< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 34 OF 47 ·
|Nov-23-11|| ||shach matov: <I still think there should be a brilliancy prize awarded either each round or overall; it couldn't hurt>|
It could help; but again since these are top players who are also highly influenced by comps, their major priority it seems is to play as accurately as they can. Risk taking could easily backfire, resulting in a lost game. It still doesn't meat that some wouldn't try, but after losing a game or two, they're very likely to go back to playing solid, drawish chess. At this level, riskier chess is not necessarily more successful.
This is all theory though; in practice things may be different. The recent 3-1-0 formant seems to produce many divisive games. My theoretical argument could also be used against it, but in practice it seems to work.
|Nov-23-11|| ||WannaBe: I personally (patzer, class Z player here.) do not see any season, <ANY SINGLE REASON> at all, that Anand should give away any novelty move(s).|
That is like pulling off a trick play in American football in a meaningless pre-season game.
People keep on mentioning great players' names, it was a different era, a different age, a different time. Things change, chess change, styles of play and approaches/strategies change, with the advances in computer chess, where moves and moves (ahead) are analyzed why are you not expecting more draws??
Computers have already proven that tic-tac-toe is a drawn game. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solved...
How long, do you expect, that chess will be proven to be a solved game, if played to absolute perfection? If you can see 50-ply deep, the game is and will always be, a drawn game.
If football/soccer is played to perfection, every single game will be 0-0. Will you still watch it?
|Nov-23-11|| ||Billy Vaughan: <Computers have already proven that tic-tac-toe is a drawn game.>|
I don't think you need a computer to prove that :p
|Nov-23-11|| ||Billy Vaughan: <I think Tal must be rolling over in his grave at the amount of draws in this tournament.>|
Tal never made draws. Certainly not, say, over 200 of them at 16 moves or less.
|Nov-23-11|| ||Domdaniel: The issue of computer influence on style is a vast and complex one. I don't think these guys actually play against computers much -- they use them as tools, in various ways. I think it's unlikely that engine accuracy has made GMs unwilling to take risks.|
In fact, the top players take risks all the time, in order to create subtle imbalances. Not great swashbuckling Tal-in-his-youth risks, but risks all the same. They could draw by playing ultra-solidly in every game, but they try for more.
I actually made the opposite mistake once, in my first tournament game for 16 years. I'd been practicing with engines, not always strong ones -- and I knew that computers, when losing, tend to throw away pawns in order to defer mate or serious loss.
So, game one vs a person, and I reach a near-winning position, with an attack, an extra pawn, positional superiority. And he offered me another pawn.
Still thinking in engine mode, I thought it was just desperation. I forgot that humans set traps -- I grabbed the pawn, and it cost me a Knight. And I still managed to draw, by carrying on the attack as if I'd planned the piece sac, so my opponent got worried.
That's why I prefer humans, both as chess opponents and for other, um, activities -- psychology.
|Nov-23-11|| ||acirce: <Billy Vaughan> Quite. If they really wanted to honour Tal, they should play a lot more non-fighting draws. But these top GM's are so ego-driven and ambitious. Shame.|
|Nov-23-11|| ||HeMateMe: Anand: Hey kid, remember when I granted you a four game match, when you were just 13?|
MC: What do you want Vishy?
VA: Remember when I used to do those cute Monty Python imitations for you? Let you sit at my table, at the big tournaments?
MC: We have a chess game to play here, Vishy....
VA: Listen, Kid. How 'bout I get you a date with Ashwari Rai?
MC: Vishy, you couldn't get into her zip code, much less her burka. Make your move!
VA: Listen kid, I can give you all the orange juice in my hotel mini bar. No charge. We need to have a quiet game, here, I don't need the stress.
MC: But, I need a full point, to win this tournament!
VA: Oh, who cares. We both have our T-shirt money. And, you're next. I'm just keeping the place warm for you. I'm tired. Lets have a 14 move Petrov draw.
MC: Sorry champ. I'm in the mood for a wide open Sicilian!
VA: Kasparov told me that, during your duel training sessions, you were watching reruns of "Hanna Montana" on YouTube. Maybe I should let that slip out, during my next interview?
MC: Oh, geez...fine, you can have a draw. Don't trip over your bean sprouts, running from the table.
|Nov-23-11|| ||WannaBe: <DomDaniel> Points taken, and I would like to extend this line of thought a bit further, if you would humour me...|
Let us take the role of 'seconds'... Granted, Bent really was nothing more than a sandwich-getter or middle-of-the-night-waker-upper (okay, tongue in cheeks here).
With computers, do(es) the role(s) of second become antiquated? Why call someone in for analysis? When you can leave Deep WannaBe running for 8 hours while you sleep?
If a GM is to prepare a line 15 moves deep, with all the 15... moves expected, what really have become of this game?
Perhaps, maybe, in another decade, maybe two, we will have the same discussion on 25... and given another few years after that, we'll be discussion 100... (By we, I don't mean you and I, but just us, in general.)
In another two decades, perhaps less, we will have so much computing powers, it would be ridiculous, the video game industry will put you in the middle of a battle field, (Hello, Holo-Deck!!)
I mean, by golly, people thought 1...c5 was ridiculous, one time, long time ago.
|Nov-24-11|| ||King Death: < acirce: But these top GM's are so ego-driven and ambitious. Shame.>|
Of course they are. Among other things, these qualities, like it or not, are what got them to the top.
|Nov-24-11|| ||parmetd: Let's not forget Tal in his later years was extremely solid, known for his undefeated streaks and strong endgame.|
|Nov-24-11|| ||King Death: <parmetd> Here's a well played ending from early in his career and one of his own favorites: Smyslov vs Tal, 1964|
|Nov-24-11|| ||visayanbraindoctor: From the Capablanca page in a link by <WilhelmThe2nd>:|
<Capablanca's own attitude towards speed chess, from what is known, seems to have been somewhat ambivalent. As one report below states, he "...made light of it as a test of skill..." (The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Thursday, July 19th, 1928, page 6A). Another interview shows what he thought of as its shortcomings:
[Helms] "There are so many drawn games nowadays. Especially is this so between grand masters. What's the remedy? A faster time limit?"
[Capablanca] "That's all nonsense." (A favorite expression with the champion.) "Those who know good chess will not complain. Faster chess means poorer chess. I'm not in that business. Leave that to the duds."
[Helms] "You have played much rapid-transit chess in your time. Was it helpful or otherwise?"
[Capablanca] "Yes and no. You can do too much of it."
(from the The Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Sunday, March 27th, 1927, page 6C, names in square brackets added by me)>
What is striking in this interview in relation to the topic of draws is that chess fans before WW2 were already complaining of too many GM draws (at a time when there was still no FIDE GM).
One solution that chess fans were also apparently proposing is to speed up the game. However, at rapid time limits, errors will significantly rise.
It is the nature of chess that if both players manage to avoid errors, the game will most likely end in a draw. The better the players, the less the errors, the more the draws.
I agree with those saying that there is nothing wrong with fighting draws at all.
|Nov-24-11|| ||King Death: < visayanbraindoctor>: What's ironic is that Capablanca was one of those who proposed to expand the game to a 10 x 10 board in the 1920s.|
|Nov-24-11|| ||anandrulez: Evidence that Tal Organisers maybe not as intelligence as previously thought and despite their high tech facilities :
I mean what are they doing with Vishy in press conf ?|
|Nov-24-11|| ||JoergWalter: I don't think money is that great motivator, in fact it may lead to prearranged games.|
|Nov-24-11|| ||JoergWalter: <anandrulez> one question besides chess and not meant defamatory as Anand is really one of my favourite players. Is he wearing a wig? His hairstyling makes me think so.|
|Nov-24-11|| ||anandrulez: <Joergwalter> No Vishy doesnt wear a wig . He has the same hair texture as
http://www.chessbase.com/news/2007/... that is when he was teens .|
|Nov-24-11|| ||JoergWalter: <anandrulez> ok, when you are sure it wasn't a wig way back then :-).|
|Nov-24-11|| ||SatelliteDan: Chucky has the most decisive games so far.|
|Nov-24-11|| ||SatelliteDan: Good time for me, got off at 02:30 from work with next 4 days off.Just played a few games on ICC. Now ready for Tal tourn, then Turkey. problem will be when to sleep.|
|Nov-24-11|| ||SimonWebbsTiger: Oh my -- good players don't chuck away pawns and pieces and make strategical mistakes, with the result a game is drawn. And people moan???|
If you want crass errors, blunders, decisive mistakes for entertainment - as your measure of good chess - play your games at weekend tourneys.
|Nov-24-11|| ||JoergWalter: <SatelliteDan: Chucky has the most decisive games so far.>|
May Chucky win! I like this guy.
|Nov-24-11|| ||SatelliteDan: It may be safe to say Ivan is a players player. By that he has a lot of heart and does risk. I remember only about a year ago or 18 months when the roomers were flying about his rating going below 2700!
Go for it GM Ivanchuk!|
|Nov-24-11|| ||SatelliteDan: I really do want to see Naka do well first most since I am USA.|
|Nov-24-11|| ||JoergWalter: <SatelliteDan: I really do want to see Naka do well first most since I am USA.>|
that is understandable but unfortunately will not happen this year.
Maybe next year...
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 34 OF 47 ·