MADIBA (Blessings and Peace be upon his transition)

1.

Getty Images / Getty Images

2.

3.

4.

Mike Hutchings / Reuters

5.

WALTER DHLADHLA/AFP / GettyImages

6.

TREVOR SAMSON/AFP / Getty Images

7.

RAJESH JANTILAL/AFP / Getty Images

8.

RAJESH JANTILAL/AFP / Getty Images

9.

WALTER DHLADHLA/AFP / Getty Images

10.

GUY TILLIM/AFP / Getty Images

11.

RAJESH JANTILAL/AFP / Getty Images

12.

Chris Jackson / Getty Images

13.

WALTER DHLADHLA/AFP/ / Getty Images

14.

Mario Tama / Getty Images

15.

Paul Gilham / Getty Images

Chess 2 Chess Part Deux (Finale)

by Eric G. Satterwhite

Unlike sporting enthusiasts of sundry persuasions without exception sporting spectacles specifically chess art admirers, have one mirthful and invaluable privilege-- not being present at the competition-- interested match advocates can record the participating  parties practices velveting  full forbearance;  all the aspects of the chess challenge skirmish, exampling the wonderment of how long each participant busted moves this or that way. 

The sheer mental machinations (executed in silence) would seem to fear rid International organizers of Grandmaster tournaments-- and fast rising new jack matches from the uneasiment-- of renting out large halls due to sub-par marketing stratagems and assumed public lack of interest. 

In fact, the maximal concert halls in cosmopolitan European cities, when appropriating riveting chess tournaments/matches are typically  too close in global scheduling, especially if  the hosting City is the venue for  competition at the chess world championships.

There is another paradoxical paradigmatic pattern. Many supporters of testy temperamental/tempo events, like--say tennis matches hockey,basketball, football, boxing, mixed martial arts, etc., are quite satisfied with a comfortable chair observing TV. Individually, and groups who passionately love sports shows-- generally prefer this cozy platform, a four cornered room projecting the pixel-ed shrine podium the  natural platform of the stadium centerpiece(home address).

Seemingly the lover of chess the silent type-- dreamy contemplative by nature has the destined role of the cloaked chess viewer. Indeed. Since television coverage of chess tournaments (virtually nonexistent) rather, I should say rare, cause  many chess fans  great interest, deemed by many--amazing to view (Grandmaster he cuts faster)chess championships live! 

For the enthusiast  one can never replace those very special, with no comparable experiences, viewership (real-time)of a live sequential/vibrational communication with the masters and grandmasters unleashing neuron/synaptic graphics in the designated tournament scenario.

Connoisseurs of chess turn out to read/study the competing parties, not only to see the 'chessy' characters on the screen - mainly for the genuine competent competitive compassion competing peering players ply personally, so to speak-- in a subordinate nature-- to figuratively smell the scent of chess sets, analyze behind the scenes behind the scene, to be in a festive atmosphere and at the same time the sub-stratospheric mental visuals of working antagonism. Ah!

 So, as you can see, a true chess zealot hankers to acquaint the clash of intellects, characters categorized, whereas passions are not mediated--not only in the battle of demarcated figures arching fights on the tables and their alternates via huge demonstration boards. 

Yet, in the literal the visual opposition if you like, "opposition" of two human beings expressing intent of the etheric realms. And that beloveds procreates synchronization to the audience ardency for theater.

It can be argued that the essentiality of the chess struggle, in the broad tableau-- append the psychological aspect a kind of inherent bi-unity  a man/woman, chess pieces, shifting shapes, and people. As there can be no chess playing chess ( the game "blind" mentally figures are still present on an imaginary blackboard) and may not be the figures that would have moved without human intervention (in the game of chess computers are programmed validating reasoning to their people.)



This  bi-unity melodrama crafts a split clearly clasped in the auditorium--where the audience gander the demonstration board all the while-- holding  chess under the supervision of peripheral vision. Sometimes, during the implementation of strategic plans or in anticipation of the impending outbreak of the combination-- the attention of the hall completely absorbs-- psychoanalyzing the demonstration board. In the moments/explosions  the drama has already taken place, and you can not fix anything, in short, when 
 chess pieces already (you blink you miss) one acted a fateful role on the scene for the individual players. Play on player...play on!

In the climactic scene where the protagonist virtues a decisive victory, we see not only the victor as both an actor and  
Grandmaster of chess theater-- we see more and the demonstration board with chess advocates living their life on it figures-- see/watch/hear their anticipate anxiety (at last) excitation upon the masks of the audience. In short, the essence of the chess battle captures  the hero sympathy/empathy symphony . And there is nothing funny all comedy aside.
It is a fusion of chess pieces and their commanding man, his destiny lies the secret of searing drama that is inherent in a chess battle. It is precisely this unity that gives chess art features, making one not only experiencing  certain ideas from a purely aesthetic pleasure, which in itself is already in abundance, but also to suffer (along with the figures or with the chess player?) 

Or, on the contrary... to simply rejoice .

Players want it or do not want the realization  illuminated by  lighted ramps being on the stage the stage, players are absorbed by execution of their art-- at the same time acting the deliberate "play" on a partner-- and even the public with the inevitability... simulating theater actors.

Chess players do react badly to anyone, even a fairly innocuous transgression on the part of partners, especially during the game. This is not surprising: the game of chess - a creative process that requires full concentration and at the same time limited in time. Any minor interference can be fatal. Every chess player knows this and is the consummate controlled conscientious contrast offering zero interference with the restricted rival.

And again - every manifestation of the correctness or incorrectness  escape not the attention of the attendees. Devotees are interested in not only the pure art of chess actors but, even the manner of the communication on stage-- witnessing proper chess  relations.

Live stage critics  flap that  modern theater art increasingly shines through the stage persona personality of the thespians. And in today's chess art despite the raging torrent of theoretical information, the identity of the individual - especially his attitude, character, mentality - the theatrical effect is sure enough clear. 

However, as it was before--
there are numerous memories of how to behave during a game of chess-- or the mannerisms of masters from former times. 

Apparently, chess players so absorbed in the mind (5 hours continuous play) firmly seize their thinking during the contest seeing oneself from the outside looking in.  This and in another case their manner, placated on style of behavior are of great intrigue to the playgoers.

Thoughts abound that chess dramatizes a  commonality with art and one's moral nature. Every sport has  the same abounding morality of its formula - "let the best man win!"Translation: may the one who most deserved the triumph (in  open competition) sport/don/costume the crown. Sports  mainly to this fact  teaches people to believe in the rightness and the inevitable triumph of justice.
The moral force of chess is situated on this formula, but unlike  the original essence of this characteristic chess is quite different, peep the paradoxical-sounding slogan - "Let the triumph of the weak commence!"

Chess game - it is often a fight between David and Goliath. In cases when one of the opponents managed to, say, win a pawn and he, even skillfully brought this material advantage to its logical conclusion, we are paying tribute to the winner, it remains a common cold symptom. 

But here we have deployed a battle in which one of the parties develop the offensive piece sacrifice (or even two) and dwells in a numerical minority. From now (consciousness shift/elevation) on, whether we like it or not, our sympathies are with the poor material side, we fervently wish her luck. And if the numerically weaker side wins and therefore, is proving to be the strongest-- we're not just gloating we download moral satisfaction-- because we see this victory of intelligence over physical strength. 
The victory of the spirit over brute matter-- the victory of the alleged"weak" over  "illusionary" strong. 

At different times  even   outstanding chess players in particular the first world champion Wilhelm Steinitz-- attempted to prove that chess struggle obeys not only its inherent original laws-- that psychology does not take part in the events on the board  before the chess player  one and only goal - repeats objectively the best move and nothing more.


In practice however, the proponents of this view are rarely able to adhere to this theory perhaps-- as it was with Steinitz, they are forced to this polemical passion. Indeed, already the choice of debut shows that chess is preparing to skirmish with the enemy and not with some kind of abstract personality

"In chess, the factor of extreme importance is the general psychology ... before the game one must be well aware of his opponent, then the game becomes a question of nerves, personality and self-esteem ...".
Whether the concept of Steinitz, considered the greatest chess thinker would lose their fair share of magic and become subjugated  primarily to a logic game. Fortunately, the game of chess is played not by abstract A and B, but people with their own unique character, with its own advantages, weaknesses, and sometimes eccentricities. 

Uniformly players are not fighting with the figures, but with the enemy the enemy with his will, nerves,  individual characteristics, and - not least - to  vanity."

Live communication with chess challengers, radiate individual qualities especially in conflict, stress, and longs for the lover of chess the coming visit to the tournament hall. Chess for lovers above all more  spectacle spectacle. The play, which not only entertains but also provides a deeper insight into the essence of chess the essence of the art of chess {the chess struggle.}

The aforementioned trait of chess subtly felt by notorious physicist Albert Einstein, who wrote in the 1952 preface to the book by chess champion J. Hannaka "Emanuel Lasker: Biography of the world champion. " Admiring the persona of Lasker, (with whom Einstein met several times) considered Lasker as one of the most interesting people with whom he had become acquainted in recent years admiring the "extraordinary power of his mind,"-- a brilliant scientist nevertheless deemed it necessary to express about chess subjective point of view-- that does not coincide with popular notions about this game. 

"I do not even have to admit (Einstein wrote) that are alien to me inherent in this form of the game of suppression of intelligence and spirit of competition."
Of course, this point of view can be considered controversial, especially since in the same preface Einstein says plainly: 

"I am not a chess player ..."

Beloveds see now the power of attraction of an unbreakable two-oneness - a man and chess pieces, the pieces and the man?
I'm not in drama, but people close to the theater, argue that even a great actor can never fully express themselves in the performance of a particular role. Something is "behind the scenes". Internal tactics actor, his tools, his experiences during the show, so who knows what else?     Walk with me...
The viewer sees  not the way but the great goal - the image. The flavor is not trying to hold any direct comparison of chess with the theatrical arts-- I want you to  see that chess in some ways is more favorable to the skulduggery of infinity.

In accordance with the dual nature of chess it can be distinguished the maestro in two cases fully without reserve--  publicly express themselves to the expanses of individual perception. Firstly, chess is a spiritual creation - the chess game is  a work of chess art. 

A moment of complete self-expression breezes in when the audience shocked/capturing chess drama stares in mute delight to the demo board-- forgetting about the creator of this work-- which is sitting front/center on the stage for all to see. This seems to be the only case  the arts and those engaged in the areas of creativity-- when the creator of the masterpiece-- has every reason to feel happy from the fact forgotten positioned (to be neglected). Ponder?

A second way to fully express ourselves wholly self-giving? 
This is the cry of the chess player sounded stunned once in the hall-- when the audience had crossed the border-- so the noise is permitted and it remains for several chess moves in seconds. This cry chess and chided  audience pleads for help   providing players with their silence ...

Such  limitless paradoxical quizzical bemusing  only further the wonderful opportunity to enjoy the amazing actors not unlike any other theater,whose name - chess art, chess, or just struggle - chess.

CHESS 2 CHESS Part 1

by Eric G. Satterwhite

The Metaphysics of Hoops and Beyond (TMHB) invariably cedes you more than what you ever bargained for ~~as we birth a skein on the antiquity, stratagems, and metaphysics of the board game hailed CHESS...

As is our routine TMHB thanks the readership faithful who have recognized/recorded/remitted how are page art influences today's MultiMedia graphics designs as seen on endless televised media outlets , Madison Avenue advertisements (online/offline/sublime), and the virtual visuals of cellphone/mobile devices ...

As uttered many times this is straightforwardly the infinite influence of The Metaphysics of Hoops and Beyond !
Now Part 1 on CHESS 2 CHESS >>>>

CHESS 2 CHESS

                             According to a plentitude of archaeological excavations - competitive stratagems related to the movement of board games (chess) were known in the 3rd and 4th centuries. 

 The true age of the game, known as chess is cloaked in the  secrecy of darkness. 

According to one long lasting legend, chess was invented in the epoch of 1000 BC, by an unknown Egyptian/Khemetic mathematician, who doubled down the invention deemed the mathematical operation of exponentiation. Truly cerebral stimulation...

When the reigning ruling regent Vizier asked this innovator what his reward request for the game chess the mathematician replied, "Let's put on the first square of the chessboard, one grain, the second - two on the third - four, and so on. So Viceroy grant me the amount of grain that happens, upon fulfilling all 64 squares. " The Regent was delighted, calculating/approximating 2 to 3 satchels however, if you calculate 2 to the 64th degree -  this number tallies  more than all the grain provisions  worldwide.

Aditional ancient theorems rewind the creation of chess to the 2nd-3rd millennium BC, derived by archaeological discoveries in Sumer, Mesopotamia,   and Kush. However, since there are exists no references in the aforementioned nations literary archives until 570 BC, many historians recognize this timeframe as the birthmark/manifestation of chess. To this specific  the game of chess was documented in a Persian poem (600 BC), that spawns a referenced referral to the invention of chess in India.

The oldest form of chess - is the militarized game Chaturanga (sanskrit)- apparitioning during the  first century BC. In India, the warrior system   Chaturanga (meaning troops), included chariots (ratha), elephants (hasti), cavalry (asva), and foot soldiers (padati).

Chaturanga's form symbolized  battlefield formations with four arms, which were

directed by four leaders/generals. The locations of the corners ( 64-square board) was represented by 4 people. Movement/travel of game pieces were determined by tossing dice. Chaturanga existed in India until the early 20th century and eventually became known as "chaturradzha" - a game of four kings, while game figurines were painted in four colors - black, red, yellow, and green.

Chaturanga was the successor to the chess form shatrang (chatrang), that originated in Central Asia at the end of 5th century. This form had two "camps" of figures and a new figure displayed as an advisor to King Farzin, played by two opponents. 
The goal - to checkmate/neutralize the opponent's king. Therefore, the "game of chance" was replaced by the "mind game"...mental manipulations.

Penetration of chess from India towards ancient Iran (Persia) during the reign of Chosroes Anoushiravan I (531-579), is chronicled in the 'Persian book of 650-750 years'. The Persian book dictates in great detail chess terminology,names, and the actions of various chess pieces. Chess is also mentioned in the poems of Firdousi, the Persian poet who lived in the 10th century BC. 

Firdousi's poem describes the gifts, presented to Indian envoys to the court of the ruling Persian Raja Sheikh Chosroes Anoushiravan I. 

Amongst these gifts delved a poem that depicted a chess game  battle of two adversarial armies. The warring factions the Persian Empire was conquered by Muslim Arabs, which commenced the renaissance spreading Chess etiquette over the sophisticated ancient world.

In the 8th-9th centuries Shatranj (jeweled game pieces)  journeyed from Asia to the East , actualizing Chess to become known by the Arabic name Shatranj. Shatranj  game terminology and the placement of game figures (shatranga), altered the physical appearance of the game via the new look playing figures. 

The Islamic prohibition of images formatting living Islam, caused the Arab rule makers to utilize miniature abstract figurines-- formulated by small cylinders and cones--, creating easy manufacture of game pieces that proactively contributed to the mass appeal of chess  via figures of sacred geometry.

Shatranj strongest players were ancient Arabs - namely the Shatranj master named Al-Adli and the following Central Asia Shatranj elites were- Abu Naim, Al Khadim, Al-Razi, Al-Soupy, Al-Ladzhladzh, and Abu-Fath, etc. 

Royal patrons of chess in this era were known Caliphs Harun al-Rashid al-Amin, and Ab-Mamun.  Due to participation of the Sultanate hierarchy chess had slowly evolved slowly, as the rook, knight, and king manifested more movement akin to the modern rules-- while other game figures had limited mobility during this stage of chess development. 

For clarity, the Queen could only move one square diagonally--in this period of Caliphate chess.

Thanks to the abstract shapes  this organic game chess gradually ceased to be perceived by  everyday people as a symbol of military battles-- and grew to be associated with the ups and downs of everyday life-- which is reflected in the epics and treatises now ascendant to the sacredness of chess. 

In the early Middle Ages Shatranj penetrated into Europe via Spain and Italy firstly, and later migrated to England , Germany and France. In the Byzantium era,Russia and Bulgaria, chess became known prominently in the 10th-12th centuries. The Arab period is associated with the emergence of so-called by diligent scribes.

Despite fierce opposition initially Muslim and later  Christian religious zealots equated chess to 'heretic gambling' (the use of dice) and condemning chess players to  emissaries of "demonic obsession".

Despite the slander chess surged forward and became the ancient world's most popular game/past time--   among both the feudal nobility and   everyday people.

Chess always on the go was pass-ported to Spain by the Moorish dynasties.  Chess arrival in the Christian world is listed in the Catalonian Testament of 1010 AD.  According varied ancient legends, the most expensive set of chess pieces was presented as a gift to the so-called 'Father of Europe' Charlemagne (at age 8 or 9) from the famous King Harun al-Rashid. Furthermore, there exists a poem that chess existed in the court of the legendary Knight of the Roundtable-- King Arthur. 

 Important archaeological finds in Novgorod reflect that Chess, was primarily distributed by the Moors, and arrived in  Russia directly from the Middle East. Up to this point the names of chess pieces in Russia indicate that they are rooted in Persian and Arabic diadems. 

In the old Russian folk poems are references to chess as a popular game. More recently, the European Chess form arrived in Russia from Italy, via Poland. The theory exists that chess was brought to Russia during the Mongol-Tatar invasion, the Mongol-Tatars in turn learned about this game from the Persians and Moors. During this epoch chess for some time was banned in Europe by the Church, as it was deemed a gambling game-- whereas the Vatican claimed that Chess bears the signs of paganism. However, nothing could (Papal policy included)halt the growing popularity of chess, which is confirmed by numerous literary evidence. The popularity of chess continued to grow and glow like a forest blaze, and soon the planet knew and participated in this most universal game in every province of the ancient world.

In the 14th -15th centuries the Eastern tradition of chess in Europe was no more releasing to the 15th-16th centuries the apparent departure from chess stratagem origins. 

Game upgrades invoked a number of rules changes regarding the mobility of pawns, bishops, and the queen.

Historical versions of chess

Historically it is known chess, in its original form, was a game for four people with four sets of figures. This game was originally called Shatranja (Shat in Sanskrit means "four" and anja means "detachment"). Persian literature in the Sassanid dynasty (242-651 AD century), was written a historical text scripted in Pahlavi (Middle Persian), named the "Textbook of chess." Modern Persian language/dialect dwells the same word used to denote Shatranja in modern chess.

 Popular historical theory is that Shatranja (chess), according to Indian mysticism represents the cosmos/universe. The four sides represent the four elements - earth, wind, fire and water, the four seasons, and the four temperaments of humanity. The argument that the word chess, derives from a Persian "king" (Shah) coupled with the term chess originates from the Persian verbiage connoting "The King is dead." 

Bulletin of the ancient game of chess Shatranja

What we duly note  are the names of  chess pieces  slightly differ in varied parts of the world however, their shape and rules of movement  are virtually identical.

Moorish consulates  certainly had the biggest impact/influence on solidifying the play-style  of chess than any other chess centered culture. The word "chess" was originally derived from the Persian Shah (king) and the Arabic word mat (died). The contribution of the early Moors in the game includes a game blindly referred to as chess archived in 700 AD, inventorying  tournaments, qualifying players, and chaired chess challenges  dutifully-described as detailed in the first book about chess entitled 'Al-Adli'.  'Al-Adli' contains beginner debuts and pontificates firstly chess challenge scenarios labeled 'attributes'-- discussed thoroughly the differences in the Persian and Indian rules. 

The Yugoslav library contains invaluable Arabic/Moorish manuscripts ( the 9th century), categorizing the competitive challenges 'attributes' of chess competition. The aforementioned manuscript was discovered in 1958. 

Some of these 'attributes' (chess problems) are based on the legend of "Mat Dilarama." According to legend, Dilarama was a chess player who gambled and lost all his possessions. In the last game he parlayed his wife, but played recklessly and almost lost the game. However, his wife noticed that he can checkmate his opponent if sacrificed both his rooks. His wife whispered the gamesmanship in his ear, and Dilarama won the game and maintaining his marriage.

Byzantine chess, Zatrikion is played on a round board, yet the pieces and mobilization is similar to  Arab/Moorish chess during this timeframe.

After penetration of chess in Europe, there are many books devoted to chess undoubtedly the ancient world's most popular game. 

Probably one of the most important and valuable of these books was written in the Middle Ages by the Spanish king Alfonso the Wise in 1283. This Great book contains 150 color miniatures based on the original Persian game figures. Furthermore, the book chronicles a collection of endgames, borrowed from Moorish literature. Most interesting chess is passed through the history of many cultures and has tested unlimited boundaries of self expression the experience boarded in mysticism. 

Today's official rules of chess are perfectly preserved and differ little from those used by chessmen 1430 years ago.

Chess - seemingly mirrors present culture; where there exists change--chess checkmates the structure of society--while  organically enforcing the rules of universal dynamism. So subtly.

For example, the figurine of the "Queen", appeared initially in the Middle Ages, when ladies exacted an important societal/leadership positioning forwarding to bestow honors on knightly chess tournaments. 

Chess succumbed to the Queen as an advisory to the King - a Vizier in the eastern variant of chess. The current freedom of movement, independence, "emancipation" of the Queen was unthinkable before the end of the XV century.

Older versions of the game are generally less dynamic, as reflected in the domain of its ancient society. In traditional Chinese chess "master" is slow-moving,  maneuvering in confined spaces - miming the walls of the Imperial Palace. Indian "Chaturanga" chess followed a strict division of figures on the haste of caste - segregating priests, rulers, peasants, and servants.

Ancient Japan, the military-aristocratic system of the XII century, allowed the man of noble birth, the readiness to apply individual due diligence to achieving a rapid societal take-off. Japanese chess pieces empowered the players the opportunity to raise personal societal status. To the contrary the European chess pawn when maneuvered to the other side of the chessboard-- is transformed into any shape - even the queen.

In modern times, chess continued materializing a changing reality. During the Nazi period in Germany, the "game of kings" rendered asunder an attempt to turn into chess into the "game of the Fuhrers": featuring chess battles with several leaders/players.

 One strategic rule of the participants created the all-out destruction of the opponent meaning someone had to be utterly defeated. The Nazi chess concept failed to influence or develop  (outside Nazi leadership) segueing/sequestered to rancid rubble akin to the worldwide machinations of the Fuhrer.

Next CHESS 2 CHESS Part 2