From: Larry Kaufman <lkaufman <at> COMCAST <dot> NET>
Date: 14 dec 2002
Subject: "art"

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chiaki Ito" <shogi <at> MAIL <dot> COM>
To: <SHOGI-L <at> TECHUNIX <dot> TECHNION <dot> AC <dot> IL>
Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 10:37 AM
Subject: Re: Ratings and grades (was: improve your shogi)


> I loved the title of Tony's book, the Art of Shogi.  If in fact Shogi is
> art, it should be something which cant be quantified in numbers, right?
>
> Chiaki
>
     There has been much discussion over the years as to whether chess in a
game, an art, a science, or a sport.  Perhaps the same discussion occurs in
Japan over shogi, but since I can't read much Japanese I wouldn't know.
     Anyway, although clearly chess has aspects of all four, the concensus
opinion now is that chess is primarily a sport.  There are even serious
efforts being made to include it in the Olympics, though I don't expect that
to actually happen.
     Shogi is sufficiently like chess so that the answer to the above
question should probably be the same for both.  Can you tell us if the shogi
magazines discuss this question, and what the concensus of the pros is on
it?
     If it is primarily a sport (which is my view), then numerical measures
are quite appropriate.
     Your comments remind me of the late Chess Grandmaster Eduard Gufeld,
who constantly emphasized the artistic side of chess.  His practical results
were not impressive for a grandmaster, but sometimes he played spectacular
games that people loved to play over.  Often he would play a beautiful game,
but ultimately lose on time or due to a time pressure blunder.  Perhaps
there are similar characters in the shogi world?

     Larry