Tis the season when every sports writer in America breaks out the chess comparisons. Every year,
MLB writers compare baseball matchups to chess. During the summer, it's not so bad. But during the playoffs,
every, single writeup has at least one reference to chess.
Now with football in full swing, comparisons are being made between linebackers and quarterbacks. This week it was
Ray Lewis vs. Peyton Manning.
To add on top of these is the US Presidential election. And we all know that
somewhere in a political contest, there has to be at least some reference to chess.
This political chess comparison is actually pretty good. The writer seems to have the good sense to take the comparison one step further by actually explaining the comparison of John McCain to an amateur chess player. Most writers will simply say, "it's a chess match" and leave it at that.
And then there is
this article that classifies the two candidates into classic and hypermodern types. He dubs McCain a "classic 'Romantic-era' player" comparing him to
Captain Evans. On the other hand, the author tags Obama as a "Hypermodern positional player" who is "an analytic who prefers big ideas to short-term tactics."
I really don't mind the comparisons. I enjoy the ones that go into the details. But the ones that make the broad-stroke comparisons aren't really that great.
Everything is like chess in one way or another. But to put some thought behind the comparison is what makes the comparison truly worthy.
