the early 60's. I joined the school chess club, and bought Fred Reinfeld's Queen Pawn Openings. My wife has it packed away somewhere. I played a bit in the Navy, then kind of lost interest.

I went to pick it up again and by then they had changed the notation. I couldn't get into it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top