I think of it more as a fight for people who can't really fight.

just a Game . Not a War .. Do you agree ? and why ??

Often War. I can fight np :)

when i make decisions, i think about all the consequences...looking through every avenue of approach before you make a decision, really helps in making the right choice..(even though ive only been playin chess for about 2 months, its really helped)

Chess is war ! Maybe a little too much drama going on here. Fisher famous for his chess statement "something to the point of crushing your opponents mind"---now fisher not only never saw military service,his firm stands were-----shape and sieze of chess chairs, sieze of chess pieces, aug. about time clocks, claims opponents were cheating. Great chess player, yes ! One of the great one's. On the human side he leaves a lot to be desired.

Chess is a psychological battle. Josh Waitzkin in his lessons on the Chessmater game pointed out how important it is for players not to lose their cool when they lose an advantage, how important it is not to get tricked into playing a different style than you're used to, and how not to get unnerved by unusual openings and moves.

From my experience that advice works just as well for the average player as it does for a grandmaster like Josh Waitzkin.

Guys, let's not get ultra-literal here. When we say "chess is war" we're using a metaphor to mean that certain aspects of chess are similar to war. We're not trying to say that the pain of losing is comparable to the pain of getting your leg blown off in battle or of having a child in the hospital.

But war DOES involve strategy and tactics and there is definitely an element of trying to one-up somebody psychologically in chess that can be seen as a mental battle. This is all most people mean when they say "chess is war".

At least, that's what I mean.

Let's not get bent out of shape over a metaphor.

I perceive two distinct types of players.

a. Those who think of chess as a frivolous game to be played for fun only. They tend not to do much more than play...very little, if any, study...and they don't mind losing (of course, they do prefer to win).

b. Those who look at chess as "war like"...who put in a lot of time at work and study to improve. They hate to lose. They will lose graciously, but there is something about losing that rubs them the wrong way. They then study and practice more...so that they can get better and better. And, to lose less and less. This sense of improvement is, to them, a lot of fun.

Of course, there are those who are somewhere between these extremes. Many, in fact. But that's the essence.

war is not two minds battling against each other by moving plastic pieces on a board. war is watching your best friend bleed out in a city whose name you cant pronounce or shooting 15 year old who run towards you with a bag in her hand. if you think chess and war are even remotely similar you are stupid. 

You just used the word "battling" though, which kind of makes my point...I'm not saying chess is anything like watching people bleed out or shooting 15 year olds, but some of the strategical and tactical aspects of chess are analogous to war...hence the use of the war term "battling".

Who are you guys trying to kid? Chess was invented because of war in the olden days.

I wrote a piece about that.  Click on it.

http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/is-chess-a-game-or-war

The connection between war and chess - the fact that both involve tactics and strategy - is pretty weak. If you can call chess a war than you can call changing lanes on the highway a war, too, and at least with driving on the highway there's an element of danger involved. Chess is just a game.

That having been said, I still like to refer to my chess games as "epic battles" and other similar things, just to kidd around.

The difference is thatm unlike changing lanes on a highway, chess is MEANT to simulate in a limited way the tactics and strategy of an actual war.

Is it only a game? Of course it is, I don't think most people seriously deny that. I just don't see any issue with referring to it as a "war". It's two sides meant to simulate opposing armies and the game is meant to be a limited simulation of strategy and tactics involved in war. So I don't see the issue with calling chess a "war" metaphorically.

Just don't act too serious about it, because yeah, as we all know, real war is Hell. I don't think most people are seriously considering it analogous to REAL war, however.

It is a war in game form.

Its a struggle!

Well, as I said...we have the two kinds of players: a. It's just a fun game. b. It is war (yes, even though it is a "virtual" war).

Nothing wrong with either.

I've spent most of my life avoiding war. It's worked so far. I'd rather just sit here & play chess.

joeydvivre: That's just stupid.  In fact, I think if you think that chess is war, I want to drag you to a real war and watch you cry, turn ashen white and puke.  Who wants to go?

I'm stupid? I think you are talking about yourself.

And, sonny, I am a veteran (U.S.N., 1961-1967). I have put my life on the line for my country.

Anybody being a puker...it is you.

And...this "war" talk is just a metaphor. So, get over yourself.

BTW...that will be the day when you are going to drag me anywhere.

Look, idiot...and I'm a guy who grew up in Brooklyn so I recognize a New Yorker who is an idiot by his big mouth.

What I said is my opinion. That's all it is. You have your opinion...you don't have mine.

I said some people think chess is a fun game and nothing more while others think it is a war (they don't mean literally...duh). And, the people in the latter camp (in general) take chess more seriously and strive harder to improve.

You ain't gonna ruin my Fathers's Day. Take a hike...a long walk off a short pier.

It's an all consuming black hole is what it is.