Are chess players good at being chess players?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PseuTonym
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m starting to like this option a lot:
It depends upon what good in reality is actually accomplished by playing chess.

However, there also seems to be something to the concern about the phrase “good at being” as something context-dependent.

Attention, poll participants:

You cannot add extra choices after you vote. You need to get all of the radio boxes that you want to select as marked before clicking the button that says you are Voting.
 
Sounds like you need to check off none of the above as well as a random selection of other ones.

Duly performed.
 
In my original post, it would have been more apt to say that grandmasters are good chessplayers, while capitalists are good businessmen.

You used an analogy of chess to imply that the outcome of capitalism isn’t explicitly biased in favor of the capitalists, as chess isn’t explicitly biased towards men. Of course, men dominate the ranks of the grandmasters due to some temperamental aspect that allows them to study more games and practice more to achieve higher rating or they may be better. Capitalists, unlike chess players, can influence the political process to favor laws that advance their collective class interests to generate more profit, such as support laws for lower capital gains taxes and weaker unions. Certainly, one could say that during the Lochner era, the regime them favored the capitalists over the workers.
 
Some chess players are good at playing chess, some are terrible, some are great.

It depends on many factors.

Judit and Susan Polgar are female grandmasters of chess.
 
Are all chess players chess players?
Yes. (Law of non-contradiction)
 
Lion_IRC said:
Are all chess players chess players?
Yes. (Law of non-contradiction)
Click to expand...
Duly noted. Note how do you get from that to an answer to the question of whether or not they are good at being chess players?
 
I’m not taking the poll because it makes no sense to me!! :confused:

Do you mean …do chess players concentrate & try to win?
 
None of the above, a good chess player is one that can see the opponents plan and counter it before being out maneuvered.
 
jaimeleglise said:
Some chess players are good at playing chess, some are terrible, some are great.

It depends on many factors.

Judit and Susan Polgar are female grandmasters of chess.
Click to expand...
Yup, chess players solved this problem by developing several Chess rating systems to estimate the strength of a player, based on their performance. They objectively tell you who is good, and who isn’t.
 
PseuTonym said:
Duly noted. Note how do you get from that to an answer to the question of whether or not they are good at being chess players?
Click to expand...
We wouldn’t know whether someone who is NOT a chess player is ‘good’ at being a chess player.
Therefore only chess players themselves can be good at “being chess players” Agreed?

That being the case, we have people who are either;
  1. Good at being chess players - because they already ARE chess players.
  2. Good at not being chess players because they ARE NOT chess players.
And the way we can help the second group to become a part of the first group is
  1. PK4…
 
StephieNorthCo said:
Sounds like you
Click to expand...
Did you intend for the word “you” in the above fragment of your message to refer to …
(a) Poll participants who are acceptable to StephieNorthCo
(b) Poll participants who are the best possible poll participants, in the idealized reality that is the best possible reality in the opinion of StephieNorthCo
(c) StephieNorthCo
(d) The thread creator, along with all somebodies who deserve acknowledgment for what experiences and education that made it possible for the thread to be created exactly as it was in reality created, plus some someones, and some One very special whose most appropriate name is open to serious controversy.
(e) The thread creator, emphatically singular, since personal responsibility must be owned, with no possible evasion of being solely responsible for what was created, regardless of various attempts to pretend that what was created might do some good
(f) The thread creator(s), singular or plural deliberately left unspecified, because cardinality or quantity is to be determined after first-hand experience and inspection
(g) None of the above
StephieNorthCo said:
… need to check off none of the above as well as a random selection of other ones.
Click to expand...
 
PseuTonym said:
Did you intend for the word “you” in the above fragment of your message to refer to …
(a) Poll participants who are acceptable to StephieNorthCo
(b) Poll participants who are the best possible poll participants, in the idealized reality that is the best possible reality in the opinion of StephieNorthCo
(c) StephieNorthCo
(d) The thread creator, along with all somebodies who deserve acknowledgment for what experiences and education that made it possible for the thread to be created exactly as it was in reality created, plus some someones, and some One very special whose most appropriate name is open to serious controversy.
(e) The thread creator, emphatically singular, since personal responsibility must be owned, with no possible evasion of being solely responsible for what was created, regardless of various attempts to pretend that what was created might do some good
(f) The thread creator(s), singular or plural deliberately left unspecified, because cardinality or quantity is to be determined after first-hand experience and inspection
(g) None of the above
Click to expand...
Grin. At least ( c OR d OR e) AND f.

Nice one.
Stephie
 
Latias said:
If you are chess player and was tortured in the Pasadena jailhouse, you are good chess player.
Click to expand...
This is a really, shocking appalling account. Although Bobby Fischer is somewhat a controversial person and he did refuse to talk at some points, he did not deserve this treatment. Sadly, this reflects badly on law enforcement officers who for the most part are heroes and great persons.

These people probably did not even know that Bobby was controversial. I would think that after they discovered the real robber and noted that the picture looked nothing like him, they would have let him go. Also, there is no excuse for the horrible condition of the cells.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top