Science & Tech Quote by Boris Spassky

Spassky draws a sharp line between machine resilience and human psychology at the chessboard. Computers defend well because they calculate without fatigue, never lose objectivity, and calmly find the only moves that hold. Defense often demands extreme precision and alertness to hidden resources; an engine can sift through millions of lines and spot perpetual checks, fortresses, or tactical tricks that a person might overlook. Humans, by contrast, feel pressure, grow impatient, and crave the initiative. Attacking allows guiding principles and momentum, while defense frequently offers a single narrow path where one slip is fatal.

Modern time controls amplify this difference. In Spassky’s era, long sessions and adjournments gave defenders a lifeline: there was time to untangle complications, consult one’s own notes between sessions, and return with a clear plan. Contemporary formats compress decision-making, include increments that encourage faster rhythms, and increasingly feature rapid and blitz tiebreaks. Under such conditions, the practical value of the initiative rises. The attacker can shuffle, probe, and pose repeated problems, confident that the clock will eventually force a mistake. The defender must keep solving puzzles with less time and growing psychological strain.

The comment also speaks to the gap between computer evaluation and over-the-board reality. Engines may show equality in a difficult position because there exists a sequence of only moves that saves the game. That kind of equality is theoretical. For a human, especially in time trouble, it can be illusory. Spassky’s insight helps explain modern preparation and strategy: players seek positions that are objectively sound but rich in dynamic pressure, betting on the opponent’s fallibility. It is not a celebration of recklessness, but a recognition that, in today’s tempo, activity and initiative are often the most practical forms of defense.