What do you have in common between a chess player and a rocker. Chess players are joking
I play chess every day at home. With parents, brothers,” said the first grader.
“It’s not good to cheat,” the coach answered, “now you even moved the rook wrong ...
-And I usually do not go with the rook!
A physical education teacher asks a student:
What kind of sport is chess - summer or winter?
-If they heat in the house, then summer, and if not, then winter.
Once, as a child, I swallowed a pawn, but the doctors worried in vain, the pawn turned out to be passed!
The programmer, after being defeated by a chess computer, declares: "Damned windows, it's buggy again."
I confessed to my father that you are a chess player.
-What was his reaction?
-He was very happy.
- Nice message.
- But don't think that dad loves chess.
- Then what made him happy?
- It's just that my last fiancé, whom my father tried to throw out the door, turned out to be a boxer.
4-ranker Zhenya plays a game with 2-ranker Vika. Only 5 minutes have passed, and Zhenya has only a rook and a pair of pawns left, while her opponent has almost a complete set of pieces.
Is this already an endgame? Do you think it's time for me to activate my king? Zhenya asks the coach.
-What kind of endgame is this? - the coach answers, - you haven't even won a single figure!
-I understand, - Zhenya retorted, - she has a middlegame, but I have an endgame!
One master was asked:
- Well, are you satisfied with your son-in-law?
How can I say, because he doesn't know how to play chess at all.
-What's wrong with that?
-That's the trouble, that he doesn't know how to play, but he plays all the time.
Now I will beat everyone at chess because my dad promised to teach me and play with me every day! Let's play a game with you!
-Let's play, - said the coach, - only in the initial position you need to put the bishops near the king and queen, and then the knights.
- No, - answered the student, - my dad said that the bishops are near the rooks!
Two students asked the coach:
“Do the king and king meet on the same square?”
“No,” the coach replied.
-We met...
A medical student asked his chess friend if he thought talent was inherited.
“Hardly,” he replied. Let's take Capablanca, for example. Have you heard anything about his father?
-Absolutely nothing.
-What about mother?
-Also no.
-You see now.
“To be honest, I haven’t heard anything about Capablanca,” the future doctor admitted.
Student: Is it possible to turn a pawn into a queen if it has not reached the end?
Coach: No, it's impossible.
Student: And my grandfather turned a pawn into a queen, which has not yet reached the end, said that pensioners can!
According to a number of programmers, Garry Kasparov, during a recent game with a chess computer, used secret code who gave his king immortality.
The son of a chess player asks his father what he is going to give him for his birthday.
- I have prepared a wonderful gift for you, - the father answered his beloved son, - we will play a game with you, and I will give you a whole horse in a head start!
The brilliant chess player Alexander Alekhine had an excellent command of English, French, German and Spanish. When asked what language he thinks in when calculating his combinations, Alekhine, smiling, said: "If I sometimes think while playing chess, it is only in Russian."
***
Once, while in a cafe, Alekhine watched the game of amateurs. One of the fans suggested that he play a game. The world champion agreed, but on one condition, that he would give his partner a head start - a rook.
- How so? - he was indignant, arranging the pieces on the board. "You don't know me at all!"
"That's why," Alekhine grinned.
***
After Alekhine brilliantly won the match against Grandmaster Bogolyubov, he fell in love with telling a joke he had invented:
“I dreamed that I died, and at the gates of Paradise, St. Peter asks me who I was on Earth. I answered the truth, and Saint Peter was surprised:
— Chess master? No, we do not let such people into Paradise!
Sad, I was about to leave, but then among the clouds I noticed Bogolyubov. Then I asked Saint Peter:
“And why is this gentleman in Paradise?” He also plays chess!
Saint Peter smiled sadly at this:
- Well, what are you, it only seems to him.
***
It is known that during his first match with Max Euwe Alekhine abused alcohol. He lost the match, and when he was later asked about the reasons for the defeat, Alekhine replied:
This month I have had the wrong diet.
***
Once, in Argentina, Alekhine was holding a simultaneous game session. Suddenly, one of the participants exclaimed joyfully:
— Maestro, checkmate in three moves!
“Congratulations,” Alekhine said. “But, señor, just don’t worry for God’s sake: first I’ll checkmate you in two moves!”
Steinitz
The first world chess champion Wilhelm Steinitz often had problems with money, or rather, with their absence. For this reason, he sometimes had to earn his living by playing chess for money in the Gambit Cafe. Once he found a very profitable partner who paid a whole pound sterling for a lost game. Steinitz gave him the knight ahead in these games and won regularly. One of the friends of the world champion gave him good advice: they say, it would be nice to lose once, otherwise you can lose such a profitable client...
Steinitz did just that: in one of the games he set up his queen and immediately resigned, after which he offered to play the next game. But his partner jumped out from behind the table with a jubilant cry: "My dream came true - I beat the world champion!" With these words, he ran out into the street, and since then he has not been seen again in the Gambit cafe.
***
When Steinitz's opinion that he considered him "the greatest composer of our era" was conveyed to Richard Wagner, the composer burst out in response to praise: "It seems that Maestro Steinitz understands music even better than chess! In any case, the opinion expressed by him does not cause me any objections.
***
Once, in a train compartment, Steinitz found himself in the company of a gentleman who was traveling with a little girl, about nine years old. Father decided to strike up a conversation with Steinitz:
- What do you do? he inquired.
“I play chess,” Steinitz replied.
Here the girl intervened:
When I was little, I also played with dolls.
Lasker
International Master Duz-Khotimirsky, who lived to almost 85 years old, personally met with all the world champions up to and including Fischer and liked to talk about his meetings with them. But Lasker especially struck him: “Just imagine: I lived in his house for three days, and not a single word about chess!”
Capablanca
Once, the legendary world champion Jose Raul Capablanca was asked at a press conference if he was really going to marry the daughter of Ford Sr. Capablanca smiled in response: “Yes, I really was going to become the son-in-law of Ford Sr., but the billionaire let me down: he only produced sons.”
***
In 1925, an international chess tournament was held in Moscow, to which the shooting of the film Chess Fever was timed. Both events featured world champion Capablanca. Once during the filming of the film, he gave a session of simultaneous playing on thirty boards. Valentina Tokarskaya, champion of the capital's Palace of Pioneers, played on one of the boards. It was very beautiful girl, who later became an actress of the Theater of Satire. Capablanca, who has always been indifferent to the fair sex, when he saw what a beauty plays against him, was literally dumbfounded. After the very first move made by the girl, Capablanca laid his king on his side and mournfully whispered: "I surrender." Of course, he won the remaining twenty-nine games.
Euwe
At the jubilee evening in honor of the eightieth birthday of Max Euwe, one of those present admired the fact that the respected grandmaster had not acquired a single enemy in so many years. After all, it's just incredible!
The hero of the day sadly answered his panegyrist: "Since I have no enemies, it means that I lived my life wrong."
Until recently, chess was considered one of the most intellectual games. This game in general from time immemorial was the prerogative of kings and aristocrats. Maybe that's why the winners of chess tournaments have always been called kings. Today the situation has changed somewhat.
Since the game went to the masses, the halo gradually began to fade. The catchphrase that the famous Botvinnik is only a champion at the board, but in all other respects an ordinary Jew, shows that the ancient game and its knights have lost their former greatness. And in recent times, many professions have appeared that are no less intellectual than playing chess, but more complex. Therefore, the palm in the battle of intellects among chess players is now being intercepted by other specialists.
It is hard to believe that chess, which a quarter of a century ago gathered many specialists and enthusiasts around the checkered board, has now found itself practically on the margins of history. And chess players, who were once a symbol of Mind and Intelligence, have become almost an anachronism. Today, this game is almost universally outlived by millions. modern computers. Chess players are on the verge of survival. Many of them, including strong players, faced the question of how to earn a living further. It was at this time that many of them found themselves in poker, preferring poker rooms on the Internet and various poker sites to chess.
For such fans of games with the mind, poker has become a kind of lifeline. The rules of poker are polished and simple, like moves chess pieces. There are no more combinations in this game than on a chessboard. The basics of poker can be learned in one evening, and the main principles can be learned in practice, playing various situations with friends. And what is especially valuable is the absence of any theory. There is no tutorial for this game. But what has poker in common with chess is an infinite number of possibilities.
Of course, since these are completely different games, there are differences. On the chessboard, the situation is viewed from beginning to end, and there is enough information for analysis. In poker, in this sense, everything is exactly the opposite. Information about the opponent - zero. You probably only know your two cards. For many, it becomes a discovery that in poker, as in chess, the laws of mathematical logic reign.
Although, it would seem, what kind of mathematics is here. Some riddles. Try to guess what the opponent has in his hands! But the outcome of the game depends on whether you guessed it or not. Therefore, the price of this decision is much higher than in chess. But this is what causes serious excitement, excites and attracts in this game.
Today poker is very popular game, and it is played by tens, if not hundreds of thousands of people around the world. And if previously generally recognized were such card games, like a point, preference or deberts, then today poker is multiplying in masses similarly to computer viruses on the Web. Television and the Internet have played a huge role in this.
The most popular game is Texas Hold'em as one of the most common types of poker. The rules of this game are simple. The players are dealt two cards per hand blindly, and the first round of betting begins. Then the flop is opened - three community cards, and the players enter the auction again, after which the fourth card is opened - the turn. Again there is a bargain, and finally, the river opens - the last community card. The participants in the game make bets again. If there are still opponents in the game, then they open their cards. During the game, each player can make one of three decisions - call the opponent's bet, raise higher or fold. Wins, of course, the one who is stronger. This is achieved either at the showdown - by a card, or, if the cards are not revealed, by the power of persuasion.
Poker educates character and willpower, often becoming part of the inner essence of a person. Just like in chess. Fischer also said that the ability to suppress the ego of his opponent is often one of the main factors in victory.
The ability to demonstrate apparent weakness to your opponent, the ability to lure him into a trap are the main qualities of a professional chess player, which are no less in demand in poker. You can also add here the habit of analyzing and drawing the right conclusions about situations at the table in general and about the game of your opponents in particular. The main thing in this business is not to overestimate your capabilities.
Having taken the first steps in poker and feeling that this game is made for you, you will realize that you need a guide and reliable assistant in the world of online poker. After all, you probably know that poker is played on the Internet, just like chess. We can say that it is on the Web that they play it the most. It is here that today the best players in the world hone their skills, and up to 85% of all hands are played. This is very convenient: the game can be started at any time convenient for you.
We just want to show you the place where all the latest poker news is available to keep you up to date. In addition, we will tell you where to look educational materials and which poker rooms offer the best bonus programs.
So, what are the common features between such seemingly different games like poker and chess
If you think that there is no connection between chess and poker, then you are deeply mistaken. In poker, Texas Hold'em in particular, as well as in chess, the blood excites a cocktail of such components as intelligence, excitement, strategies, passions, risk and bluff. All this attracts much more players to poker than to chess.
The Soviet Union gave the world far more top chess players than any other country. With the development of poker, many try their hand at this exciting and exciting game. One of them is the fifth in the Russian rating young grandmaster Alexander Grischuk.
Chess players bring to poker their composure, intelligence, the ability to calculate options and evaluate situations, study theory, learn quickly, play for several hours in a row.
In poker, unlike chess, no artificial intelligence capable of beating a professional player. Today, it is a generally accepted fact that logic and skill play a major role in poker, and only beginners can count on luck. But to win it is necessary to be not only a logician. You will also need the ability to read your opponent. Unlike chess, where only two people play at the board, there can be from two to nine players at the poker table, each of which has its own cards, hidden from opponents.
In poker, as well as in chess, tournaments and championships are held. But the prize pools here are much more significant. At the same time, it should be noted that poker tournaments are held daily, and serious competitions with millions prize funds- almost weekly. If you like chess, then it makes sense to try yourself in poker. After all, such an explosion of emotions and an atmosphere of excitement cannot be found anywhere except poker.
I must say that in Russia, where the mind has always been valued, and mathematics was at its best, poker is developing very quickly, and the successes of Russian players follow one after another. Opening the list is Alexander Kravchenko, who won a gold bracelet and over $2 million in Texas Hold'em at the 2007 WSOP. A little later in the winter, young player Alexander Kostritsyn won the AussieMillions tournament in Australia, receiving one million Australian dollars. The following year in November, Ivan Demidov takes second place in the WSOP Main Event for $5.8 million.
On this site you will find everything to start your poker career. Here you can learn the rules, watch poker combinations, read books and articles, and get free training at the poker school.
There is no sin in laughing at a person who allowed himself to be deceived, who fell into a simple trap. Unless, of course, it had tragic consequences for him.
Do not pull into the trap by force. “The beast itself falls into a trap” (V. Dahl). A person also comes across “voluntarily” - self-interest, laziness, thoughtlessness lead him into a trap ... chessboard- not an exception. Moves based on general considerations, without taking into account the peculiarities of the opponent's position and capabilities, are often not only bad, but also ridiculous.
Kostecki – Berman
Liepaja 1973
Black to move
The black queen pretended to leave the c5-pawn without her guardianship and went to b8. What for? What did he need there? But White elephant, apparently not devoid of the above-mentioned human weaknesses, did not think for a long time and swallowed the bait: C:c5. And here the queen (smiling restrainedly, or maybe laughing out loud - it depends on her upbringing) returned to f8. Elephant in a mousetrap! How the monkey Toto would make fun of him!
What has become ridiculous is no longer suitable for serious business. When the old becomes ridiculous, it is discarded and the new is sought. And already from this it follows that a sense of humor contributes to creativity.
Creativity, in whatever sphere of human activity it may take place, inevitably takes on an aesthetic form. And every aesthetic process is essentially a creative process. The need for beauty encourages people to find, appreciate and develop the rudiments of the future. But the renewal and improvement of life is unthinkable without the comic. The main role of the funny is to anticipate and timely “neutralize” everything that sooner or later may become an obstacle to the creative movement.
In the comic, as in the beautiful, the properties of typicality (patterns, universality) and paradoxicality are combined. Therefore, any aesthetically significant phenomenon produces a contradictory impression - it seems familiar and unfamiliar, ordinary and at the same time unusual. Seemingly incompatible properties of typicality and paradox in the aesthetic process collide, fight and pass into each other.
When the superiority of typicality is revealed, a feeling of beauty arises. And if the paradox takes over, it can be funny or sad.
In the beautiful, something singular and accidental asserts itself as necessary and universal - paradoxicality turns into typicality.
In the comic, on the contrary, the manifestation of the typical (or pretending to become so), paradoxically reveals its irregularity and inexpediency. At the same time, the typical is, as it were, compromised and debunked.
In other words, the comic (funny) reveals the limitations and relativity of what was (or seemed) before unlimited and unconditional.
|
In the position on the diagram 1. Rh8 wins. Black cannot take the pawn 1... Rxa7 due to 2. Rh7+. Oyanen - Ridala, It is known that the British are distinguished by a subtle sense of tact and strict observance of the rules of etiquette. Related to this are the peculiarities of British humor, which often plays on the paradoxical manifestations of politeness typical of the British.
To foreigners, English politeness (like everything that is characteristic of some more than others) often seems excessive. Therefore, we (non-Englishmen) can sometimes be laughed at by the fact that the British themselves speak quite seriously - just out of a sense of tact.
|
The comic lies halfway to the beautiful, it crowds out something that exists in the present, highlights the failure of its claims for the future, but, unlike the beautiful, does not offer anything in return. What is beautiful is what needs to be developed and multiplied. Beauty has a great future. But the future of the funny is in doubt, most often funny is what needs to be squeezed and limited, and possibly completely eliminated.
The typicality of the paradoxical is beautiful, but the paradoxicality of the typical is ridiculous.
This definition of funny may seem too broad, because unusual forms of manifestation of ordinary things can also generate positive values. However, laughter is not only revealing.
Laughter does not always mean negative evaluation. Judgment is not condemnation. And not everything that the sense of humor refers to is reprehensible. Here, for example, are the words of M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin about poetry: “Why walk on a rope, and even squat every four steps?” It is clear that this playful phrase does not contain condemnation, but an unusual, paradoxical look at a well-known (seemingly!) Phenomenon. To better understand the familiar, you need to see (find) something strange in it. (Viktor Shklovsky called such a technique "deletion" and considered it one of the most important in art). Therefore, one can also say about laughter that it expresses the joy of estrangement.
Quite a typical situation: one serves, the other eats
.
There is a comic and with a plus sign. In this case, the comic comes closest to the beautiful, but still differs from it in that the funny case remains a case with little chance of repetition. There is laughter from the feeling of fullness and diversity of life. Laughter, welcoming the return to the old concepts, erased from frequent use, the original associative fullness.
Freud gives an example of wit:
Stubbornness is one of the four Achilles heels of this gentleman.
To call a stubborn person a donkey is very banal. And here it is done in a paradoxical form, without a colorless verbal stamp, and therefore more caustically and expressively.
A person can rejoice and laugh because he managed to solve a difficult problem. A non-trivial idea of a solution found on his own seems beautiful to him, and the initial attempts to achieve a result using standard methods and these methods themselves are ridiculous. (To this is added pride in oneself, a sense of superiority over others, and possibly a hidden mockery of them)
When a person rejoices in good luck, he can also laugh at what could happen if fortune were not so favorable to him.
Shereshevsky - Buslaev
Tbilisi, 1973
White to move
By all indications, White's position is lost. And if Shereshevsky had seen the move Nh8!, he probably would have rejoiced and laughed (to himself, of course) at such a “gift of fate”. But he would laugh, of course, not at the winning move, but at the miraculously overcome threat of defeat. All the “alternatives” to continue Nh8 would be ridiculous, and in particular, the template move Ng5, which was actually made in this position.
The article uses examples and illustrations from the book Dmitriev A.V., Sychev A.A. "Laughter: sociophilosophical analysis", M.: 2005Dedicated to blessed memory:
Yury Razuvaev (1945-2012), comrade
childhood, grandmaster, honored
Russian coach
Grigory Kogan (1901-1979), neighbor in
entrance, pianist, teacher, great
music theorist
Jacqueline Piatigorskaya (1911-2012),
charming vice-champion of the USA,
musical chess sponsor
The seditious thought prompted the author to develop the theme “Chess and Music”: “Why is it that there are such a huge number of enthusiasts among musicians and chess players?” Recently, the enthusiasm for chess among outstanding musicians has not faded away. In particular, such celebrities as pianist Nikolai Lugansky and cellist Alexander Knyazev devote a lot of time to playing chess and actively attend various tournaments. And at the last Moscow match for the world championship, they discussed the problem chess-music at a press conference.
 |
 |
Is there any pattern here? As far as is known, the great French chess player and opera composer François Philidor stood at the base of the pyramid. The outstanding Russian musician S.I. Taneev, who from childhood was fond of ancient game, Leo Tolstoy's constant chess partner, followed the recommendations of the great writer: “Make your mind constantly act with all the power it can”. But Sergei Ivanovich loved music more: "Without music, a person is nothing. People need to give up everything and indulge in one music." Another Russian composer, A.K. Lyadov, in 1907 put it aphoristically: “Life is a chessboard: now all of humanity is on a black square, then it will switch to a white one, then again to a black one - and so on without end. Where is the truth - on a black or white cage? .. ”Lyadov and his wonderful friend N.A. Rimsky-Korsakov were very interested in the St. Petersburg International Tournament of 1896, where they were furiously rooting for M.I. Chigorin. At the beginning of the 20th century, A.N. Skryabin became addicted to chess. During the period of intense work on the "Mystery" he willingly switched to chess games with the outstanding pianist A. B. Goldenweiser. In the 20th century S.S. Prokofiev became famous for his fanatical love for chess. In 1909, seventeen-year-old Prokofiev achieved a draw in a session against Em Lasker, and shortly after the end of the 1914 St. Petersburg grandmaster tournament, Sergei Sergeevich won a game in a session against H. R. Capablanca.
There were other wonderful events as well. Yes, well known chess match musical titans in 1937: S. Prokofiev - D. Oistrakh.
The 7th world champion Vasily Smyslov had a deep respect for vocal art and seriously thought about the profession of an opera singer. A graduate of the Leningrad Conservatory, the famous pianist Mark Taimanov still devoted more time to chess, although his recordings (on two pianos, together with L. Brook) were included in the collection of Philips discs - 100 great pianists of the 20th century. However, about Taimanov phenomenon speech ahead.
They say chess is the silent game of the music of the mind. There is also the winged thought of Dr. Z. Tarrasch, that chess, like love and music, has the ability to make a person happy. Let's leave this chemistry of hormones to poets and artists to sing, their description of happy love will turn out to be more colorful. Our task is to emphasize the creative analogy of chess and music, to reveal the unifying principle between the great, let's not be afraid of this word, manifestations of human culture. In addition, we will try to draw meridians and parallels between their carriers - chess players and musicians; to understand why other people, being gifted in one area, turn out to be mediocre in another, and some are well-versed in several.
On the first glance, the comparison of music and chess, such outwardly dissimilar objects, seems ridiculous: chess players deal with an abstract scheme, they bend over the boards and make their moves in silence, and musicians in concert halls pour out oceans of sounds. But only at first glance...
100 years ago, the young Sergei Prokofiev, watching the game of major chess players, wrote: “... And if the complex, deep Lasker seems to me the majestic Bach, then the living Capablanca is the eternally young Mozart, who created with the same ease, and sometimes with sweet negligence, as and Capablanca. In conclusion, a small compliment to Dr. Tarrasch for his musical talents. Quite by accident I had the pleasure of hearing him play the piano. A clear rhythm, clear phrasing and general expressiveness testify to the great musicality of the famous chess player ”(Den newspaper, St. Petersburg, 05/10/1913).
Also Professor Grigory Mikhailovich Kogan in his theoretical works compared the creative styles of major chess players and musicians. In particular, he wrote: “... If we now move from chess to a consideration of what happened in the field of pianistic art, then we will positively be amazed at the extraordinary similarity in these two branches of culture. Indeed, doesn't the Rubinstein-Bülow rivalry, which at that time stood at the center of pianistic life, not resemble ... the rivalry between Chigorin and Steinitz? Isn't there a parallel between Chigorin's combinational style and romantic game Anton Rubinstein, in which brilliant ideas and inspired impulses were combined with not always flawless technical performance (the famous "handfuls" of false notes)? Isn’t there a parallel between Chigorin’s chess educational activities and the musical educational activities of Rubinstein, the organizer of the Russian Musical Society and the St. Petersburg Conservatory (cf. Chigorin’s role in the history of the St. Petersburg Chess Assembly), a pioneer of Russian professional musical culture? On the other hand, don't you feel an analogy between the analytical mind of Steinitz and Rubinstein's German rival Bülow with his detailed and at the same time bizarre game? Isn't there an analogy between Steinitz's commentaries on chess games and comments on the piano works of the classics in Bülow's painstaking revisions, which laid the foundation for the whole theory of piano phrasing? ... During the years of Lasker's chess championship, Ferruccio Busoni was the most outstanding figure in the world of pianistic art. His biography bears some resemblance to Lasker's. Almost the same age (Busoni was born in 1866, Lasker - in 1868), they simultaneously achieved world fame: Lasker - since the match with Steinitz (played in America in 1894), Busoni - since the publication of his adaptation Bach, published in America in 1894. Then Berlin became the center of activity for both. The era of Lasker's championship ended in 1921 with a loss to Capablanca, and a little over a year later Busoni's concert activity also ended. The similarity between Busoni and Lasker can also be traced in many other ways. Like Lasker, Busoni was a very educated and intensely thinking person, the author of philosophical works, who developed original views on his art. It would be especially interesting to compare the pedagogical principles of both: for example, Busoni's idea that most piano teachers teach "to master individual passages and individual pieces one by one", while it is advisable to stock up on "a bunch of a few hooks and master keys" that give the key to all the diversity technical formulas, and Lasker's similar idea that instead of memorizing countless options one by one, one should "look for rules that could give in a concise form the results of thousands and tens of thousands of options." “Before those who are called to creativity, there is, first of all, the most responsible negative task - to free themselves from everything learned, heard,” says Busoni. “Out of my 56 years, I have spent at least 30 forgetting what I have learned or read by heart,” Lasker echoes him... (G. Kogan. “Playing chess and playing the piano”, newspaper “Soviet musician”, No. 13 (103) of March 23, 1940). How deeply the professor of the Kyiv and Moscow Conservatories analyzed!
 |
Grigory Kogan |
Among our great contemporaries, one can note the similarity of the creative fundamentality of Mikhail Botvinnik and Emil Gilels. By the way, there was also a spiritual connection between them, as follows from mutual correspondence: the chess player admired the pianist, and he was a constant fan of the 6th world champion, although he himself did not play chess.
It is also interesting to note the following fact: in his youth, such a seemingly distant person from chess, infinitely immersed in music - Evgeny Kissin - turned to the famous composer and strong chess lover Vladimir Dashkevich for chess lessons.
So, chess players and musicians are reaching out to each other, but why? This is what we have to find out...
The specificity of chess and musical works has ideologically similar structural elements. Let's take the opening stage, say, the Spanish game. Here is the Janisch Gambit, and the Berlin Variation, and the Marshall Attack, it’s impossible to list everything - in a word, variations on the theme of Ruy Lopez (the inventor of the opening). How do they differ from, say, variations about Paganini? Here - a sea of sounds, there - a sea of moves! But think, the essence is one - combinatorics! In the initial position, there are only 16 pieces and 16 pawns on the board. It is calculated that in one single chess game, forty moves, the total number of possible positions fits into one with 130 zeros. True, the lion's share of them is absurd, only real ones are selected that reflect the meaning chess game. That is, a binary goal must be realized: checkmate the king (win) or avoid checkmate (draw).
And in music? You have 7 octaves with twelve sounds in each: 84 elementary sounds in total. Their combination, even within an hour of performance, will also represent an astronomical number. But, of course, only euphonious ones are chosen. concept harmony, however, is very relative and depends on temporary predilections. What would have been considered a cacophony in the 18th and 19th centuries is warmly welcomed today. The fashionable curse of the middle of the 20th century, "mess instead of music", as applied to the work of N.Ya. Myaskovsky, S.S. Prokofiev and, especially, D. D. Shostakovich, has given way to an enthusiastic attitude towards them today. It is difficult yet, even in the 21st century, to algorithmize the exact meaning harmony and therefore it is impossible to create an appropriate computer program that could write good music. In this respect, chess is easier. Here game programs they have already advanced quite far, but, nevertheless, they still cannot compose sketches.
It is interesting to compare the nature of musical and chess abilities. If an individual's ear for music (external and internal), as well as a sense of rhythm, can be easily "diagnosed" and explained as specific, then the identification of chess talent presents great difficulties. It seems that chess talent should be laid in the intellectual sphere: a brilliant memory, a rich imagination, the art of long-range calculation, and so on. However, how then to "reconcile" with the surprising weak game Napoleon Bonaparte and the "father of cybernetics" Norbert Wiener, who were intellectual geniuses and at the same time great lovers of chess. The author of these lines once had a dispute with a man who knows everything - Yuri Lvovich Averbakh - regarding the reason for Napoleon's helplessness in chess. The grandmaster argued that the self-proclaimed emperor of the French simply did not have enough time to prepare, and your humble servant defended pathological inability Bonaparte specifically to chess. For many, for example, academician Pyotr Kapitsa, mathematician Vladimir Makogonov, pianist Mark Taimanov, did not have enough time, but they still played great chess!
There are opinions that any normal person can be taught anything. Many quote the famous American psychologist John Watson (1878-1958; not to be confused, as it happens, with the Nobel laureate James Watson): “Give me ten healthy babies, and at will I will raise anyone from them: from scientists to criminals.” His follower, the outstanding Hungarian educator Laszlo Polgar (1946), was able to translate this doctrine into practice. With the help of his unique technique, he proved a remarkable theorem: the ability to achieve an arbitrarily high level of chess intelligence with the help of special exercises and targeted training. Of his three daughters average(in his opinion!?) with his abilities, he raised three male-level grandmasters!
 |
A significant contribution to the theory and methodology of the development of intelligence was also made by the outstanding coach, grandmaster Yu.S. Razuvaev, who repeatedly pointed out the importance of chess exercises for the development of the general mental ability of students. He emphasized the relevance action in mind characteristic of a chess game. In the same way, concert musicians keep ready-made programs in their minds and perform them automatically at the right moment. That is, at the right moment make volitional efforts, activating a certain area of the brain. Razuvaev wrote: “... at the age of 6-12, it is decided whether the child will be an intelligent person or not, his intellectual abilities depend on this!” He, together with a prominent scientist N.G. Alekseev, created an appropriate program for the formation of a mechanism for mental analysis. Razuvaev continues: “... I came up with a slogan for this program: “Action in the mind is born in the game!” I started testing these lessons... If for some reason a child lags behind in development, without any organic damage or disease, then chess is a strong catalyst. As practice proves, in a short time a child can catch up and overtake his peers ... "Also, with regard to professional chess players, Razuvaev made important conclusions:" ... Incorrect calculation of variations (yawns) is, as a rule, a consequence of defects in the mechanism of action in the mind. I tried to eliminate these defects: I took the scheme of the psychologist P. Ya. Galperin about breaking down the mechanism of action in the mind into stages and applied it to chess. And he helped a number of chess players to really improve the quality of their scores. This applied discovery once again convinced me of the correctness of the whole scheme. So, the child must learn to concretize the situation and make a decision.
However, in real life one often sees a different picture. The selection of students capable of chess or music is made according to the principle big numbers. Of the many chess sections or music schools experienced professionals discover few (statistics unknown) real talent. Exactly, as the poet V.V. Mayakovsky said: “In a gram, production is in years of work.” But it also happens small numbers: outstanding specialists in their field cannot master the game of chess or playing musical instruments. And among the musicians there are mysterious people. For example, in the 20th century there were two great friends, two brilliant pianists - Yakov Flier and Arnold Kaplan. Both are passionate chess lovers. But if the first one played them decently enough, without making any special efforts to prepare (there was no time!), then Arnold Lvovich turned out to have the same pathological chess inability. His beloved nephew Lev Khariton recalls: “... my uncle attended almost all significant chess events, and in his spare time he did not part with the chessboard. For example, walking along the beach of the Riga seaside, he sat down to play with everyone who wanted to. After thinking over the move for about twenty minutes, he always exposed the queen or another piece to a blow and did not get upset at all. At the same time, his bright abilities in other areas should be noted: he painted beautifully, imitated the manners of other people.
On the other hand, it is important to determine how a professionally oriented student should learn the material?
Scientific experience shows that the brain of an average person successfully perceives learning if the assimilation of the subject occurs differentially and in equilibrium, i.e., with a rather slow complication of the material. This is how L. Polgar built his famous textbook (CHESS: 5334 Problems, Combinations and Games. Budapest. 1994). The exercises were selected in such a way that there was not only a transition from simple to complex, but a negligible increase in difficulty was applied - as if a polygon with an infinitely growing number of sides fit into a circle. No jumps, full smoothness. And the results showed the effectiveness of the method: all three of his daughters almost did not make gross miscalculations in their chess games. Because their brain worked out the simplest possible blunders on a subconscious level, and “yawns” usually happen at a primitive level.
In the practice of performing musicians, a similar method of slowly “driving” small fragments from works into the brain is also relevant. And the pieces already learned by heart do not tolerate constant fast playback, otherwise they, as experts say, flirting. No wonder S.V. Rakhmaninov, when he was shown virtuoso students, asked them to play slowly a particularly stormy passage. If the students could not cope, Sergey Vasilievich called their technique " counterfeit coin»!
And what is the dynamics of the information process in the chess and music spheres? The general flowchart is well known: in musicians, sound information sequentially passes through the outer, middle, and inner ear, then passes through the auditory nerve to the neurons of the brain; chess players carry information to the brain through the optic nerve. At the next stage, the performing musician must learn the work and reproduce it from memory (sometimes, you can use notes as a hint). Practicing chess players are forbidden to use cheat sheets, and they need to know the first stage of the game by heart, and in the good old days, a scrupulous analysis of the adjourned game was relevant. The pre-programmed preparation of a musician before a concert cannot, as a rule, be replaced by mood improvisation; exceptions are rare here (Chopin, Rachmaninov, etc.).
It is appropriate to ask the question: “What structures of the brain are responsible for memorization and reproduction?”. At present, this daunting neurobiological problem is still far from being solved, but at least it has moved off the dead center. It should be recalled that a few decades ago, the outstanding chess expert Grandmaster Igor Zaitsev insisted on the existence of specific chess cells which develop in skilled chess players and need constant activation. Otherwise, these cells will gradually atrophy and the player's level will drop sharply. The example of the almighty MM Botvinnik is rather eloquent. Only three years later (1948-51) from the moment of his triumph, without playing a single tournament game, he approached the match with D.I. Bronstein in disassembled condition. Of course, Mikhail Moiseevich's intensive work on his doctoral dissertation in electrical engineering is a sufficient justification - but only for him personally, and not for his chess brain! Exactly the same situation develops in the case of musical performers. Daily instrumental work is absolutely necessary for them.
About a century and a half ago, the great pianist Anton Rubinstein roughly explained the need for the daily work of a performer: “... If I miss one day of piano lessons, I immediately notice shortcomings in my playing; the omission of two days is determined by specialists, and the result of three days of inactivity is distinguished by the public! ..».
 |
It is known that Rachmaninoff, even during travels, did not part with the silent keyboard, constantly exercising his fingers. And such a virtuoso as Franz Liszt completely stopped concert performances when he had a shortage of time due to intensive composing and teaching activities.
Well, we ask, are exceptions possible here? In the words of the immortal literary hero, Mr. Sherlock Holmes: "The only exception refutes the rule ...". No, at least one exception there is! It - Taimanov phenomenon.
Mark Evgenievich, as a pianist, missed systematic classes for months, as he played in numerous tournaments, traveling around cities and countries. He returned, instantly recovered and continued his concert activity. What can I say, a miracle, and nothing more! But, in our opinion, there is a rational explanation: Taimanov's high chess skills helped him in music. At that time, neither A.G. Rubinshtein, nor F. Liszt, nor S.V. Rachmaninov were seriously involved in chess! But how Nimzowitsch defense can help a pianist's motor memory? Only in one case - if the mentioned chess cells are located in the same areas of the brain as the learned musical images - these cells catalyze each other! Science has yet to prove this hypothesis experimentally.
 |
 |
So far, neuroscientists have found activity in the brains of chess players and musicians in specific regions responsible for visualizing images. A significant contribution was made by University of California professor Norman Weinberger and his colleagues, who proved the existence of a neural coding mechanism for information used by the brain to organize memories depending on their emotional load. Scientists have found that the use of a “memory code” causes the brain to use special important information a large number of nerve cells, which significantly reduces the risk of forgetting it. In the future, they plan to study exactly how the brain remembers and organizes the information it receives and learn how to control this process. Other researchers - Professor M.V. Pletnikov with colleagues from Novosibirsk - discovered a structural asymmetry of the brain in musicians. In particular, in the case of many prominent musicians, it has been found that the size of the left superior-posterior temporal gyrus ( planum temporale) was much larger than the right one.
The results of studies using positron emission tomography (PET) have shown that during the processing of musical information, the blood supply and metabolic activity of this gyrus in experienced musicians increases markedly. Moreover, among musicians, its largest size is noted among those who have an absolute ear for music. Thus, direct evidence was obtained for the predominance of the activity of the left hemisphere in the regulation of the perception of musical information in people with professional musical training.
The brain of chess players is currently much less studied, but, obviously, such studies seem to be extremely relevant. Let us compare, for example, the situation when the brain learns chess and musical information. Chess players, playing blindly, introduce each move in the game into the brain through the auditory nerve; then all position changes are rendered into a visual image. For musicians, when reading a score, information enters through the optic nerve and is transformed into sound. Here, alternating different signal channels leads to a similar result − image perception.
Thus, it can be argued with a considerable degree of certainty that the reproduction mechanism as chess moves, and musical phrases has a common neurobiological nature.
