games chess

Games Chess

Divide and you will uncover!
Funny name, real hobbies
[ Sign up | Log in | Guest ] (beta)
tim_b ♡ 27 ( +1 | -1 )
GK and real boards. When I first came on GK, I re-enacted some games on real boards (hi-jacked the dining room table) because I felt and still feel that there is no better way to "read" a game.

Do most people do this? Is it important to see things in 3-D?


caro-kann ♡ 32 ( +1 | -1 )
Well, I guess that it may have some sort of effect (personally I don't feel much), but I prefer 2D games, probably because of no interference (i.e the birds-eye view) from other objects blocking my line of sight. It would seem that in OTB 3D games, I need the same bird's eye view as in 2D to perform well
ganstaman ♡ 67 ( +1 | -1 )
I prefer the 2-D look, I believe. Playing so much online and reading books (well, actually I think just 'book') and magazines will get you used to this view.

When I play live, I often stand up and feel I can see the board better that way. By getting over the board like this, I make it seem more 2D than 3D.

Still, changing boards or sets does make the whole position look different. It's probably good in a difficult position where you want to get a different perspective on the board to hopefully get you to see the right move (similar to how I will sometimes merely flip the board around to see it in a whole new light).
bucklehead ♡ 144 ( +1 | -1 )
We're geezers... The first thing that occurred to me when I read this post was to check the ages of the posters...our lead author tim_b is 34 and ganstaman is a sprightly 21. I'd be willing to wager that, the younger the chessplayer, the more likely he/she is to prefer a computer screen (or, at least, profess there's no difference).

These days, I've gotten lazy and started to analyze/move based solely on the 2D display. But since I'm 36, there's really no substitute for a physical board and physical pieces. It's what I grew up on, and making the shift to computer-based chess proved very difficult for me. I still find that my analysis is better if I can sit down and get my hands on the pieces--I have a very nice and heavy plastic set (and floppy mousepad board) for regular analysis, but if things get nasty I pull out my ebony pieces and onyx board. I'd keep the nice set out all the time, except for the fact that I have three small children, the littlest of whom would no doubt attempt to eat the chessmen. All at once, if he can manage it.

For this reason, there is no piece of chess gear I lust after more than the DGT eboard ( -> ). But as aforementioned, there are kids in the picture, and therefore no disposable income.

Let there be woodpushing!
wschmidt ♡ 72 ( +1 | -1 )
Well, I'm 57... and I really never got into chess seriously until the advent of chess engines and on-line play. A large part of the reason was I don't have the kind of chess memory that allows me to quickly reset pieces back to an original position after analyzing a variation. I either had to keep two boards going, have a diagram in a book, or only do a couple of moves into a line. Only when the "back" button could get me back quickly and easily did analysing stop being an exercise in frustration for me.

I still enjoy occasionally setting up a board to read over a game, but only for fun where I don't follow the variations too deeply. Otherwise that old frustration sets in again.
tim_b ♡ 69 ( +1 | -1 )
Thanks Thanks for the response, everyone, I am starting to acclimatise to 2-D now and understand the point about an unfettered birds eye view.

LOL, bucklehead ! I know what you mean – “Eek! Time to pull the big guns out!” No kids, but I’ve got a puppy to watch out for and people reclaiming the dining table! ;0)

wschmidt I see what you are saying about the limitations of bringing out the wood, but I can’t analyse deeply like that and replace the pieces faithfully either, it’s difficult to put my finger on it, but I feel there’s something about seeing the real board in 3-D that makes things a bit clearer on occasion.


bunta ♡ 35 ( +1 | -1 )
I know a guy I know a guy, one of my mates who plays so much playchess that when it comes to over the board games he stands up to try and get the 2D view and calculates from there. So 3D view seems a little bit wierd for him lol. Quite funny really, I'm trying to get used to both. I think everyone should, as it helps in all ways especially when your playing.
kansaspatzer ♡ 8 ( +1 | -1 )
I see on 3D much better, but I'm playing 40 games at once, I don't have time to set them all up.
doctor_knight ♡ 96 ( +1 | -1 )
I like both. But if you are an over the board player, you have to get used to the real board. If all you ever look at is a 2d board, when you finally play on a real board, you will very likely make mistakes because you are not used to the board. I have made a number of pathetic mistakes because I found it difficult to visualize the position on certain boards that I was not used to. Even the tournament boards caused errors for me at first (of course that's not the only reason for the mistakes but had a lot to do with some of the more obvious blunders). I don't play out my gameknot games on a 3d board, but I think it is good to go to the club at least once a weak and not necesarily just play games but do a lot of study and analysis with your friends on the tournament board. That way you get used to seeing a position on the real board. Now the tournament board is the best board for me to use I think. Especially with those nice heavy weight pieces that my friend has.
wote ♡ 44 ( +1 | -1 )
yes I think it's a good idea to see the game in 3D as you call it.Especially if you’re an over the board player, like in a club. I don’t always do this for GameKnot, but you should always do it when playing against your computer. It give you the same advantage, that the computer has. – being able to move the men around and look at possibilities. But ultimately you should be able to see the moves in your mind without any help of any kind. Play lots practise!!