A lot of people argue that fencing equals chess on the fencing strip. Although it may serve as an interesting metaphor, borrowing here and there from each other in terms of thought and in case of a stronger opponent, maybe prayer, my experience is that the way you analyze chess is vastly different from how you analyze fencing.


One of the key differences is that in case of chess, you always have to wait for your opponent to move, the moves are limited to what’s on the board and the position the pieces are in. You have to move in fixed steps according to squares.


Fencing is fluid. Timing is everything, regardless of whether the opponent has moved or hasn’t moved. The analysis, contrary to in chess, relates directly to the rhythm and timing of particular moves and what moves the opponent has gotten used to so far.


Playing chess due to strong gambling skills I score near 250 points higher (computer rated ELO, CrELO) than you’d expect based on my puzzle-level. My CrELO-score had an upper limit of 1800. I couldn’t concentrate due to forced antipsychotics-abuse. Chess did help, but mucuna pruriens really helped me score higher than that.


I make puzzles and this does help me analyze the board, but as I reached a higher level, I figured out that I hadn’t fully realized what it actually was I was analyzing. I was just “seeing” but I didn’t know what. In my efforts to restore the brain damage I suffered, I went back to the beginning and analyzed what it was I analyzed. I hope it helps you as well.

Literature:

  • Emile M. Hobo, “A Primer in the Art of Chess Warfare: Direct Intentions” - May 13th, 2018. [Article]
Emile M. Hobo / HoboArt © 2018