I play chess when I get in the mood and enjoy it, but I'm not that good. I am just wondering if this is because I am the wrong type for this game. Not saying I can't become good, just wondering who the naturals are.
Which types would be good chess players?
- Tags
- types
tigerman11
21 - 39 of 39 Posts
You make a good point and I agree with it very much.
An interesting subject though would be methods the good chess players use to win. For example in my case as an INFJ I generally rely on my opponent to unwittingly tell me what his strategy and next move is, but I'm terrible at seeing all of my options on the board. This makes me very good at playing a game of attrition, but if I'm playing an INTJ/P those guys can be so hard to read and their strategy can be so intricate I have no hope of getting them.
Methods the good chessplayers use to win? Easy..."deliberate practice" of openings, middlegames, endings and especially tactics. 8 to 12 hours per day (5-6 days a week) should eventually do it after 5 years. You should reach master level with that type of dedicated consistency. I am INFJ, but my type has absolutely NOTHING to do with how high I can go...only consistency and the will to totally immerse in the world of chess. This is why young players starting around 5 have an advantage, they are not weighed down by the demands that are required of practical adults, who usually need to attend to careers, wives, children and other hobbies/social interactions. For myself, I am extremely fortunate in being able to study 24 hours a day if I choose (even at work), so there is really no excuse not to reach a high level in tournament play. It simply depends on whether or not the arduous study that is required is palatable over the long-term. Chess will give you nothing without total devotion over the long-term.
Joined
·
495 Posts
It's often said that NT's are the best chess players, and INTJ's even "see the world as a chess bord" according to some websites. I think the first statement is partly true, and the second one is false. I'm an INTJ and I hate chess, I'm bad at it, and I definitely don't see the world as a chess bord!
I have this INTP friend who's really good at chess, but he's actually really intelligent and... good at everything.
I have this INTP friend who's really good at chess, but he's actually really intelligent and... good at everything.
Joined
·
57 Posts
I'm most likely an ESTP maybe ENTP and I'm great at chess. I always beat my ENTJ brother and ESTJ dad. My ISFJ mom still doesn't even know what pawns are XD
I find chess extremely interesting, but I am absolute trash at it. I'm not sure whether it's just because I have no one to play with, or that I lose all confidence as soon as I lose one important piece and start losing more and more--whereas a good chess player would just keep playing. I feel like that's something a T would find no problem at all.
Joined
·
360 Posts
Defense and trap-setting are my strengths. But other than that, I suck. Once the opponent figures out my tricks, I'm usually out of business.
I would think that INTJs would be the best at chess, with ENTPs coming in a close second.
I would think that INTJs would be the best at chess, with ENTPs coming in a close second.
Joined
·
21,211 Posts
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1207/s15327752jpa4903_13
intuition correlates strongly in chess players, judging to a lesser extent
examples of famous chess players:
fabiano caruana, intp
garry kasparov, entj
maxime vachier-lagrave, intj
vassily ivanchuk, entp
magnus carlsen, istp
carlsen, btw, is the current world champion
intuition correlates strongly in chess players, judging to a lesser extent
examples of famous chess players:
fabiano caruana, intp
garry kasparov, entj
maxime vachier-lagrave, intj
vassily ivanchuk, entp
magnus carlsen, istp
carlsen, btw, is the current world champion
ENTJ and INTJ for setting up their board through counter measures.
ENTP and INTP for coming up with strange plays to offset their opponent.
ESTJ for applying methods and strategies.
Not sure about ESTP, also I think ESTJ would run into problems if the opponent knows all the strategies and methods and thus would get countered hard.
Joined
·
23,138 Posts
I'm alright at chess. I'm no genius, but I beat my dad (ESTJ) when I was 9. Beat my brother (INTJ) when I was 15 (he was 19). We went back and forth for a while before I lost interest. I did lose more than won against him though. The thing is that I'm good at just making a mess of the board at times and exploit mistakes. Some players think that their opponent won't make "crazy" moves in a game and therefore it's easy to exploit that. Toss in chaos and anyone can be thrown off their strategy.
I've played on and off again and have an ok record. I generally win more than I lose, but it depends on the opponent. I haven't played great players yet so I have no clue if I am actually really good or not.
I'm also very good at video games (especially sports and racing games) ... I don't "play" the game as much as I exploit the mechanics that exploits things in a game that are "broken" and can be exploited - to the point where once I get really good at something, my opponent tends to rage quit. My company set up an Xbox at work during off-season and it took me a while, but I got so good that everyone stopped playing that game.
h:
Joined
·
372 Posts
Anyone can study it; I would guess NT types are most likely to be drawn to it though.
However in my experience the young chess prodigy can be anywhere on the indicator.
However in my experience the young chess prodigy can be anywhere on the indicator.
Joined
·
2,497 Posts
I've noticed with games in general that different people have different strengths.
For chess:
Si: Memorizes openings and specific end-game patterns. If a game is 'solvable', Si will perform the best at it. The more open-ended the game is, the harder it is for Si.
Se: Is good at quickly responding to the unexpected. Se will excel at speedchess, although Se tends to fall off at in-depth analysis.
Ni: Is good at abstract patterns. I myself am great at the mid-game where it's mostly up to creativity and general patterns. Ni can't handle solvable game states but is really great at formulating general strategies for a game.
Ne: Can quickly go through a number of different options. Ne is great at thinking of inventive new solutions but can't stand familiar patterns.
Ti: Likes to go through lines of reasoning and evaluating them. Ti can't be hurried but exists apart from reality in a way. When anaylzing a game state in a vacuum, Ti is the best. Ti isn't great at formulating and reaching goals though, so it can miss the clearest path to a win sometimes.
Te: Is all about formulating goals and tactics. Te thinks short-term and will easily solve the situation once the goal is clear. Te can get tunnel-vision though, so if there's mutiple objectives Te can easily go for the wrong one in the situation.
Fi: Fi will be helphul in finding chess as a passion and sacrificing things to be the best at it. Fi is mostly used for motivation in chess. (although it can also be helpful in avoiding bad moves if you have an emotional response to them)
Fe: Will be helpful in connecting to other players and the chess community as a whole. It can also be a reason to play the game.
All the functions have their strengths and weaknesses when it comes to games. The trick is to use the parts of each function that fill in each other's weaknesses.
That said, there's a reason so many high-level chess players are INTPs. INTPs in particular have a way to disconnect themselves from the world, look at the board objectively, consider all alternitive moves and then keep everything structured in their heads.
Not to say that other types can't be just as good, but I do think INTPs in particular have a set of traits that fits well with a game like chess where so much is known but there's still so much room for creativity.
For chess:
Si: Memorizes openings and specific end-game patterns. If a game is 'solvable', Si will perform the best at it. The more open-ended the game is, the harder it is for Si.
Se: Is good at quickly responding to the unexpected. Se will excel at speedchess, although Se tends to fall off at in-depth analysis.
Ni: Is good at abstract patterns. I myself am great at the mid-game where it's mostly up to creativity and general patterns. Ni can't handle solvable game states but is really great at formulating general strategies for a game.
Ne: Can quickly go through a number of different options. Ne is great at thinking of inventive new solutions but can't stand familiar patterns.
Ti: Likes to go through lines of reasoning and evaluating them. Ti can't be hurried but exists apart from reality in a way. When anaylzing a game state in a vacuum, Ti is the best. Ti isn't great at formulating and reaching goals though, so it can miss the clearest path to a win sometimes.
Te: Is all about formulating goals and tactics. Te thinks short-term and will easily solve the situation once the goal is clear. Te can get tunnel-vision though, so if there's mutiple objectives Te can easily go for the wrong one in the situation.
Fi: Fi will be helphul in finding chess as a passion and sacrificing things to be the best at it. Fi is mostly used for motivation in chess. (although it can also be helpful in avoiding bad moves if you have an emotional response to them)
Fe: Will be helpful in connecting to other players and the chess community as a whole. It can also be a reason to play the game.
All the functions have their strengths and weaknesses when it comes to games. The trick is to use the parts of each function that fill in each other's weaknesses.
That said, there's a reason so many high-level chess players are INTPs. INTPs in particular have a way to disconnect themselves from the world, look at the board objectively, consider all alternitive moves and then keep everything structured in their heads.
Not to say that other types can't be just as good, but I do think INTPs in particular have a set of traits that fits well with a game like chess where so much is known but there's still so much room for creativity.
Joined
·
704 Posts
The ones who practice it.
Joined
·
2,286 Posts
As with most strategy games, those who think most in terms of abstract patterns are most likely to perform well, or at least have the ability to do so. And it's probably similar to the kind of people who perform well on IQ tests (on average INTx > INFx > ENxx > ISTx >...). Basically those who prefer intuition, above all, and introverts secondly.
Magnus Carlsen apparently said he was INTJ. I'm not aware of any other self-typings. I am not a chess player myself but I can certainly relate to the mindset although I'd guess it's INTJs who succeed the most on the world stage because they are probably more likely to put the intense, obsessive preparation into succeeding over the rest as compared to INTPs.
Magnus Carlsen apparently said he was INTJ. I'm not aware of any other self-typings. I am not a chess player myself but I can certainly relate to the mindset although I'd guess it's INTJs who succeed the most on the world stage because they are probably more likely to put the intense, obsessive preparation into succeeding over the rest as compared to INTPs.
21 - 39 of 39 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
