The winner is the one who makes the next-to-last mistake.
After white's reply to 1. e4 e5 with 2. f4 the game is in its last throes
Chess is an effective means to educate and train the human intellect.
There are fixed rules in chess, and no one knows how the game will end.
A game of chess holds many secrets. Fortunately! That is why we cannot clearly state whether chess is science, art, or a sport.
A brilliant strategy is, certainly, a matter of intelligence, but intelligence without audaciousness is not enough.
Chess is beautiful enough to waste your life for.
Repeating moves in an ending can be very useful. Apart from the obvious gain of time on the clock one notices that the side with the advantage gains psychological benefit.
I guess a certain amount of temperament is expected of Chess geniuses
The first essential for an attack is the will to attack.
The concept of 'talent' is formed under completely abstract criteria, having nothing in common with reality. But the reality is such that I don't understand chess as a whole. But then again no one understands chess in its entirety. Perhaps talent is something else, in chess it is conditionality.
Fischer is Fischer, but a knight is a knight!
Just as one's imagination is stirred by a girl's smile, so is one's imagination stirred by the possibilities of chess.
Intellectual activity is perhaps the greatest pleasure of life; chess is one of the forms of intellectual activity.
Here and there in the ancient literature we encounter legends of wise and mysterious games that were conceived and played by scholars, monks, or the courtiers of cultured princes. These might take the form of chess games in which the pieces and squares had secret meanings in addition to their usual functions.
The range of circumstances in which it is possible to presuppose the presence of a combination is very limited. The presence of such circumstances is the reason for the genesis of the idea in the master's brain.
Weaknesses of character are normally shown in a game of chess.
My coach and my parents both had this relationship to what I was doing, which was allowing me to express myself with chess. And so I could love it. I had a passion for it. I was expressing myself through chess, and I was learning about myself through chess.
Campo, as everyone in chess recognized, had a 2600 rating as a politician.
The best tournament that I have ever played in was in 1950. It was great - a waiter came to you during the game, and you could order anything you wanted to drink (even some vodka, if you liked). Pity, there are no longer tournaments organized in this manner.