This is a youtube cover of the Rivers Cuomo (band member of Weezer) song - Chess.
Chess by Rivers Cuomo (Lyrics): chess is such a difficult game there are so many pieces so many squares where you can go so few promises never you mind all the others anticipating your next move i know it's hard cause you got a lot to do street signs and traffic lights ever confusing me it's you stop left, go right, no U-turn, where's the goddamn exit never you mind all the others influencing your next move i know it's hard cause you got a lot to prove lalalalalalala~ sex and drugs and rock n' roll pieces are rocking for you this puzzle can't be done wrong so cover 'em while you can never you mind all the others aniticipating your next move never you mind all the others never you mind what they do don't let them get you down cause it's there too you'll be trapped forever under their shoe here is the paper so go i know it's hard cause you got a lot to do fa la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la~
"Judging creativity is hard to do without being subjective. The closest I see how to do objectively is to measure setting problems for one's opponent.
Sullivan's study (comment #4 by alchessimist) includes a measure of "complexity", and scales the raw deviations from Rybka+Crafty's best move down in complex positions. I have been developing a more-detailed model that (when finally tuned) will compute expected deviations for both the featured players and their opponents. The higher the latter, the more problems set for the opponent. My model requires taking data for (at least) the top ten moves in every position, so my engine---a special private version of Toga II which I know has not been regressed against GM games---needs to run far longer per move to reach depth 18 as in Sullivan's study.
Thus a "dynamic" player with a higher error rate may benefit if he/she also created a higher expected rate for the opponent. It will be interesting to see whether this work restores the likes of Tal and Alekhine (at their peaks) to the parity their over-the-board reputations would suggest. Alternatively, it may reveal that "positional" players are also the cagiest."
I have previously blogged (here) about Sullivan's excellent research (link) and very much look forward to seeing the results of Regan's analysis. The idea of analysing the effects of dynamic play, as measured by problems set for an opponent, is an interesting one. Dynamic play is likely to increase the effect of performance psychology, time pressure, and possibly the Einstellung (set) effect. To me, dynamic play is what makes chess a sport.