Games
Adam http://www.livejournal.com/users/adamfletcher posted in his livejournal a bit about playing games and being too competitive and it got me thinking about why I like games so much.
I think that any game worth its salt has an inner beauty to it that can only be unlocked when two players, both accomplished at the game and of similar skill, play. To me that is the entire point of playing a game; those games that when the game is over you go, "That was beautiful." and even the person who lost appreciates what happened. Games where there is not enough strategic skill involved cause me to lose interest very quickly, even if I am good at the game and can win. I don't care about winning as much as I care about playing a good game. It is my downfall in 5 minute chess-- if I reach an interesting position or one where I have a marginal advantage I use up all my time trying to find the right plan and a good move rather than just moving so I don't lose on time. It is the same reason why I do not like playing against the horseshit tactics 5 minute chess players-- it is boring. You see the trick and defend, you don't see the trick and lose. It doesn't matter-- there is no exchange of ideas over the board, no positional battle. It's just cheap shots, accomplishing nothing.
I read somewhere that in Russia chess is referred to as, "Art in the form of a game." Hell yeah. I think that applies to many of the games I like to play in some way, though nowhere near as well as it applies to chess.
The other factor which is common through all of the games I like to play is self-discipline. I am not really a good chess player, but I managed to get my rating up to around 2000 which is Expert status, a ridiculous rating for someone of my skill. The way I won most of my games was through tenacity and sheer desire to win. I don't know openings and I suck at the endings too-- almost every game I would get myself into a worse middle game. But rather than be defeated by being behind and trying a couple of cheap shots before giving up, I would make it as difficult as possible for my opponent to win. I would sacrifice a pawn for some piece play, anything to make it so my opponent had to keep working for the win. The one thing I am good at is taking small advantages and getting the most that I can out of them-- positional chess. After 4 or 5 hours of pounding on me and not going down, hanging onto my little plusses in the position, creating small problem after small problem, my opponents would slip up and I would snatch the win away from them.
Even poker, which is a relatively simple game since you only have three choices every time it is your turn, has a deep complexity to it. There are a myriad of factors you have to include in your calculations before you decide what to do and the game basically comes down to whoever can pick the right decision more often wins. It's main draw is the monk-like self discpline you need to win. If you lose badly to someone playing sucker hands you have to just shrug it off and keep playing. If you think someone is bluffing and you don't have much, you have to throw in that raise, having the discipline and courage to trust yourself enough to put money on the line for it. You have to train yourself to be in the present moment when you are playing, keeping your mind on the game and not wandering off. And while you are doing all this you have to keep it off of your face.
This weekend I lost about $900 in an hour playing $20/40 at Foxwoods-- I am used to losing money at poker now and then, but so much in such a short amount of time dealt a blow to me. I was upset, frustrated, lost. That steel discipline in me crumbled. But the guy next to me, as he was raking in the $1600 pot he won on the river from me with a garbage hand, commented to me, "You never get upset." I just shrugged, not saying anything. I folded a few more hands for the look of it and then got up to sit somewhere else for a while, watch the rain and breathe until I regained my inner balance.
-rory
I think that any game worth its salt has an inner beauty to it that can only be unlocked when two players, both accomplished at the game and of similar skill, play. To me that is the entire point of playing a game; those games that when the game is over you go, "That was beautiful." and even the person who lost appreciates what happened. Games where there is not enough strategic skill involved cause me to lose interest very quickly, even if I am good at the game and can win. I don't care about winning as much as I care about playing a good game. It is my downfall in 5 minute chess-- if I reach an interesting position or one where I have a marginal advantage I use up all my time trying to find the right plan and a good move rather than just moving so I don't lose on time. It is the same reason why I do not like playing against the horseshit tactics 5 minute chess players-- it is boring. You see the trick and defend, you don't see the trick and lose. It doesn't matter-- there is no exchange of ideas over the board, no positional battle. It's just cheap shots, accomplishing nothing.
I read somewhere that in Russia chess is referred to as, "Art in the form of a game." Hell yeah. I think that applies to many of the games I like to play in some way, though nowhere near as well as it applies to chess.
The other factor which is common through all of the games I like to play is self-discipline. I am not really a good chess player, but I managed to get my rating up to around 2000 which is Expert status, a ridiculous rating for someone of my skill. The way I won most of my games was through tenacity and sheer desire to win. I don't know openings and I suck at the endings too-- almost every game I would get myself into a worse middle game. But rather than be defeated by being behind and trying a couple of cheap shots before giving up, I would make it as difficult as possible for my opponent to win. I would sacrifice a pawn for some piece play, anything to make it so my opponent had to keep working for the win. The one thing I am good at is taking small advantages and getting the most that I can out of them-- positional chess. After 4 or 5 hours of pounding on me and not going down, hanging onto my little plusses in the position, creating small problem after small problem, my opponents would slip up and I would snatch the win away from them.
Even poker, which is a relatively simple game since you only have three choices every time it is your turn, has a deep complexity to it. There are a myriad of factors you have to include in your calculations before you decide what to do and the game basically comes down to whoever can pick the right decision more often wins. It's main draw is the monk-like self discpline you need to win. If you lose badly to someone playing sucker hands you have to just shrug it off and keep playing. If you think someone is bluffing and you don't have much, you have to throw in that raise, having the discipline and courage to trust yourself enough to put money on the line for it. You have to train yourself to be in the present moment when you are playing, keeping your mind on the game and not wandering off. And while you are doing all this you have to keep it off of your face.
This weekend I lost about $900 in an hour playing $20/40 at Foxwoods-- I am used to losing money at poker now and then, but so much in such a short amount of time dealt a blow to me. I was upset, frustrated, lost. That steel discipline in me crumbled. But the guy next to me, as he was raking in the $1600 pot he won on the river from me with a garbage hand, commented to me, "You never get upset." I just shrugged, not saying anything. I folded a few more hands for the look of it and then got up to sit somewhere else for a while, watch the rain and breathe until I regained my inner balance.
-rory