If in a battle, I seize a bit of debatable land with a handful of soldiers, without having done anything to prevent an enemy bombardment of the position, would it ever occur to me to speak of a conquest of the terrain in question? Obviously not. Then why should I do so in chess?

How can I lose to such an idiot?

The isolated Pawn casts gloom over the entire chessboard

If in a battle, I seize a bit of debatable land with a handful of soldiers, without having done anything to prevent an enemy bombardment of the position, would it ever occur to me to speak of a conquest of the terrain in question? Obviously not. Then why should I do so in chess?

Many men, many styles; what is chess style but the intangible expression of the will to win.

Do not always be thinking of attack! Moves that safeguard your position are often far more prudent.

No pawn exchanges, no file-opening, no attack.