so this made me happy

i was again listening to josh waitzkin explain to me the intricacies of chess. we were looking at end game strategies and, in particular, end games where opponents are left with bishops of opposite color. this particular game was one where he eventually defeated this grandmaster. before he shows the end game, however, he usually shows important moves leading up to it and explains how the position got exactly how it got.

so, all this, but just really to say one thing. the first move he showed he says could look like a very logical move to some but a very difficult move to see for others. what's interesting is that it is difficult to see for grandmasters and not beginners. the reason he explains relates to what i was having difficulty accepting which i talked of in a recent post i think. waitzkin says that the reason a grandmaster might miss the move was because it was an unnatural move. instinctively, looking at the board, the move should not be made. all chess 'principles' go against making the move, in general. but the small intricacies in the particular piece setup made the move actually work.

i'm thinking it's kind of like any time someone makes a sacrafice. sure, chess principles wouldn't have you sacrafice your queen too often but of course based on the board many times it could be an advantage. the difference here was that first, if one made a sacrafice it is very obvious and the opponent would look around knowing that you did it for a good reason. but when josh made the above move i was talking about it was more subtle and the gandmaster's eyebrows may have stayed set low on his obviously wise eyes thinking that josh just perhaps wasn't as wise as he. so the grandmaster didn't look for why josh made the small mistake because it was probably the kind of mistake he saw all the time and that he realized usually was what separated him and his kind from those who weren't grandmasters. (should be noted, i don't know if josh was then considered a grandmaster. still, the main point holds, just not some of my animation of the scene).

so, the grandmaster was lost in his own book of principles which at once can make playing chess much easier while it lulls a player into false security.

josh was young and ambitious and kept an open eye.

(the way he describes the principles, with sidenotes on everything he says, makes me think of him as using lots of parentheses)