Fischer vs. Spassky; The Power of Strong Ties
The game of chess can be thought of as a conflict between two, mutually antagonistic groups that satisfy the structural balance property (the network can be divided into two subsets X and Y composed of nodes entirely friendly with each other and antagonistic to the opposition). Each piece constitutes a node and all pieces share at least a weak tie with one another. Throughout the course of the game, each player develops his or her pieces (nodes) into a more cohesive unit; weak ties become strong ties as the match progresses. Winning the game requires a harmonious strategy; breaking the opponent necessitates a symphony—a fluid, coherent, and uniformly developed attack. This, naturally, requires a network of strong ties between all attacking pieces. A strong tie is defined by this course as a particularly strong relationship in which both parties share a considerable amount of the same information amongst each other. For the case of this thought experiment, consider two pieces to have a strong tie if they are attacking the same four square segment of a chess board (for example: E4,F4,E5,E6). This uniformity poses a significant threat to the opposition. The player who cultivates the largest, most optimal network of strong ties between his or her attacking pieces will normally come out as the victor.
(Fischer vs. Spassky 1992)Take the simple example of Bobby Fischer vs. Boris Spassky (1992). The position above is a blatant representation of the power of strong ties. White’s pieces (the two knights and bishop) constitute a network of strong edges honing in on the C6,D6,C5,D5 set. This forms a formidable attack on Black’s king, pictured on C6. The weak defensive network that black composes cannot contain white, and Bobby Fischer shortly overtakes Spassky and checkmates his king. While some of black’s pieces also form a strong network (both bishops and the knight on F6,E6,E7,F7), due to the location of the loci, the network adds little to no value to black’s strategic position. While we have not necessarily covered this to a great extent, this represents the simple, often overlooked, fact that not all strong ties are necessarily valuable. Both the context and the nature of the network must be taken into consideration to assess the actual value of the information that the network provides. Fischer’s network of strong ties easily outdoes Spassky’s weak ties and poorly utilized strong ties.
More instances can be found across any and all chess games. This particular example and others can be found at: https://database.chessbase.com/?lang=en.