|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 678 OF 1301 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
Oct-11-06
 |
| ketchuplover: thanks :) |
 |
| Oct-11-06 |
| Maatalkko: <Joshka> That sounds awesome, almost too good to be true. I wouldn't be too pedantic regarding Gothic chess; it sounds like an interesting variant and everyone agrees that standard chess has been at least partially "Fritzed out", as Nigel Short has said. If Fischer is willing to play it you can bet it's a serious game and Fischer has done some analysis of it. I shouldn't get my hopes up though, the chance of this actually happening is 5% at best. |
|
| Oct-11-06 |
| MyriadChoices: What's gonna happen is the GC folks will need money to fund this 'supposed match'. They'll ask for donations and never have it happen. That's my guess. |
|
Oct-12-06
 |
| Joshka: My guess is, Dan will announce, that they are "talking"...not that they have agreed, on the where, when and why of it.....maybe just the who and what has been determined. Dan seems to be too reliable to bait and switch us;-).....big day in the chess world today, we'll find out if Kramnik can keep the World Chess Championship combined with an FIDE title, have a Game 5 if Topa wins today, if it's drawn go to those silly tie-breaks.guess many scenarios are possible, and then Dan's announcement tonight on his show. |
|
Oct-12-06
 |
| whiskeyrebel: Fischer and Karpov may as well play Yahtzee or tiddly winks or Twister or Mystery Date or Candyland; Gothic chess my $#*&! who cares. Let 'em have a cake baking contest or arm wrestle or best of all a "tough man" martial arts scrap. Chess is chess..variants aren't. |
|
| Oct-12-06 |
| Tomlinsky: If it's to do with Fischer Random then I'll be delighted for him. Chess without the opening theory and static start position. I love it. If it's that Gothic nonsense it would be very disappointing. |
|
Oct-12-06
 |
| Bent Bexley: <Joshka> Dan isn't announcing anything. The guy who runs the Gothic Chess site is. <Tomlinsky: If it's to do with Fischer Random then I'll be delighted for him. Chess without the opening theory and static start position. I love it. If it's that Gothic nonsense it would be very disappointing.> This does make me wonder which is more awful FRC or Gothic Chess. Both are not necessary. |
|
| Oct-12-06 |
| RookFile: <whiskyrebel: Fischer and Karpov may as well play Yahtzee or tiddly winks or Twister or Mystery Date or Candyland; Gothic chess my $#*&! who cares. Let 'em have a cake baking contest or arm wrestle or best of all a "tough man" martial arts scrap. Chess is chess..variants aren't.> Chess died when it became the case that a computer can see more in 2 seconds than a human can in his entire life. |
|
Oct-12-06
|
| Joshka: <Bent> just went to the Gothic site, there are photos from Iceland, but not one word about Fischer. http://www.gothicchess.com yea while FRC would be very interesting cause it's still really chess, just using the other postions (959)...Gothic uses two new pieces 10x10 board, so it's another game alltogether.hard to believe Bobby has been promoting FRC for almost what 10 years now? (argentina 1996)..still has not played a FRC match...and sounds silly he would play Gothic!?...the only interest for me would be seeing Karpov and Bobby across the board, and possibly down the road sometime, agreeing to play regular chess, or FRC. |
|
| Oct-12-06 |
| Maatalkko: <RookFile> Agreed. But does Gothic Chess reduce the computer/human disparity, or does the greater complexity only increase a computer's advantage? |
|
Oct-12-06
|
| Bent Bexley: The advance of computers in chess is to be regretted greatly, I think. But to say they killed chess is going a bit too far, to say the least. If chess is dead, why are you wasting your time here? |
|
Oct-12-06
|
| whiskeyrebel: some of us are simply chess purists and some accept spin-offs. Fischer knows he couldn't play classic, normal chess up to his old standards and his ego couldn't handle losses. Rather than fess up to this he declares the game dead and advocates a variation which he still only talks about being willing to play publicly. Personally, I respect older top players who hang in there and keep playing beyond their prime even if their rating slips or they botch up a game now and then. In the world of golf they have a Seniors tour; the old golfers are treasured even though they lose a bit of their game with age. They still put butts in the seats..people love watching them. NOTE! the golf legends don't play putt putt golf or variants to preserve their ego's. |
|
| Oct-12-06 |
| azaris: I actually find "Gothic chess" (or some non-commercial variant thereof) better than the hideous monstrosity that is Chess960. |
|
Oct-12-06
 |
| acirce: Well, "Gothic chess" is at least different, so it has some independent value. Chess960 is simply chess but much worse. |
|
| Oct-12-06 |
| azaris: Oh, and for those who wonder what Gothic chess looks like, here is a miniature: http://www.gothicchesslive.com/java... I have no idea what's going on but I think White did not play well. |
|
Oct-12-06
 |
| Eric Schiller: <whiskey> I agree with your analysis and your support for continued play past the peak years. Even if a player can't dominate tournaments it is possible to produce masterpieces at the chessboard that will continue to enlighten and entertain for centuries to come. Fischer is simply unwilling to risk losing so he wants to change the rules of the game to suit his personal preferences. It is a simple fact that none of the chess variants have ever caught on in the Western world and I expect that none ever will. The unique evolution of chess over many centuries cannot be matched by people sitting around and fiddling with a few rules just to change the game. In the Western world, every single chess variant has been tossed into the rubbish heap of history and the trend can be expected to continue |
|
Oct-12-06
|
| Bent Bexley: Well said, <Eric Schiller.> I agree with the opinions of <acirce> and <azaris> on 960. I would guess that one thing 960 and Gothic Chess have in common is that most of the supporters of both games would like to see their game supplant chess as the standard form of the game. I know next to nothing about Gothic Chess and this possible match but I'm still willing to say or guess that it is not likely to ever happen. And, furthermore, the people behind Gothic Chess realize this and don't care. As the saying goes, there is no such thing as bad publicity. |
|
| Oct-12-06 |
| Eggman: <<If chess is dead, why are you wasting your time here?>> <<Well, "Gothic chess" is at least different, so it has some independent value. Chess960 is simply chess but much worse.>> The point, which has been made before, is that for club players who either don't know theory or who can play 2nd-best (or 5th best) opening moves and still obtain an advantage, chess is very much alive. But for someone like Fischer (or even Short or Svidler), it's a completely different story. One cannot play decent moves, one must play with the greatest accuracy, and this turns out to mean that both players often reel off 25 or 30 moves of theory. This is not playing chess, but rather relaying chess. An extreme example from modern play:
click for larger viewLeko-Kramnik, Game 5, 2004 World Championship Match
This position, in which Kramnik played 24...Bxf3, is already an endgame, yet it is known theory, and was seen before in Karpov-Anand, 2002. If you are 1700, and if your opponent has memorized a great deal of theory, then you can sidestep all this, even perhaps playing for example 1.b4. But Super-GMs (and even many IMs) can hardly afford to do this, so they are left to relay moves that have been determined before the game, and with the help of computers to boot. Perhaps chess is not dead, but it seems to be gravely ill. |
|
Oct-12-06
|
| Bent Bexley: <Eggman> I think there are adequate replies to your position on master chess being <gravely ill.> I'll let others make them, but I will say that there are plenty of examples of modern master chess that aren't like the Leko-Kramnik game you quote. I will also add that <club players> and the like make up about 99% of all chess players. |
|
Oct-12-06
 |
| keypusher: <azaris> Thanks! Nice graphics those goths have to go along with their silly game. The knibish, or whatever it's called, is pretty devastating at close range. |
|
Oct-12-06
 |
| veigaman: I dont agree about 960 chess, i think it is nice idea and i dont know why so many gm or im are afraid of try it before giving his opinion. This situation is similar when you go to a new country and somebody offers you a new food, for example insects, and people answer it "thx but i dont like it" without tasting!
Afraid of losing? who knows but after elista incident, bobby is a senior |
|
Oct-12-06
|
| veigaman: Moreover, classic chess has lovely tradition and theory but it is just one of the 960 style of chess which means each style of chess can have its own tradition and theory. Everyone critize Bobby affirmation" chess is dead" but i wonder why capablanca said the same many years before than bobby. May be capablanca and bobby went ahead of his time |
|
Oct-12-06
|
| Eric Schiller: Capablanca was dead wrong, history has demonstrated that clearly. If he was right, there would have been no Fischer. Fischer is also wrong. In fact, opening theory continues to grow and there are more playable openings now than in Fischer's time. Every randomization of the game will result in "new tradition", but so far none of lasting vlue. Chess is a game of unique balances which variants, without exception, screw up. That's why they don't catch on, and never will, except as fads. This isn't unique to chess, it is true of most sports, the sole exception perhaps being Arena football in the US.
Just think of how easy it would be to "improve" basketball by having two hoops instead of one at each end, or tennis by having a 12-foot high net with holes in it, or soccer by filling the ball with helium or water! That's what these mutilated chess games are like. |
|
Oct-12-06
|
| Bent Bexley: <veigaman: Moreover, classic chess has lovely tradition and theory but it is just one of the 960 style of chess> No, it is chess. Style 417 or 882 or whatever do not have hundreds of years of practice and history behind them. And they never will if there is always a new starting position. |
|
Oct-12-06
|
| veigaman: basketball didnt have 3 points lines, tennis didnt have tiebreaks and as sport they improved! |
|
 |
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 678 OF 1301 ·
Later Kibitzing > |
