This was inspired by a similar thread at the Socionix forum:
- In conclusion, if you want to unravel the multitude of secrets of chess then don't begrudge the time.
- The public must come to see that chess is a violent sport. Chess is mental torture.
- My nature is that I have to excite myself with a big challenge.
- For inspiration I look to those great players who consistently found original ways to shock their opponents. None did this better than the eighth world champion, Mikhail Tal. The "Magician of Riga" rose to become champion in 1960 at age twenty-three and became famous for his aggressive, volatile play.
- This obligation to move can be a burden to a player without strategic vision.
- Having spent a lifetime analyzing the game of chess and comparing the capacity of computers to the capacity of the human brain, I've often wondered, where does our success come from? The answer is synthesis, the ability to combine creativity and calculation, art and science, into a whole that is much greater than the sum of its parts. Chess is a unique cognitive nexus, a place where art and science come together in the human mind, and are then refined and improved by experience.
- Chess helps you to concentrate, improve your logic. It teaches you to play by the rules and take responsibility for your actions, how to problem solve in an uncertain environment.
- It's not enough to be talented. It's not enough to work hard and to study late into the night. You must also become intimately aware of the methods you use to reach your decisions.
- Women, by their nature, are not exceptional chess players: they are not great fighters.
Here are links to his videos:
I also dug up a thread on this forum in the Alpha thread, where LII and LIE were suggested. Obviously, the world grand chess champion must be a logical type, right?
My versions are ESE or SEE with SLE a remote possibility. To me Kasparov seems like a direct, animated, physical, and extremely energetic person. For comparison with an NT type, look at the other man in the second interview with him (Stephen Cohen), who is intellect-centered, emotionally distant, and analytical. Kasparov, in contrast, is constantly moving around energetically, is full of passion, changes his facial expressions all the time, and seems hurried and a bit pushy.
In my opinion, the fact that Kasparov was a chess master doesn't say much about his type at all. His particular style in chess compared to other players of his level, however, does.