Chess principles as applied in war & other matters.

reedak · Jun 8, 2012

China is worried about the US shifting 60 percent of its warships to the Pacific by 2020 and has asked Washington to respect its interests in the region. US officials announced the plan at a security summit in Singapore.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Liu Weimin said: “All parties should make efforts to safeguard and promote peace, stability and development in the Asia Pacific”, adding that China sees the US’ plan of deploying more ships and giving prominence to a military and security agenda as “untimely.”

It is absolutely useless for China to protest to the US over any hostile move or to urge the US "to respect its interests in the region". Calling the latest hostile move as “untimely” will only psychologically convince the US that its move is really "timely" instead.

All chess players know that they cannot tell their opponents what moves to make, or to protest to their opponents over whatever hostile moves they have made.

In a game of chess, as in war and other matters, you can't tell your opponent what to do but to wait for your opponent's move and respond appropriately.

Secondly, as in a game of chess, once an individual or a country makes a fatal mistake or a series of minor mistakes, the result can be disastrous as shown in the famous Opera House Game (1858) by America's unofficial chess champion, Morphy.

In 1858, Paul Morphy was in the midst of his whirlwind tour of Europe, during which he would defeat nearly all of the greatest European players of the day. However, his most famous game came against two amateurs working together against the American.

The game in question happened during an opera (many say it was The Barber of Seville), attended by Morphy along with Duke Karl and Count Isouard in Paris. Morphy had White, with the consultants taking Black.

Morphy managed to checkmate his opponents in 17 moves after they made a series of mistakes.

China can counter the US hostile move by forging closer military ties with Russia and making its own "pivotal shift" to the US backyard of South America.

China lashes back at US plans in Asia Pacific | Asia | DW.DE | 04.06.2012

US naval fleet to shift towards Pacific - Yahoo!7

China: US shift of naval forces 'must be watched closely' - Yahoo! News Philippines

Every Move Explained - Morphy's Opera House Game - Every Move of a Chess Game Explained

Paul Morphy vs Duke Karl / Count Isouard (1858) "A Night at the Opera"

Opera Game

Paul Morphy - Profile of Chess Player Paul Morphy

LaughAtTheWorld · Jun 8, 2012

Trying to say that war is similar to chess is bull****.
If chess has about a million pawns, tens of thousands of knights and such, and if the landscape changes about every 5 minutes, with no stable route of attacking, and random pieces dying every 5 seconds, then it will become more similar

rathi · Jun 8, 2012

The metaphor is hideously flawed. Chess is so simple that it can be played by a computer, war is impossibly complicated. China for instance maybe militarily weaker at the moment, but has a technological and economic growth rate massively in their favor. The sensible course of action is avoid a potentially dangerous conflict and simply wait to gain the upper hand. The primary danger is some idiot will start a war based on emotional nonsense, as unlike chess, pawns have a mind of their own in real life.

reedak · Jun 10, 2012

Proud South Korean said:
Trying to say that war is similar to chess is bull****.
If chess has about a million pawns, tens of thousands of knights and such, and if the landscape changes about every 5 minutes, with no stable route of attacking, and random pieces dying every 5 seconds, then it will become more similar

Chess was often used as a way of teaching war strategy in the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance. Please refer to the article headlined "The passion to play chess" at Chess Learning Resources

However, there is a Chinese saying, "Talking about military affairs on paper" which means that "trying to say that war is similar to chess is bull****". Of course, if you want something that is 100 per cent similar to war, you would have no choice but to turn to war instead.

Taking another example of "talking about military affairs on paper", Sun Zi's The Art of War is listed on the US Marine Corps Professional Reading Program (formerly known as the Commandant's Reading List). You may also asked: "Since Sun Zi belonged to the ancient era of the swords, bows and arrows, isn't it foolish and irrelevant for the US military to study his Art of War in the modern era of nuclear missiles and bombs?

Please take note of the title of my thread which focuses on the application of "chess principles".

As pointed out by the writer of the article headlined "The Origins of Chess" at History chess is "a struggle of mind and will", hence its principles (including tactics and strategy), like Sun Zi's Art of War, are applicable to war and other matters regardless of time and situation.

It is obvious that you have underestimated the complexity of chess when you said "if chess has about a million pawns, tens of thousands of knights and such...". After each player makes just one move there 400 different positions possible! After 2 moves – about 72,000 positions possible. After 3 moves – 9 million. After 4 moves – 288 billion positions can arise on a chess board. Please refer to How complex is the game of chess?

If you are still not convinced about the complexity of chess, here is an ancient tale cum mathematical riddle which shows that even the simple chessboard is more complex than you would have thought at first:

"When the creator of the game of chess (in some tellings an ancient Indian mathematician, in others a legendary dravida vellalar named Sessa or Sissa) showed his invention to the ruler of the country, the ruler was so pleased that he gave the inventor the right to name his prize for the invention. The man, who was very wise, asked the king this: that for the first square of the chessboard, he would receive one grain of wheat (in some tellings, rice), two for the second one, four on the third one, and so forth, doubling the amount each time. The ruler, arithmetically unaware, quickly accepted the inventor's offer, even getting offended by his perceived notion that the inventor was asking for such a low price, and ordered the treasurer to count and hand over the wheat to the inventor. However, when the treasurer took more than a week to calculate the amount of wheat, the ruler asked him for a reason for his tardiness. The treasurer then gave him the result of the calculation, and explained that it would take more than all the assets of the kingdom to give the inventor the reward.....

Well, I leave the result of the calculation to you.

In conclusion, here is a quote by US psychologist Karl Meninger (1893-1990):

"In poker there is, of course, no attempt to disguise the aggressive element. Poker is a fighting game, a game in which each player tries to get the better of every other player and does so by fair means or foul so long as he obeys the rules of the game. He may bluff or lie about his own strength, the object of the game being either to frighten the other players into believing that he has greater strength or else to prove it. Chess is a more highly symbolic game, but the aggressions are therefore even more frankly represented in the play. It probably began as a war game; that is, the representation of a miniature battle between the forces of two kingdoms."

Quotations from Karl Meninger

Karl Menninger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://www.digplanet.com/wiki/Sun_Tzu

http://www.viweb.freehosting.net/TanCN.htm

reedak · Jun 10, 2012

rathi said:
The metaphor is hideously flawed. Chess is so simple that it can be played by a computer, war is impossibly complicated......

Is chess so simple? Then I must be debating with the world chess champion or a chess grandmaster. If you still insist that "chess is so simple", please refer to my previous posting about the complexity of chess. After each player makes 4 moves, 288 billion positions can arise on a chessboard.

Please take note that war scenarios can be simulated by a computer. Is war so simple too?

Military simulation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wargaming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Board game - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

rathi said:
.....China for instance maybe militarily weaker at the moment, but has a technological and economic growth rate massively in their favor. The sensible course of action is avoid a potentially dangerous conflict and simply wait to gain the upper hand. The primary danger is some idiot will start a war based on emotional nonsense, as unlike chess, pawns have a mind of their own in real life.

Quite true. I agree with you that "the sensible course of action (for China) is avoid a potentially dangerous conflict", but not "simply wait to gain the upper hand". As a Chinese saying goes, "While enjoying the fruit of peace, beware of any looming disaster", China should be alert to any hostile action taken by the US and take precautionary measures to counter it.

If China is contented with its "technological and economic growth rate massively in their favour", does nothing and simply wait to gain your so-called "upper hand", it will end up like the daydreaming farmer "waiting for a rabbit" in the Chinese rabbit folk tale .

Once the US completes weaving its crescent-shape network of containment all the way from Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Vietnam, Australia, India to Afghanistan along the eastern, southern and western flanks of China, what China finds at the end of its waiting will not be a fat white rabbit but a big bad wolf at its gate.

Please also take note of another chess principle that can be applied to this scenario: All chess players know very well that if they fail to maintain the initiative, their advantage on the chessboard will dissipate very fast.

In conclusion, I wish to emphasize the points of my thread.

1. The title of my thread focuses on "chess principles" (including tactics and strategy) which can be applied to war and other matters regardless of time and situation, just like Sun Zi's Art of War.

2. My first posting in this thread carries my view that China should stop its old and useless practice (since the 1950s) of protesting to the US anytime it makes a hostile move such as selling arms to Taiwan, meeting with the Lama or freeing the Uighur prisoners caught in Afghanistan.

Instead of telling the US to respect its core interests in the region or telling the US what to do or what not to do, China should think of some innovative ways to counter the US containment. In this respect, I think China should forge closer military ties with Russia and make its own "pivotal shift" to South America.

A Chinese Rabbit Folk Tale

rathi said:
He'd be right at home on some ancient battlefield, swinging an axe into somebody's face.

If I were the guy, I prefer to checkmate somebody on the chessboard rather than getting the death sentence later on.

In conclusion, here is a quote by an English poet and novelist, Mortimer Collins (29 June 1827 – 28 July 1876):

"There are two classes of men; those who are content to yield to circumstances and who play whist; those who aim to control
circumstances, and who play Chess."

Mortimer Collins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MoSurveyor · Jun 10, 2012

reedak said:
Is chess so simple? Then I must be debating with the world chess champion or a chess grandmaster. If you still insist that "chess is so simple", please refer to my previous posting about the complexity of chess. After each player makes 4 moves, 288 billion positions can arise on a chessboard.

Please take note that war scenarios can be simulated by a computer. Is war so simple too?

Military simulation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wargaming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Board game - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Given this part of your post I have to ask: Excluding chess, what (tabletop) wargames have you played?

reedak · Jun 10, 2012

MoSurveyor said:
Given this part of your post I have to ask: Excluding chess, what (tabletop) wargames have you played?

Besides chess, I play draughts and xiangqi (Chinese chess).

If you consider xiangqi as a type of chess, my answer is: none at all.

Draughts

Xiangqi: Chinese Chess

cpwill · Jun 10, 2012

"All War is Deception"

Reedak. Consider the above, and ask yourself if you are taking Chinese protestations at face value.

Matt Foley · Jun 10, 2012

reedak said:
China is worried about the US shifting 60 percent of its warships to the Pacific by 2020

lol, those are some slowass ships.

LaughAtTheWorld · Jun 10, 2012

reedak said:
Chess was often used as a way of teaching war strategy in the Middle Ages and during the Renaissance. Please refer to the article headlined "The passion to play chess" at Chess Learning Resources

However, there is a Chinese saying, "Talking about military affairs on paper" which means that "trying to say that war is similar to chess is bull****". Of course, if you want something that is 100 per cent similar to war, you would have no choice but to turn to war instead.

Taking another example of "talking about military affairs on paper", Sun Zi's The Art of War is listed on the US Marine Corps Professional Reading Program (formerly known as the Commandant's Reading List). You may also asked: "Since Sun Zi belonged to the ancient era of the swords, bows and arrows, isn't it foolish and irrelevant for the US military to study his Art of War in the modern era of nuclear missiles and bombs?

Please take note of the title of my thread which focuses on the application of "chess principles".

As pointed out by the writer of the article headlined "The Origins of Chess" at History chess is "a struggle of mind and will", hence its principles (including tactics and strategy), like Sun Zi's Art of War, are applicable to war and other matters regardless of time and situation.

It is obvious that you have underestimated the complexity of chess when you said "if chess has about a million pawns, tens of thousands of knights and such...". After each player makes just one move there 400 different positions possible! After 2 moves – about 72,000 positions possible. After 3 moves – 9 million. After 4 moves – 288 billion positions can arise on a chess board. Please refer to How complex is the game of chess?

If you are still not convinced about the complexity of chess, here is an ancient tale cum mathematical riddle which shows that even the simple chessboard is more complex than you would have thought at first:

"When the creator of the game of chess (in some tellings an ancient Indian mathematician, in others a legendary dravida vellalar named Sessa or Sissa) showed his invention to the ruler of the country, the ruler was so pleased that he gave the inventor the right to name his prize for the invention. The man, who was very wise, asked the king this: that for the first square of the chessboard, he would receive one grain of wheat (in some tellings, rice), two for the second one, four on the third one, and so forth, doubling the amount each time. The ruler, arithmetically unaware, quickly accepted the inventor's offer, even getting offended by his perceived notion that the inventor was asking for such a low price, and ordered the treasurer to count and hand over the wheat to the inventor. However, when the treasurer took more than a week to calculate the amount of wheat, the ruler asked him for a reason for his tardiness. The treasurer then gave him the result of the calculation, and explained that it would take more than all the assets of the kingdom to give the inventor the reward.....

Well, I leave the result of the calculation to you.

In conclusion, here is a quote by US psychologist Karl Meninger (1893-1990):

"In poker there is, of course, no attempt to disguise the aggressive element. Poker is a fighting game, a game in which each player tries to get the better of every other player and does so by fair means or foul so long as he obeys the rules of the game. He may bluff or lie about his own strength, the object of the game being either to frighten the other players into believing that he has greater strength or else to prove it. Chess is a more highly symbolic game, but the aggressions are therefore even more frankly represented in the play. It probably began as a war game; that is, the representation of a miniature battle between the forces of two kingdoms."

Quotations from Karl Meninger

Karl Menninger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Learn and talk about Sun Tzu, Ancient Chinese military writers, Chinese non-fiction writers, Chinese philosophers, Good articles

Tan Chin Nam - Master in business and chess

Modern warfare is very different from warfare during the medieval ages or the Renaissance you understand.
Chess is complex yes, but my point is that war is infinitely more complex than chess. Chess is a game of mathematics and chances. War involves humans, which are so unlike the unique perfection of numbers and math, and as you mentioned, things aren't simple as they appear on paper

Oozlefinch · Jun 10, 2012

reedak said:
China is worried about the US shifting 60 percent of its warships to the Pacific by 2020 and has asked Washington to respect its interests in the region. US officials announced the plan at a security summit in Singapore.

The Pacific Ocean is after all the largest ocean in the world. Honestly, I would be surprised that we do not already have most of our ships over there. If I have to guess, I would say that with the now reduced tensions in the Med after the government change in Lybia, it is decided that less of a presence is needed there so they changed home ports.

If China sees that as a threat, that is their problem. They should really get a grip and realize that even if the entire US Navy was in the Pacific, we still could not be a serious threat to them.

However, we would be a threat to their attempts to gain influence over other nations through intimidation.

Matt Foley · Jun 10, 2012

I guess the Panama Canal failed in it's mission.

Oozlefinch · Jun 10, 2012

Matt Foley said:
I guess the Panama Canal failed in it's mission.

What does that have to do with anything?

Look, the Panama Canal was never really a part of the US Defense plans. However, it is of strategic importance for supply lines.

After all, what is the most powerfull arm of the US Navy? Why, it's the Aircraft Carrier of course. A vessel that is currently impossible to transit the canal because it is just way to big.

And other then for the transfering of ships from one fleet to another, it has never really been used by the US military for over 60 years. It is simply to vulnerable of a point, all ships basically crawl through it, and a single missile could bring down the entire system. And ever since the planned attack with the I-400 was learned, the Navy realized it and slowly reduced it's dependence upon it. And especially since 1999 when it was turned over to Panama, it is even less important then ever. After all, only a fool would place something of "vital strategic" value in the hands of a foreign power. By then, the canal was largely a footnote to the military.

I think the last time the Panama Canal was of major defense or strategic importance was World War II. And even then, it was mostly for transfering ships from East to West, or the reverse. But for the movement of "fleets", no. The canal is good for sending a cruiser and a few destroyers, but nothing like a fleet, even during WWII.

USS New Jersey transiting the Gatun Cut

USS New Jersey, transiting the Mina Flores locks, enroute from California to New Jersey for use as a museum ship.

Divine_Wind · Jun 10, 2012

Chess is a great teaching tool for strategy, but the world is much more complicated. The China and South China Sea issue isn't going to go away. The problem I see with it is that China is also the US bank to the tune of $139 BILLION per month. When push comes to shove, if the US has to choose between seeing it's funding cut off or rolling on its allies disputing the Chinese territorial claims, I think we'll end up rolling on our own allies. Sad, but true. There are many reasons to fix our budget and this is just one of them.

reedak · Jun 16, 2012

Rising Sun said:
Chess is a great teaching tool for strategy, but the world is much more complicated.......

True, but because of its simplicity, some of its basic principles, if not all, can be applied to war and other matters. In the following link at http://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/napoleon-on-strategy-striking-chess-parallels the writer discussed the striking parallels between Napoleon's strategy and chess.

Napoleon Bonaparte and Chess by Edward Winter

The chess games of Napoleon Bonaparte

Napoleon Bonaparte and Chess

At least chess found one practical use not so long ago. In the article headlined MI5 Chess and the Cold War « Chessalee it was revealed that during the WW’s/Cold War, codes were used by spies to send messages and some of the messages were disguised as chess moves. There were also the Code Breakers and many of them were chess champions (employed to break the codes) and some of them just very good chess players.

MI5 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chess, Code-Breaking and Spies - Chess.com

Five Best: Books on the Cold War - WSJ.com

Secret spy postcards sent to MI5 chief in Cold War found | Mail Online

whysoserious · Jun 16, 2012

Aren't you being a bit hard on him? He's not comparing war directly to chess... you bunch of ****ing derps. He's saying, metaphorically speaking, there are some similarities and lessons about war that can be learned from chess.

reedak · Jun 16, 2012

whysoserious said:
Aren't you being a bit hard on him? He's not comparing war directly to chess... you bunch of ****ing derps. He's saying, metaphorically speaking, there are some similarities and lessons about war that can be learned from chess.

Sage, TYSVM for being not so serious and asking our friends why so serious.

reedak · Jun 16, 2012

MoSurveyor said:
Given this part of your post I have to ask: Excluding chess, what (tabletop) wargames have you played?

I wonder why you ask me the interesting question. Do you have in mind a better tabletop wargame than chess? If so, share it with everybody here.

MoSurveyor · Jun 16, 2012

reedak said:
I wonder why you ask me the interesting question. Do you have in mind a better tabletop wargame than chess? If so, share it with everybody here.

Better/worse? No - they're just different.

I've played too many (tabletop) wargames to count. I've played chess for years, my cousin taught me when I was ~8. I learned GO when I was ~16. I've played wargames since I was ~14. All of them have something you can learn about strategy and/or tactics - it's all a matter of how you look at the game.

Oddly, the main thing I've learned from all of them is the only loser is the guy who doesn't learn anything.

reedak · Jun 16, 2012

cpwill said:
"All War is Deception"

Reedak. Consider the above, and ask yourself if you are taking Chinese protestations at face value.

You seem to take the Chinese protestations as a war deception. Taking an analogy, if a schoolboy is being bullied all the while by his classmate and his only response is protestation, I wonder whether it is a deception on his part. However, besides his protestation, he secretly gets somebody to give the bully a good walloping outside the school one day. That, in my opinion, is deception.

Not only war is deception, chess can be deception too. There are such tactical skills as "traps", "pitfalls" and "swindles" in chess.

Frank James Marshall (August 10, 1877 – November 9, 1944), was the U.S. Chess Champion from 1909–1936, and was one of the world's strongest chess players in the early part of the 20th century. He was so well-known for "swindling" his opponents that his great tactical skill to turn a lost game around was given the name of "Marshall swindle".

In his famous game against Stepan Levitsky at Breslau 1912, Marshall concluded with a stunning sham sacrifice of his queen (23...Qg3), allowing it to be captured in three different ways.

This move is considered one of the most brilliant moves ever played. Legend has it that the spectators showered the board with gold pieces after Marshall's stunning last move. Ponzi-scheming Wall Street businessman, Arthur Shaw (Alan Alda), references this particular "Marshall swindle" in the film, Tower Heist.

Please refer to Marshall’s ‘Gold Coins’ Game by Edward Winter

Swindle (chess) - eNotes.com Reference

reedak · Jun 16, 2012

MoSurveyor said:
Better/worse? No - they're just different.

I've played too many (tabletop) wargames to count. I've played chess for years, my cousin taught me when I was ~8. I learned GO when I was ~16. I've played wargames since I was ~14. All of them have something you can learn about strategy and/or tactics - it's all a matter of how you look at the game.

Very true.

MoSurveyor said:
Oddly, the main thing I've learned from all of them is the only loser is the guy who doesn't learn anything.

Words of wisdom -- deserved to be a signature in the forum.

reedak · Jun 16, 2012

Matt Foley said:
lol, those are some slowass ships.

TRU DAT. The next step for the US is to make them sail faster.

apdst · Jun 17, 2012

Proud South Korean said:
Trying to say that war is similar to chess is bull****.
If chess has about a million pawns, tens of thousands of knights and such, and if the landscape changes about every 5 minutes, with no stable route of attacking, and random pieces dying every 5 seconds, then it will become more similar

From a strategic point of view chess can be compared to warfare. From a tactical point of view, they're not even in the same ballpark.

Oozlefinch · Jun 17, 2012

reedak said:
I wonder why you ask me the interesting question. Do you have in mind a better tabletop wargame than chess? If so, share it with everybody here.

This is one I have been playing now for almost 30 years. Won multiple tournaments also.

Even this is better, if a bit more simplistic.

Chess is a good strategy game. But it has little to do with actual warfare itself.

reedak · Jun 23, 2012

Oozlefinch said:
This is one I have been playing now for almost 30 years. Won multiple tournaments also.

Even this is better, if a bit more simplistic.

Thanks for showing us two interesting war games with colourful maps and 3-dimensional pieces.

I also wish to congratulate you for winning multiple tournaments in playing the first game for almost 30 years.

Oozlefinch said:
Chess is a good strategy game. But it has little to do with actual warfare itself.

I beg to differ with your last statement. Chess in all its variations has been used historically to illustrate battlefield tactics and probe new strategies.

Teams at the Swedish national defence college in Stockholm and the defence science and technology organisation in Australia are studying the game afresh in an attempt to understand better how to gain military success. In Sweden, the researchers are using real players. In Australia, the team has run tens of thousands of virtual games - with some clear messages for their military sponsors.

On the face of it, the bloodless, low-tech game of chess might seem to bear little resemblance to modern warfare. "But it resembles real war in many respects," maintains Jan Kuylenstierna, one of the Swedish researchers. "Chess involves a struggle of will, and it contains what has been termed the essentials of fighting - to strike, to move and to protect." By studying chess and other adversarial abstract games such as checkers (draughts), researchers can strip away some of the confusion of the battlefield and identify the factors that are most important for winning, says Jason Scholz, who leads the Australian work. "The strength of this approach is our level of abstraction," Scholz says.

Chess! What is it good for? | Science | The Guardian

ChessBase.com - Chess News - How about a nice game of war?

Chess principles as applied in war & other matters.

Member

Custom User Title

Count Smackula

Member

Member

Member

Death2Globalists

Custom User Title

Death2Globalists

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member