RSS Feed
The primaries and Kasparov
7 May 2008 18:18 PM | Last modified: 15:26
For years, Kasparov has claimed that life imitates chess. Until now, I’ve had a difficult time believing this, if only because life was here before chess, and because chess is a model of life rather than the other way around.
by Arne Moll
I know, it’s a pretty childish argument, but for some reason this has been a good enough reason so far not to devour How life imitates chess like the rest of Kasparov’s books; I still have to read it.
This morning I saw the news: Barack Obama, despite a small loss in the state of Indiana, is “pushing ahead of Hillary Clinton in the American primaries for the presidency. In all analyses it’s stressed that Obama, numerically speaking, in fact cannot lose this race anymore. The pressure on Clinton to give up the fight is increasing. But Clinton doesn’t give up. According to the papers, she will keep on fighting until the bitter end.
What does this remind you of? I had to think of the chess player who, in a completely lost position and he knows it, still decides to play on. Hoping for a small mistake, but especially hoping the opponent will become reckless or, worse, annoyed by the fact that his opponent shows so little respect.
After all, resigning is the ultimate act of showing respect. I myself have experienced numerous times that the fatal cocktail of diminishing concentration, recklessness and annoyance have resulted in a loss even from a completely won position. There are even opening systems that seem to exploit this lack of respect: recall Tony Miles’ provocative 1…a6 against Karpov, or Hikaru Nakamura’s recent 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5!?
Of course, the moves are completely legal and nobody can complain on formal grounds, but you have to be an enormous formalist to deny that this psychological mechanism plays some kind of role in chess.
And now, apparently, Hillary Clinton tries the same tactics, and that’s definitely smarter than many people (non-chess players) will think. I have to admit I know too little of Barack Obama to be able to judge how he and his campaign team will react to this, and that is not my point either. Judging only on my own experience, I suspect Clinton’s chances to be bigger than people might think.
And so, if Clinton should win - against all odds - I’ll change my mind and read Kasparov’s book after all.
Loading ...
very nice article! I also think, when reading “how life imitates chess”, that it should be the other way around, but probably a few words with wise Kasparov would convince my simple mind of the contrary, haha.
As usual a very interesting article by Arne Moll.
I think you will end up reading Kasparov book “How life imitates chess”, because it is known by recent elections, that in America the worst candidate will end up winning always! In America every trick counts! That will say a lot about how people think and they will end up liking a fake smile and a fake speech. Kasparov once said: The number of players by country, will show is level of cultural development and maybe this is the reason why this kind of tricks in politics like 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5!? (but dubious in the end) will end up working in America!
Perhaps 1. e4 e5 2. Hh5!? (H = Hillary), a ‘Hillaryous’ move indeed.
1.e4 c5 2.Qh5! is also on the menu. This variation was also used once by Boris Becker against Garry Kasparov. The Boom Boom Attack. Nice work.
Well personally I doubt America is ready to have either a black president or a woman president… it´s a sad truth. I wouldn´t bet too much on a democratic era yet.
Nice thought (move)
Kasparov or Hillary to play now ?
“The number of players by country, will show is level of cultural development and maybe this is the reason why this kind of tricks in politics like 1.e4 e5 2.Qh5!? (but dubious in the end) will end up working in America!”
Sure, José, let Portugal be the model of political and cultural development for the United States.
Good piece.
Pundits have an ‘event horizon” as well. Nothing is over yet.