< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 15 OF 15 ·
|May-02-13|| ||Eyal: A nice chessvibes video with the players talking about Alekhine: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2vD...|
|May-02-13|| ||Dionysius1: Hi <pberker> <I actually hadn't realized the cruelty angle to "sustained sarcasm" as you put it>. and the rest of your post. Thanks - that's very even handed of you. You seem a thoughtful type, and I like your/wikipedia's distinction irony and sarcasm. Cheers, D|
|May-02-13|| ||perfidious: <Petrosianic: ....Cheapest of all was when Bisguier went home thinking he'd "won" the US Open (on tiebreak) and after he got home, he was notified that nope, the TD made a mistake adding up the tiebreak points and Fischer actually "won" the tournament instead....>|
Had this happen in a Vermont championship long ago-the TD actually gave me the trophy, then contacted me a few minutes after, stating he had made an error in his calculations. All I could do was laugh.
|May-02-13|| ||schweigzwang: Vermont??? They play chess here?|
|May-02-13|| ||QueentakesKing: <HeMateMe> Is there still a glimmer of hope for an american world chess champion after bobby? In the near future? Maybe before the century ends. (2013-1972= 41 years dormancy). Suck.|
|May-02-13|| ||perfidious: <schweigzwang: Vermont??? They play chess here?>|
Still do, so far as I know.
|May-02-13|| ||QueentakesKing: <Billy Vaughan> Its been freakin 41 years thats why.|
|May-02-13|| ||schweigzwang: <Ok, there are opinions which say players shouldn't be forced to play a certain way, but a lot of people are trying to market the game and expose it to a wider audience, and right or wrong they are trying to encourage more positive results.>
Marketing, yes. But typically this means catering (or pandering) to the unsophisticated, and in the US at least this means injecting "personal interest" stories (and hyping controversy) and ensuring decisive results. (Compare football or hockey penalty shootouts.)|
It's probably cheaper and easier to do this than to teach a broader audience to appreciate what led to the non-decisive state "at the end of regulation time" in the first place. But I am encouraged by what I've seen in the live coverage of recent matches--perhaps the internet + computer software + talented commentators (especially) will do the trick.
I seem to recall in the early rounds (2 and 3?) of Zug that although there were MANY draws, very FEW of them were "grandmaster" short draws. They were actually contested. They were fun to watch (given that I was able to listen to commentary by folks who actually know what was happening on the board). I did not find these less interesting merely because they were not "decisive" (or "effective" as they put it over at the Alekhine site).
What we have now is not ALL that different in essence from watching Shelby Lyman on PBS in 1972 during Fischer-Spassky, but the bells and whistles are helpful.
But please, dear God, let us avoid American Idol - style viewer input concerning who should survive through to the next round ...
|May-02-13|| ||perfidious: <QueentakesKing: Is there still a glimmer of hope for an american world chess champion after bobby?>|
Is there the vaguest chance you will ever have anything intelligent to say on it?
<....In the near future? Maybe before the century ends. (2013-1972= 41 years dormancy). Suck.>
That last word about says it all, I should think, regarding your, ah, contribution.
|May-02-13|| ||Billy Vaughan: <QueentakesKing: <Billy Vaughan> Its been freakin 41 years thats why.>|
The United States is just one country, and there are many other countries that take chess more seriously. The Soviet machine was so powerful it's surprising when <any> player who isn't from the Eastern blog penetrates the highest level. And even among Western nations the US hasn't been stronger than England, France, or the Netherlands; why aren't you surprised that <they> haven't produced any champions in even longer? Chess also tends to produce champions who reign for years, and Kasparov reigned longer than almost anybody due to his unusual individual skills. I mean, there have only been four "classical" champions since Fischer. So given the right perspective it's no surprise the US hasn't managed yet to produce another champion.
|May-02-13|| ||mrandersson: A question guy does any one here still use any old engines to go over there games? Old engine I use is abrok 5 0 been using it for years a post fruit engine. I know itís a dinosaur these days but still gives good analysis. My main engine is still rybka 3 dynamic best style engine iv come across I think. Any thoughts guys?|
|May-02-13|| ||mrandersson: Houdini 3 is a monster i know but for some reason or an other im not a big fan of its style. All the top engines are quite same these days i think Shredder even thou its old has a very different out look just bit weak v the clones etc.Even Hiarcs lost its self deep junior on other hand has kept to its roots.|
|May-02-13|| ||pbercker: @ <mrandersson>
The super-final computer chess tournament is ongoing right now ... the two finalist Houdini 3 (3144) vs. Stockfish2.5 (3104) are battling it out. So far it's a series of draws punctuated by the occasional win by Houdini +3 ... and Stockfish +1 ... and Stockfish is free! (stockfish 3.0 is out)
The tournament is live at ...
|May-02-13|| ||pbercker: Stockfish 3.0 is out, but is nominally stronger than Houdini 3. Houdini 3 may be a monster but Stockfish is not far behind, and for the price ($0) it's a terrific deal!|
|May-02-13|| ||mrandersson: Critter is quite strong to but again bit like Houdini. But what the criter guy did few months back with his hacked h3 robodini cant help but wonder how long till all engines play the same.|
|May-02-13|| ||Troller: Tiebreaks in closed tournaments are silly. In single round robins obviously a player can have an easier schedule; but he should not be punished for that, as it stems from the drawing of lots. In double round robins tiebreakers make absolutely no sense. This proved to be a problem in the Candidates of course, where a single winner was needed (but then a rematch would make most sense).|
I am pretty sure both Aronian and Gelfand will say that they finished shared first, were they asked. I cannot believe that many chessplayers take tiebreakers in closed tournaments very seriously.
|May-02-13|| ||anandrulez: Indeed joint winners are good for Chess. There ain't no meaning for these silly tie breaks if only Kirsan can think lol|
|May-02-13|| ||messachess: I think that this has to be seen as a comeback of sorts for both Aronian and Gelfand. Come to think of it, Anand hadn't been riding very high lately himself.|
|May-02-13|| ||haydn20: Aronian made a huge comeback after losing to Ding. He beat Svidler, Kramnik and MVL. Gelfand beat Adams and Ding. All victories were with White; both palyers had 4 whites. Seems to me quality of opponents in wins would give Aronian the nod. In any case, I find nothing holy in 1-.5-0 system. A Black win is much more difficult e.g.|
|May-03-13|| ||Sokrates: <Ezzy: I also am glad Gelfand achieved shared first. Even though he took Anand to the wire in their World Championship match, he still didn't seem to gain much favour with a lot of chess fans.>|
Sadly true. Gelfand achieved what neither Kramnik nor Topalov accomplished: to draw the ordinary match with Anand. Only because of the trick trap, Anand managed to draw, not because of supreme, better play.
Among serious observers Gelfand earned much credit and respect for his whole performance - which for instance can be read from reports and articles in New in Chess.
Chess fans - they are a very divers group of people - as the threads here at Chessgames prove! Those who have balanced opinions founded on analysis, reason, and insight I read, enjoy and consider. Those who make unsubstantiated wild statements I regard as silly entertainment - at best.
|May-03-13|| ||Everett: <May-02-13 QueentakesKing: <HeMateMe> Is there still a glimmer of hope for an american world chess champion after bobby? In the near future? Maybe before the century ends. (2013-1972= 41 years dormancy). Suck.>|
You suck more because you care about this. Go suck someplace else, like the ignore bin, suckboy.
|May-03-13|| ||fromoort: <Sokrates> Good attitude! Go Denmark!|
|May-04-13|| ||QueentakesKing: (Everett) Of course I care. An american champion is always good for chess. Specially now that americans are looking at other sports instead. A chess hero is wanting.|
|May-04-13|| ||QueentakesKing: In addition, it also means more sponsors and playing schedules in the land of milk and honey.|
|May-05-13|| ||John Abraham: Nice tournament.|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 15 OF 15 ·