Who would win at Chess? Leonardo or Donatello?

[Refractive Reflections]

I came across this image and it got me thinking...

"Tactician vs Genius" by Nikitomate
http://nikitomate.deviantart.com/art...nius-370211212
(Of course, this isn't a chess game board...)

Who do you think would win in the game of Chess? Leonardo (the tactician) or Donatello (the genius)?

Unlike other knowledgeable games where Donatello could easily beat Leonardo, this game provides a more even playing field since Chess would be right up Leonardo's skills in being the leader and a strategist.

So who do you think would win? And why?
You gotta admit, it would be an awesome game to witness.

(Let the Leonardo vs. Donatello debates begin! ...By the way, I don't think we have had many of them here. Usually all we hear about is Leonardo vs. Raphael. )

[Krang100]

I vote for Donatello who had genius level intellect. Although Leonardo was a great leader and strategist.

[raph27]

Donatello.

[CowabungaMikey]

Donatello, I think.

[PApagreg]

Leo and they are playing go

[Blossombrooks]

I think Leo would win, Donny is more intellectual yes, but he also tends to be shown procrastinating and chess is a game of strategy and decision after all. It would be close though!

[Bossa Nova]

I think Donnie would wins hands down. Games of strategy and thought are right up his alley and what he excels in. True, I do think Leo IS very good at strategy, but it's a different type of strategy. He has to be quick to think, quick to action which is where Donatello struggles. I imagine that games like chess work for Donnie because (for him anyway) there's no pressure, he can see everything clearly, map out his game plan in his head and ensure he's at least 2 steps ahead of his partner at all time. In the midst of battle (as we've seen on Nick), he winds up trying to apply this strategy to fighting and he overthinks it whereas Leo has learned how to strike a balance between the two, hence, his being a much stronger leader when it comes to battle. We've seen that Don tends to panic a little when he has to apply his thinking skills in stressful situations. Plus I just have this amusing headcanon that Leo sucks at all non-physical games, no matter what it happens to be.

[Candy Kappa]

Donnie is the intellectual one, but. I think Leo can plan more ahead and have more strategies then one.

[Roland]

I think it is even.

[RaphAndDonnie]

I think, in the end, Donnie would win. I think that Leo would be able to strategize well but Donnie would simply have the smarts and strategy to outwit him. While Leo's planning Donnie's already twenty steps ahead of him.

[Irishmile]

This is a surprisingly hard question to answer... I voted Donnie.. but I think Leo would win one out of three games.

[BubblyShell22]

I think Leo would win because he's an excellent strategist.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

I think it would come down to the end-game. They're too evenly matched in this case. Donnie is a genius, but Leo is just as smart in many ways, and he has strategy and the ability to think like his opponent on his side. Donnie can be impulsive at times, so might be easily maneuvered by the more battle-savvy Leo. Chess is as much about misleading your opponent as anything, and knowing Donnie as well as he does, Leo might make moves intended to sucker Donnie's ego in. So it would probably be a stalemate. That's what I voted for. Donnie might eventually see through Leo's strategy, but probably too late to make a difference. That's why I say stalemate.

[Leo656]

The more I think of it, the more interesting an idea this is to me. And the more I think of it, the harder it is for me to pick a winner. My knee-jerk reaction was Donnie, because as something of a genius he would likely have several strategies to fall back on and the ability to plan several moves ahead. On the other hand, Leonardo is a master strategist, and chess is a simulated game of war. That factor, as well as how much prior experience Leo had playing chess, if any, could decide things in his favor. (Obviously if Leo hasn't played before it's not really fair.)

I really could see it go either way. I can see Donnie having multiple strategies going at once, giving him a clinical and statistical edge, BUT I also see him being taken by surprise if Leonardo began using subtle psychology and/or playing moves that seem to make little strategic sense. In the past, Leonardo has usually shown more strategic flexibility and adaptive thinking; when things don't go his way, he seems to have better skill at changing his plans, whereas Donnie, for all his intelligence, is usually shown deferring to Leo in terms of strategy, etc. They each have an "edge" in different ways; to me, it's not at all as simple as "Donnie is the 'smarter one' so he wins." I think it would be a lot more complicated than that.

To me, it makes for a little bit of a better story if Leo wins, honestly. If Donnie wins, well, he's the "genius", so good job doing what you're supposed to do. I can see Donnie being several moves ahead, anticipating Leo's every move in advance, and taking an aggressive early lead, until suddenly, Leonardo's plays stop making logical sense as he makes several seemingly self-defeating moves for no apparent reason. Unsure of Leo's intentions, he stops being able to predict Leo's strategy because he seems to have none, which makes Donnie suddenly a bit uncertain and paranoid. And then at the end, overconfident, Donnie seems to have victory in hand, only to look closer and realize that Leo had managed to get him into Checkmate, probably with one of the lesser pieces like a simple pawn, thus revealing Leo's seemingly random plays had a strategy all along. Donnie would ask him how he pulled it off, and Leo would answer with some anecdote about having read Sun Tzu's "The Art Of War" 700 times.


If they played 2 out of 3, they'd each win at least one and I have no idea how the third would go. But I think if Leo approached the game as a simulation of warfare (which it is) and applied his skills in that area to the game, he would have a good chance to overcome Donnie's superior clinical intelligence. The guys who know how to count cards don't ALWAYS win at poker, after all, they're just really, really good at it. Plus, it makes for a better story and better character moments (I feel) if Leo gets the surprise win. Especially if it led to a scene later where Donnie wins by applying some of the strategy Leo used to win earlier.

This was interesting; I initially skipped over this thread not expecting to care about it, but it's actually a pretty interesting debate now that I think of it.

[Prowler]

I'd say Leonardo. Just because Donatello is a great scientist, that does not mean his high intellect makes him a naturally great chess player. Chess is more of a game of strategy than anything.

[Donatello19]

I was gonna say Donnie at first since he's a genius and all, but then I realized that him over thinking everything could cause him to lose...so I vote for Leo.

[Shark_Blade]

Leo the strategist.

In addition, Leo seems to handle risks and counterplans more as a leader, so it could translate well into the game.

Donnie's kinda like Hermione Granger to me, books and cleverness, doesn't necessarily mean he'll be great at chess too.

[Irishmile]

I certainly agree about the points you guys made about Leo.. but I think Chess is exactly the sort of thing Donnie would have spent countless hours playing against people online... I think specific experience in the game would win the day.

[Prowler]

Originally Posted by Irishmile

I certainly agree about the points you guys made about Leo.. but I think Chess is exactly the sort of thing Donnie would have spent countless hours playing against people online... I think specific experience in the game would win the day.

Leonardo and Splinter come across as chess players more than Donatello to me.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Agreed. Donnie in IDW appears to be a bit of an MMORPG type of gamer rather than a strategy gamer. Don't recall him playing games in any other versions, but he strikes me as more of a Tetris man than chess, lol!