My CG.com moniker comes from a Spotlight on Openings (Chess Review, 1969) written by Bill Lombardy. He analyzed several games with a system involving g3,f4, Nh3->f2 and called it the Paris Attack.
I learned to play chess during the Christmas holiday, 1966. I had $2.00 left over from shopping for gifts and used it to buy a chess set. I was was quickly hooked! I read Koltanowski's weekly column like some people read the bible. My mother found a copy of Smyslov's Games of Chess at her work library. WHOA! Chess books...
I play rated tournament chess for seven years. My highest rating was just north of 2000 though I quickly fell back to the low 1900s. That was 1973 and I haven't played competitively since. I've always suspected that my affection for hypermodern openings kept me from attaining master level strength. Still, my local chess hero Master Bob Wendling, once said to me, "You play the opening like Botvinnik. Too bad you play the middlegame and the endgame like <ParisAttack>!" But, I had fun!
One of my enduring passions has been chess literature. My first buy was from the famous bookseller, Al Buschke. I bought Sokolsky's 1. b4, Trifunovic's Grunfelda, Bogolyubov's 1.d4 and a lovely early edition of Bilguer's Handbuch all for the princely sum of $23.00. After selling off 1700 foreign books and periodicals a few years back I have approximately 6000 books in my collection. Although I continue to purchase selected newly published volumes, my intention is to pare down to 3000 or so. The stark reality is I will almost certainly never read nor use many of them.
The high points of my chess life: Beating a Senior Master (as white, Closed Sicilian), drawing with a Senior Master after having a forced mate-in-five (as black, Najdorf Bednarski-Browne variation), beating a former Wyoming champion with 1. e4, e5; 2. Nf3, Nc6; 3. Bd3?!, beating a three time Colorado champion with the Gurgenidze Robatsch, meeting Bobby Fischer for all of five minutes when he borrowed three of my books for his match with Larsen, a wonderful telephone conversation with Hans Kmoch, interviewing Lajos Portisch and of course the visits in New York with the delightful and knowledgeable Al Buschke. I suppose the low points were losing the state Junior championship twice in the last round and accepting I would never get very good at the game.
The chess openings have also always been of interest, with emphasis on hypermodern sorties. I also enjoy studying and identifying styles of the top players of today and yesterday. I feel I've learned the most from Botvinnik (find a target early and drill), Keres (bring your pieces to better and better squares) and Gligoric (its the center, stupid!). Other favorite players: Morphy, Pillsbury, Nimzovitch, Flohr, Boleslavsky, Stein, Petrosian, Fischer, Lombardy, Tal, Karpov, Mamedyarov and Ding Liren.
Lessor used defenses I think have more to mine: Franco-Benoni, Polish Defense, Symmetrical Defense, Dory Defense, Classical Dutch, Alekhine's Defense. I think 1. e3 is an excellent first move - almost as good as 1. g3. ;)
Generally, I think new players learn the most from the 'transparent' and 'aggressive' GMs - Morphy, Pillsbury, Alekhine, Keres, Gligoric, Spassky and are wise to initially avoid Nimzovitch, Capablanca and Fischer (deceptive simplicity), Tal (otherworldly although I believe the key to his combination-rich middle games is in how he gains tempi and open lines in the openings), Petrosian and Kasparov (unless you also have a thousand eyes). But when I taught chess years ago, no one played a game - theirs or anyone else's - until they could demonstrate up to an efficient K + B + B v K mate. The endgame has all the basic chess skills and ingredients in digestible form.
I am also interested in considering the skills necessary to be a superior (>2400) chess player. I believe the core native skill is how the chess geometry is visualized and manipulated in the brain - and that to a very large degree 'you either have it, or you don't.' Obviously, I don't. My best guess is the information is processed as a language; perhaps also explaining chess, music and mathematics prodigies. This also might explain why hundreds of books written on 'tactics' have done so little for so many. Practical Chess Analysis by Buckley is one of the few books offering 'train your brain' ideas for the core visualization skill.
I rank the Best of All Time: 1) Fischer, 2) Lasker, 3) Capablanca, 4) Karpov, 5) Kasparov, 6) Alekhine, 7) Botvinnik, 8) Tal, 9) Rubinstein, 10) Petrosian. Of course such lists are extremely subjective; fun, but meaningless. What are the criteria, how do you quantify the criteria and matrix of relationships between them? What the world needs now is non-commutative multiplication. Perhaps soon we will have engines which emulate historic players with current book knowledge and the problem will be solved! Or, will it?
My two main GAME COLLECTIONS:
1) "Through the Years" - 100+ games I have found most interesting and/or instructive.
2) "Triumphe die Hypermodern Schachpartie" - 80+ games showing the six 'themes' representing what I call the tapestry of hypermodernism. I've also cataloged variations and noted hybrid motifs in my favorite defense, the Robatsch, with illustrative games.
I've concluded classical chess is in its winter years though at 64 I am also; it won't matter much to me what the game's status is in 20 years. I do not think 960 or other varietals - even were they accepted - could stay Moore's Law and increasingly sophisticated heuristic algorithms such as Monte Carlo sampling. The damn engines will have Go cooked in 10 years. I note there is already some exploration of 21 and 23 line Go. Sadly, no such 'quick fix' is available for chess.
As of late-2014 I've suspended my Go studies a few months to let it all sink in, I hope. I am back to chess if just a bit. Currently organizing my library, studying rook endings and a few openings.
My big project is completing the Fischer-Spassky 1972 games with all the annotations from 35 sources. This will hopefully evolve into 'Chess En Masse' - a website with the capability of analyzing variations multiple-ply deep efficiently.
All in all, Chess has been a wonderful lifelong friend. The $2.00 I spent that late day in December 1966 was a great investment, indeed!