Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

World Championship match Carlsen v Caruana

2»

Comments



  • sodacat11 wrote: »
    Preparation is far too big a part of modern chess even among amateurs.
    I can see your point, but I still don't agree. Preparation is a huge part of every sport these days; why should chess be any different?




  • Most of the preparation is done in the weeks and months leading up to the match. During the match they're just reviewing what they've already worked on, with patching up done by the seconds if required.

    The real issue with two games a day may be that it comes down to who breaks physically, but that's no different to any other sport either.




  • There'd be an issue with timing too. A 100-move game - and we've had one - could last 7 hours. How do you schedule two games a day on that basis? (You could of course reduce the time control, but I don't think that's fair for a world title match. It's not Bunratty they're playing)




  • cdeb wrote: »
    I can see your point, but I still don't agree. Preparation is a huge part of every sport these days; why should chess be any different?

    There's a bit of an assumption built in here. If something is a big part of a sport or game, does it follow that it's a good thing? Diving is a big part of soccer, etc.

    Huge preparation levels in tennis or golf don't necessarily have a negative effect on the game as a spectacle. Chess is different. Excessive preparation can mean that the entire game is pre-rehearsed. It's as if the game was played two months earlier and all we are seeing is the re-enactment. Even worse, we're seeing re-enactments of mostly computer-generated analysis.




  • Don't know about you, but more diving in chess could be fun. :)

    I agree prep in chess is different to other sports. Yet it is a fact of other sports - and it has in a way led to a feeling of pre-rehearsal. Football for example has become very samey; similar formations and styles and player builds and set-pieces (there's a best spot to aim at from corners for example). The race to be the best can narrow down to a certain playing style in football as much as in chess. Yes, it's more pronounced in chess by its nature, but it impacts other sports too. So why make chess different?

    The point that prep takes place months in advance is a good one too.

    I think overall two games a day just isn't practicable for a world title match. But other suggestions - longer match; winner stays on - are absolutely valid I think.


  • Advertisement


  • Two games a day is too barbaric IMO.

    Why not just abolish the rest days? Makes it more marketable also for the worlwide audience I'd have thought.




  • Joedryan wrote: »
    Two games a day is too barbaric IMO.

    Why not just abolish the rest days? Makes it more marketable also for the worlwide audience I'd have thought.

    If two games a day is barbaric for twenty year olds what is three games in a day ,as we have in many weekenders, for 50+ players????




  • sodacat11 wrote: »
    If two games a day is barbaric for twenty year olds what is three games in a day ,as we have in many weekenders, for 50+ players????

    Its a lower time limit but 3 games a day on a Saturday is also barbaric IMO, I've done it and it can be done, but it shouldnt be done!

    I feel your pain.




  • Joedryan wrote: »
    Two games a day is too barbaric IMO.

    Why not just abolish the rest days? Makes it more marketable also for the worlwide audience I'd have thought.

    Fewer rest days is a good idea. I don't know about the marketability part, but it would give less time for seconds to do repair jobs on preparation within the match, in response to problems that turn up in games. With a 16-game match there would be time to expose potential weaknesses in opening preparation. As it is, Anand was quoted (on ChessBase) as saying after game 3 (!) that Caruana was running out of time to switch to an open Sicilian from 3. Bb5.

    Agreed on two games a day.




  • Is there a good place to follow this online? Ideally with gm commentary.
    Thanks.


  • Advertisement



  • Thanks - that's exactly the sort of thing I was looking for! Can't listen to audio at the moment. Could anyone recomend a podcast/youtube channel where they discuss games like these in simple terms.

    I can play chess but I would not be familiar with any technical terms i.e. didn't have a clue what Rossolimo opening was and benefits etc




  • Most websites showing top games have a chat feed which allows players who know nothing about serious chess to post stupid comments or say what their computers are telling them.




  • steve_r wrote: »
    Thanks - that's exactly the sort of thing I was looking for! Can't listen to audio at the moment. Could anyone recomend a podcast/youtube channel where they discuss games like these in simple terms.

    I can play chess but I would not be familiar with any technical terms i.e. didn't have a clue what Rossolimo opening was and benefits etc

    https://www.youtube.com/agadmator
    and
    https://www.youtube.com/chessnetwork

    are two popular channels that don't overcomplicate things.




  • Most websites showing top games have a chat feed which allows players who know nothing about serious chess to post stupid comments or say what their computers are telling them.

    I think that's the general rule for those chat feeds for anything!

    I'm following the games and reading the blog here:
    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/live/2018/nov/28/magnus-carlsen-v-fabiano-caruana-world-chess-championship-tie-breakers-live




  • Unfortunately Caruana is now busted in game 2 also and Magnus only needs a draw from the next two games.
    The Anand-Gelfand and Carlsen-Karjakin tiebreaks were much more interesting.
    Even so, very unsatisfactory way to decide the world champion. The whole chess world must urge the new FIDE leadership to change it for the next cycle.
    Admittedly Caruana did have more chances to win a game or two in the regular 12 games.




  • Unfortunately Caruana is now busted in game 2 also and Magnus only needs a draw from the next two games.
    The Anand-Gelfand and Carlsen-Karjakin tiebreaks were much more interesting.
    Even so, very unsatisfactory way to decide the world champion. The whole chess world must urge the new FIDE leadership to change it for the next cycle.
    Admittedly Caruana did have more chances to win a game or two in the regular 12 games.

    The only thing that FIDE values is money. Commercial considerations are what has led to this farcical situation we now have. FIDE couldn't care less how the champion is decided as long as the coffers get filled.




  • Well, that was a bit of anti-climax.

    The classical games were more exciting than the rapid.




  • It drove home for me how little merit I feel the playoffs have. I'd sooner have seen draw odds for the champion. At least Caruana wouldn't have had the safety net of the playoffs and might have gone for the jugular in the final classical game or his final game with the white pieces.




  • I feel like there doesn't need to be any change, Carlsen or Caruana could've won in classical if they played better. I don't think it is the "classical" world chess championships, just the world chess championships. The best chess player in the world. If you're not up to the task in quicker time controls then you don't deserve to be considered the best chess player in the world.


  • Advertisement


  • I feel like there doesn't need to be any change, Carlsen or Caruana could've won in classical if they played better. I don't think it is the "classical" world chess championships, just the world chess championships. The best chess player in the world. If you're not up to the task in quicker time controls then you don't deserve to be considered the best chess player in the world.

    There is a rapid World chess champion, and a Blitz World chess champion.

    Those are separate events, so I'd disagree, this is in fact the Classical World Chess Championship.




  • I feel like there doesn't need to be any change, Carlsen or Caruana could've won in classical if they played better. I don't think it is the "classical" world chess championships, just the world chess championships. The best chess player in the world. If you're not up to the task in quicker time controls then you don't deserve to be considered the best chess player in the world.

    This is nonsense. You might as well decide a tie in the Masters or British Open by having the players play pitch and putt to decide the winner.
    In 2012 I found myself in the surprise position of being tied for the lead with four others going into the final round of the Irish Championship. I was to play Stephen Brady as black in the final round so my chances of winning were slim but I made it quite clear before the game that in the event of me tying first place with two others I would not be participating in any kind of play-off, not because I am no good at blitz (I'm about the same as in classical) but because I don't see it as "real" chess. In my mind I would have been joint Irish Champion regardless of what the history books might have shown.
    If I had been in Caruana's shoes yesterday I would have simply defaulted and refused to play in that sham play off but probably they would have got him for breach of contract and witheld his 450k if he did. The whole thing was completely unsatisfactory, we are now left with the feeling that the match may just as well not have been played at all. We are left with a "champion" who could twice only better his challengers in a different discipline to that which he is supposed to be the champion of. They should decide the next match by a game of table tennis or maybe draughts just for a bit of variety.




  • I don't see how a draw odds match would make Carlsen a more deserving champion than a tiebreaker does, other than forcing Caruana to play on in a game 12 where he was significantly worse anyway.

    I didn't sense any safety first approach from Fabiano during the match, I thought his play was fairly ambitious given the positions he got. Game 6 was an interesting one in that regard, where he could have just sat tight but chose to play for more and almost got it.

    Here's hoping he qualifies again next cycle and Mr and Mrs.Sinquefield are willing to finance a longer match.




  • I really enjoyed the match and watched almost every round from start to end.

    I think there could be ways of refining the event to suit both the viewer (who wants to see results and probably more rounds) and the sponsors/FIDE/world chess (who want to make money/monetise the event and, you'd hope, spread chess/grow the game).

    I think the stop/start nature of 2-2-2-2-2-1-1-TBs (20 days) holds the match back as a viewing sport where 4-4-4-2-TBs (19 days) or 4-4-2-2-2-TBs (20 days) would keep your day count similar, increase the number of games by 2, and increase the fatigue factor (but not by enough where the standard drops off a cliff). Over 4 consecutive days of play, I think the chance of a win would increase quite a bit (in your first 2 or 3 sessions depending on the model above), the viewers could sink their teeth in a bit more and you'd have an extra 2 games to market while for the nitty-gritty final rounds, you can rest up a bit.

    However, this would require players to sign their contracts. If the money is there, I don't think they'd object but I obviously can't say with any certainty.


    To go against the general thread, I don't mind the tiebreaks as they are currently. Rapid isn't pot-luck, these guys still play at an incredible standard during it. Obviously not perfect, but its better than say a penalty shoot-out in football in live-or-die games. At some stage, you have to seperate the two and this seems as good a way as any to me. I didn't hear Fabi objecting to it as a means to find a winner.

    The only alternative I would suggest for tiebreaks would be to add an additional 2 classical games on 0-day rest ...1,1 followed directly by rapid games the next day. Those formats would then look like (with my own formats above):
    4-4-4-211R (20 days)
    or
    4-4-2-2-211R (21 days)
    where R is rapid (and blitz) games.




  • I saw this suggested by somebody on Twitter so I cant take the credit for it, how about this:

    18 games. 1 rest day after every 6 games.

    That should sort out the men from the boys :)

    The match might go on for 3 weeks, but its a World ch match, cant see the issue.




  • Joedryan wrote: »
    I saw this suggested by somebody on Twitter so I cant take the credit for it, how about this:

    18 games. 1 rest day after every 6 games.

    That should sort out the men from the boys :)

    The match might go on for 3 weeks, but its a World ch match, cant see the issue.

    That sounds sensible but doesn't solve the problem of a tied match.
    I don't see why we can't just have joint world champions. When Botvinnik and Bronstein drew 12-12 (or whatever it was) was Bronstein any less deserving of being called world champion? Is Caruana a lesser player than Carlsen now?
    The thing about tradition is that once you break with it you have lost it forever. The world championship was seriously undermined by the Kasparov v Short match leading to "champions" like Ponomariov and Khalifman. The abandoned Karpov v Kasparov match that went on forever was another farce and then the final nail in the coffin was the introduction of this infernal blitz/rapid b,,,ls,,t.
    Today's snowflake generation seem to have the attention span of a gnat. Everything is about instant gratification, penalty shoot outs, 20/20 cricket, tennis tie breaks, sevens rugby, etc etc.I hear that they are now even building 12 hole golf courses(God help us). My one hope is that most of these things tend to go in cycles, maybe when everything gets shortened to its minimum people will see how shallow it all is and the trend will be to revert to quality and substance.




  • Interesting comments from MVL about the match on his blog here:

    http://www.mvlchess.com/en/2018/12/06/carlsen-caruana/


Advertisement