Table of Contents
12 Types of Chess Players?
Way back in the past, I stumbled on a Quora question titled “What are 5 types of chess players?”.
I read the answer by the user Charles Slade and thoroughly enjoyed it. I knew I would be unable to surpass it, but I wouldn’t be I if I didn’t at least try. As usual, I showed no respect for the format and came up with 7 types of chess players.
Fast forward to the future. Running out of the ideas for the blog, I decided to recycle a bunch of my Quora answers. Since the XYZ Types of Chess Players sounded like a cool article and I really liked Charles’ answer. So I decided to contact him and ask him whether he has anything against me posting it on the blog.
Fortunately, he said yes, so I decided to merge it with my own answer to produce the final result – a list of 12 types of chess players.
Hope you guys will enjoy it 🙂
Charles Slade’s Answer
Before I dive in: these are five kinds of chess players, but definitely not the five kinds of chess players. The taxonomy is much more extensive. And these categories are non-exclusive.
1. The Memorizer / Cyborg
“Memorizer” is a derogatory term. This person can bang out 30 moves of theory in every opening. Their 31st move will almost certainly be a stinker. They can’t really play chess, they just memorize.
A friend of mine (rated mid/high 2200) loves playing against these players. He’ll select a line in which the book goes all the way to, say, a “drawn” K+R vs. K+R endgame. He’ll then win that endgame.
I saw one particularly bitter memorizer sneer at him after a game: “Why did you keep playing after move 40? The endgame is drawn.” My friend gave one of the best retorts I’ve heard in a while: “The endgame isn’t drawn, it’s even.”
(Subtext: “You suck at endgames.”)
When a memorizer actually knows how to play chess a little (and their memorization goes very deep), they graduate to become a cyborg. They do what the computer says so often, they start to look like a computer themselves.
To be sure, “cyborg” is sometimes also used to describe someone who’s cheating via a computer. That’s not necessarily what I’m talking about here.
2. The rating whore.
This is pretty self-explanatory. This person doesn’t wake up thinking about how to get better at chess. They wake up thinking about how to get a higher rating. Maybe that means becoming better at chess, but that’s kind of secondary consideration.
These players will never want to play lower-rated players — because if they lose the game, they’ll lose a lot of points. They don’t want to play if their rating is too high, because… they’ll lose a lot of points. If their rating crosses a threshold that’s important to them mid-tournament, they’ll actually withdraw from the tournament to “lock-in” that rating.
If they are beating a higher-rated player and the higher-rated player offers a draw, they’ll often accept. Better to get those rating points in hand.
Even outside tournament chess, you can sometimes spot these guys. You’re playing a casual game. Maybe you’re playing against them, maybe you’re playing against someone else and they’re watching. But if you reveal that you might at least know possibly something about chess, their first question will be: “what’s your rating?”
As in, “uh oh, I don’t know what to do with you. Am I supposed to arrogantly dismiss you? Or genuflect and kiss your ring? I can’t take this uncertainty!”
3. The guy who tries too hard to be original
This is a minority type, but this type is near and dear to my heart. This guy in your town is absolutely unique. But there’s one of these guys in every town.
This guy plays weird openings. Expect 1. g4, 2. a4, etc. He doesn’t follow conventional wisdom. In many cases, the reason is so that you’re “out of the book” and he has the advantage. He never realizes that the conventional wisdom is conventional for a reason: straying too far from the path just means you suck.
(By way of analogy, yes: a football defender will be confused if you’re a wide receiver who skips backward instead of runs forwards. That doesn’t mean you’ll be harder to defend though.)
4. The guy who can’t let it go. (Related: the guy who was always winning, until he lost.)
You play a 40 move game. He loses. No matter what the circumstances are, he’ll want to go back a few moves and analyze it. “All I had to do was play Nf5 instead of a3, and I’m winning.” No. No you’re not. You made a mistake on move 12 that lead to your position slowly collapsing. Going back to move 37 isn’t going to reveal your error.
Hilariously, if you indulge this person as much as they’d like, you eventually will get back to revisiting what he played on move 12. If he discovers a better move on move 12, he’ll confidently proclaim like he knew all along: “See? I was winning!”
Relatedly, this guy is annoying even when they’re watching. Two strong players play a tense and interesting game. One finally succumbs. This guy will pipe up, “Why didn’t you take the knight a few moves ago?” A fatal mistake is to indulge with an answer, otherwise, you’ll be lead down an infinitely-expanding labyrinth of inane suggestions.
My greatest contribution to chess has nothing to do with a clever opening variation or a strategic philosophy. My contribution is a response to this kind of guy. “Why didn’t you take the knight?” “I didn’t see it.” This is a great response, because it (a) ends the conversation, and (b) makes this guy feel good that he saw a move that you — the great player you are — didn’t. He won’t disturb that feeling by asking a follow-up.
5. Scaredy cat / White to trade and win
I don’t know why this person plays chess. Given his choice, he wouldn’t move a piece past the fourth rank. Ever. The order of the day is duck and cover.
A related person, though not always the same person, is the “white to trade and win” guy. Give this guy a pawn, and suddenly the only plan he can execute is to trade all the pieces. If you have any sense of dynamic play, these guys are fun to play. They’ll tie themselves in knots trying to trade pieces or hang on to their pawn, “sac sac mate” is always looming.
My Answer:
6. The “quick-drawer” guy
You arrive at the game.
You play the first 7 moves.
Suddenly you hear your opponent whispering.
You don’t hear him and are wondering what on Earth is happening.
He leans over, puts a sympathetic smile and says: “Young man, perhaps it is best if we drew?”
Over the last couple of years, I have often encountered “quick-drawers” here in Croatia. Their number rose together with my rating. I even had some draw offers in the middle of blitz tournaments.
Sometimes they even offer a draw before the game. Especially if it is a league match, where arranging 6-draws (3:3) result is common, in particular. They approach the table where you seat with your team and say with a big smile: “Now, boys, we don’t really want to play, do we?”
I really don’t get it why someone would do it. We chess amateurs play a little number of games per year. Why would you want to reduce it further by ending several of them prematurely?
If you don’t feel like playing the game, then why do you appear in a chess-playing hall in the first place?
I mean, are we here to shake hands or play chess?
7. The “overly-shy-beginner” guy
You know those novices who appear in the tournament hall for the first time and then stand as close to the wall as possible, as if they wish they had Harry Potter’s Cloak of Invisibility?
Who are moving their pieces slowly and uncertainly with a hand that is shaking tremendously?
Who have the look of utter confusion and shame when they press the wrong clock or write the wrong moves on their scoresheet?
Who get paired against someone rated around 2100-2200 and then state excitedly: “Oh my god, I am playing a Candidate Master!”?
Who almost lose their consciousness when a Grandmaster enters a hall because for them it is as if the gods themselves descended on this sorrow land?
Whose pure joy and excitement after a won game are contagious and a pleasure to watch for us more experienced players?
Because most of us were once like them.
8. The “overly-confident-beginner” guy
On the other side of the spectrum, we have beginners who have won a game or two on the Internet or beaten their dad or grandfather and now they think they are the champions of the world.
They call everyone “a patzer”, state that “chess is easy” and that “becoming a Grandmaster is nothing special since basically anyone can do it”.
They think other people should lose their consciousness because when they appear it is as if the gods themselves have descended on this sorrow land.
They are a good example of the Dünning Kruger effect and are, in general, arrogant assholes people emigrate to avoid.
Not to mention that, despite their mediocre play, it is never their fault. They always have a perfect excuse ready.
Which brings me to the next type.
9. The “excuse” guy
So, you have just lost a game and you think it is because of your bad play?
Well, think again.
There is a high probability it might have something to do with the lighting.
Or the lack of fresh air in the hall.
Or the facts there were cameras disturbing you.
Or the fact “Russians” and “Jews” conspired against you.
Or the fact your cat kept meowing the previous night and you were unable to get some sleep.
Or the fact your teammate started coughing loudly just when your game has reached the critical moment.
Or the fact your opponent must have cheated. Definitely! 100%!
Whichever path you chose, the main thing to remember is: whenever you lose a game, it is never your fault and there is a plausible external reason for it.
P.S. In some cultures, this type of player is also known as Robert James Fischer
10. The “can’t-handle-the-nerves” guy
We all know that one guy. He has big talent, good knowledge of openings and superb calculations skills.
But he is never able to display them in a tournament game.
It is inexplicable. He crushes everybody over the Internet. He is a complete monster in training games.
But the moment someone tells him the game will be rated “for real”, he loses his ability to play.
This type of players can be easily recognized. They are often shaking even more than “shy-beginner-guy” and often go down the “quick-drawer” path simply because they have trouble handling the stress and fathoming the possibility that they might lose.
11. The “can’t-handle-the-loss” guy
Although few chess players handle the defeat graciously, some of them go over the top and behave outright rude and badly.
In my relatively short career, I have been insulted, cursed at, called “patzer” and recommended to “give up chess”. My opponents often refuse to give me their hand after their game, or even worse – angrily slam the pieces on the board and then leave, fuming with anger.
And that counts only over the board games. When you add all the comments I received (but also awarded, mind you) in Chesscube, Lichess and Chesscom chats, things get even worse.
There is no denying it is not easy to lose in chess. But behaving like a 5-year-old brat also should not be excusable.
P.S. In some cultures, this type of player is also known as Viktor Korchnoi.*
12. The nice guy
Finally, allow me to conclude this answer on a more optimistic note.
More often than not, you have the chance to play against someone and enjoy it from the very start until the very end.
There aren’t any dirty moves, bitter comments, badmouthing or anything of a sort. You two meet as two chess enthusiasts, enjoy the battle and congratulate yourselves on the fighting spirit and good moves displayed.
And if you are feeling particularly adventurous, you even analyze a game or two together and become friends.
Even if the nice guy is much stronger than you, he will never look down upon you just because you are not equal in strength. He knows it is much wiser to judge people on the basis of their character, their actions and their treatment of other people than on their chess strength.
Also, a nice guy will gladly take pictures with annoying fans and even raise his thumb up after the fans awkwardly do it themselves first.
P.S. In some cultures, this type of player is also known as Ian Nepomniachtchi.
Be like Nepomniachtchi.