Chess discussions

Ding’s win is an anime story in real life, from Russia invading Ukraine, Karjakin being an idiot, Fabi playing as if the candidates was a winner takes all, and then Ding being down 3 times during the Championships!

I hope Alireza, Nodirbek and Gukesh all make it to the Candidates already next time.
 
17Larsson said:
I'm shaking after just watching that, can't imagine what the players were going through. Nepo was convinced it was going to be a draw
Click to expand...

I would be blundering like nobody's business. This championship makes me appreciate Carlsen even more.
 
Congratulations to Ding. Quite the comebacks over this series. Okay, he was only ever one game down but it's still hard work to always be chasing in this format. Everything seemed to align for him when you consider how he got there. Nothing between the two players really.

Had either played Carlsen they would have lost convincingly but the fact they were playing an equal opponent made for one of the most entertaining World Championship matchups as neither was afraid to mix it up and I really admire that in how they played. Nepo played very aggressively in the past so I guess that's not such a surprise he can revert to that if he's not playing Carlsen, but Ding shocked me - he cracked out the French Defence! That I did not expect.
 
Abraxas said:
Congratulations to Ding. Quite the comebacks over this series. Okay, he was only ever one game down but it's still hard work to always be chasing in this format. Everything seemed to align for him when you consider how he got there. Nothing between the two players really.
Click to expand...

I would say that nothing aligned for him. He had to grind in order to make the candidates due to restrictions that he barely managed to overcome.
 
I was a little bit surprised it was that close. I thought Hikaru might win by a 3:2 ratio.

But yeah, Hikaru is insanely good at bullet. Savant like abilities.
 
Abraxas said:
I was a little bit surprised it was that close. I thought Hikaru might win by a 3:2 ratio.

But yeah, Hikaru is insanely good at bullet. Savant like abilities.
Click to expand...

This + IMO Magnus isn't the player he was a few years ago. He's no longer 100% focussed on being the best ever (that ended with the 2900 goal) but even "chilled out" Carlsen is the best classical and probably rapid player, and 2nd best blitz player (barely). I saw the final and he had 2 chances to end it before Naka won. Nakamura is just insane at blitz though.
 
NM said:
This + IMO Magnus isn't the player he was a few years ago. He's no longer 100% focussed on being the best ever (that ended with the 2900 goal) but even "chilled out" Carlsen is the best classical and probably rapid player, and 2nd best blitz player (barely). I saw the final and he had 2 chances to end it before Naka won. Nakamura is just insane at blitz though.
Click to expand...

Carlsen is on an insane run in OTB blitz, including a win against Naka (I just checked the full run in his last 2 tournaments, and it's +25 =8 -3 :eek:).
Not good in classical or rapid though...
 
berbatrick said:
Carlsen is on an insane run in OTB blitz, including a win against Naka (I just checked the full run in his last 2 tournaments, and it's +25 =8 -3 :eek:).
Not good in classical or rapid though...
Click to expand...

Yeah but i think it's a short slump. Essentially he's living his best life. he was playing a blitz tournament while raving at a nightclub in Sweden FFS. It's unfair how good he is.
 
Magnus Carlsen confirmed that he has no intention to play the Candidates unless the format changes.
 
JPRouve said:
Magnus Carlsen confirmed that he has no intention to play the Candidates unless the format changes.
Click to expand...
Just see that aswell from the world cup stream sad news but he seems burnt out from this format for a good while now.He does want this win here though to get that elusive crown that he doesn't have soo far,but Can see him coming back for the world title in a few years maybe once he gets refreshed or wants to prove himself again personally.
 
Fischer Random is where it's at. They need to do more tournaments using it. Hell they could do several tournaments a year with the same piece position, and watch the meta develop.
 
massey said:
Just see that aswell from the world cup stream sad news but he seems burnt out from this format for a good while now.He does want this win here though to get that elusive crown that he doesn't have soo far,but Can see him coming back for the world title in a few years maybe once he gets refreshed or wants to prove himself again personally.
Click to expand...

I don't see him coming back especially when his point makes sense. The candidate and World Chess Championship should integrate shorter formats especially when it comes to draws, like we have see in the World Cup. Players and spectators like the change of pace and strategies. Also Armageddon wouldn't hurt.


Basically all his points are valid.
 
JPRouve said:
I don't see him coming back especially when his point makes sense. The candidate and World Chess Championship should integrate shorter formats especially when it comes to draws, like we have see in the World Cup. Players and spectators like the change of pace and strategies. Also Armageddon wouldn't hurt.


Basically all his points are valid.
Click to expand...
They are valid in some respect for the new rates of interest in fans and of course no one wants to see draw after draw or for instance 48 games in a final like Karpov Vs Kasparov so changes have been made I guess it comes down to how many you can make to not totally do away with the classical format the world cup format is pretty much as you say 2 games of classical then games of rapid in decreasing time formats if drawn but in a chess world championship final it will take away the nature of it imo can we really call someone a champion or the best player if they drew a few games then won it on armegeddon pretty much a lottery of a format with lots of errors.
 
massey said:
They are valid in some respect for the new rates of interest in fans and of course no one wants to see draw after draw or for instance 48 games in a final like Karpov Vs Kasparov so changes have been made I guess it comes down to how many you can make to not totally do away with the classical format the world cup format is pretty much as you say 2 games of classical then games of rapid in decreasing time formats if drawn but in a chess world championship final it will take away the nature of it imo can we really call someone a champion or the best player if they drew a few games then won it on armegeddon pretty much a lottery of a format with lots of errors.
Click to expand...

I think that we can, not only because you still need to play Chessin Armageddon but also because if you don't want to be in that situation then don't play or settle for a draw unless there is no other option. In Classical chess the format essentially forces players to focus on a draw if they are black, Armageddon and/or tiebreaks create a situation where players have to try to win which is something that we have seen this month where even theoretical draws have led to both players actually trying to win or force mistakes which in my opinion is good.
 
I agree, this World Cup format is very good. I'm not sure it is quite the right format for a World Championship or the Candidates but it's more aligned with what I think fans want in terms of excitement and the pace of play. There is probably a good way to address this balance. You do want to reduce variance in the World Championship and probably the Candidates because ultimately you want the best players to be crowned, not neccessarily the best player on a particular day. In the WC there is a fair amount of randomness which is exciting but not exactly what they're looking for in those tournaments. But it's certainly true that those tournaments are long winded.

I guess Abasov has been a major surprise and pretty much came from nowhere. Apart from that the others are not such a huge surprise and would have been among the favourites.
 
noodlehair said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-66538328

I don't understand any of what anyone is talking about in this thread, but chess is such a randomly dumb sport to take a stand against transgender women. Why are the men and women even in separate competition?

Educate me oh chess nerds
Click to expand...
Not too sure what the transgender rules are in chess but generally the women and men are kept apart as the top women grandmasters are around 2500 elo and wouldn't have a chance in the big tournaments as most male gms and super GMs are around the 2700 and even 2800's in the case of Magnus carlsen.The only exception to that case was Judith polgar who did play In alot of men's tournaments as her elo peak rating was 2735.
 
noodlehair said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-66538328

I don't understand any of what anyone is talking about in this thread, but chess is such a randomly dumb sport to take a stand against transgender women. Why are the men and women even in separate competition?

Educate me oh chess nerds
Click to expand...
There isn't usually a "mens" competition in the sense of other sports. They're usually open sections which means anyone is free to participate IF they meet the sporting requirements to qualify. It is the women's tournament that is actually closed off and for women only. So that's probably why they're looking at the transgender issue for female only tournaments. There would be no issue of a transgender playing in the open section so it's not as if they're banned from chess!

The reason mixing doesn't happen often in practice is that there aren't any women currently good enough to compete at the top end of open tournaments. Playing the female only tournaments is better for them on every level. Financially, profile, sporting competition is better. So it's a decision they make.

A lot of newcomers get this stuff backwards and think chess is somehow discriminatory because there are women's tournaments and titles. It's the exact opposite, it's to give them opportunity.
 
Last edited:
Abraxas said:
There isn't usually a "mens" competition in the sense of other sports. They're usually open sections which means anyone is free to participate. It is the women's tournament that is actually closed off and for women only. So that's probably why they're looking at the transgender issue for female only tournaments. There would be no issue of a transgender playing in the open section so it's not as if they're banned from chess!

The reason mixing doesn't happen often in practice is that there aren't any women currently good enough to compete at the top end of open tournaments. Playing the female only tournaments is better for them on every level. Financially, profile, sporting competition is better. So it's a decision they make.

A lot of newcomers get this stuff backwards and think chess is somehow discriminatory because there are women's tournaments and titles. It's the exact opposite, it's to give them opportunity.
Click to expand...
I wonder if darts and snooker will follow!
 
Red in STL said:
I wonder if darts and snooker will follow!
Click to expand...
Is it not similar? I thought there were a few females chucking darts in "male" tournaments? I would have thought there's no reason they can't play if they qualify to do so, there's no physical confrontation. At least that seems logical to me.
 
Abraxas said:
Is it not similar? I thought there were a few females chucking darts in "male" tournaments? I would have thought there's no reason they can't play if they qualify to do so, there's no physical confrontation. At least that seems logical to me.
Click to expand...
There are women only tournaments like chess, basically it's the same thing, there are few women that have reached the standard of the mens versions they have their own tournaments but can play in the open versions
 
Of all the classical tournaments, I thought the Candidates was the best to follow. More than the world cup (where a win in the first game is a MASSIVE draw incentive in the second). More than the championship (where a game could be boring, or even if exciting, I'm not good enough to even computer-analyze a position for as long as the players take to human-analyze it - I'll just lose focus midway).
In the candidates, there were always 1-2 interesting games a day. No danger of getting lost in only one, no danger of having nothing worth watching.
 
noodlehair said:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-66538328

I don't understand any of what anyone is talking about in this thread, but chess is such a randomly dumb sport to take a stand against transgender women. Why are the men and women even in separate competition?

Educate me oh chess nerds
Click to expand...
There isn't an issue here as others have said. There's no stand being taken. They are free to compete.
 
massey said:
Not too sure what the transgender rules are in chess but generally the women and men are kept apart as the top women grandmasters are around 2500 elo and wouldn't have a chance in the big tournaments as most male gms and super GMs are around the 2700 and even 2800's in the case of Magnus carlsen.The only exception to that case was Judith polgar who did play In alot of men's tournaments as her elo peak rating was 2735.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what most of that means but it sounds like it makes sense so I'm not going to argue with it.

Abraxas said:
There isn't usually a "mens" competition in the sense of other sports. They're usually open sections which means anyone is free to participate IF they meet the sporting requirements to qualify. It is the women's tournament that is actually closed off and for women only. So that's probably why they're looking at the transgender issue for female only tournaments. There would be no issue of a transgender playing in the open section so it's not as if they're banned from chess!

The reason mixing doesn't happen often in practice is that there aren't any women currently good enough to compete at the top end of open tournaments. Playing the female only tournaments is better for them on every level. Financially, profile, sporting competition is better. So it's a decision they make.

A lot of newcomers get this stuff backwards and think chess is somehow discriminatory because there are women's tournaments and titles. It's the exact opposite, it's to give them opportunity.
Click to expand...
altodevil said:
There isn't an issue here as others have said. There's no stand being taken. They are free to compete.
Click to expand...

This makes sense.

I am consider myself educated
 
Salimova vs Goryachkina ended dramatically. Salimova lost the tiebreaks on a blunder after dominating most of the tournament. Both played very well and they are so young.
 
Pragg in the World Cup Finals! He's taken down the World #3 and the World #2.. Magnus will probably be a bridge too far..

But if he wins, my claim to fame will be that I've played the World Cup winner :D

Yes he thumped me in an hour :wenger:
 
Brilliant from Prag. Hard fought match and ruthlessly exploited one big chance. Very impressive against a resurgent Fabi.
 
No one watching? Praggnanandhaa is really impressive. Might become a good long term rival for Magnus.
 
Magnus will win the World Cup, beat Pragg the first game with black, Pragg paid the price for getting into time trouble.
 
A quick and clean final from Carlsen.
 
Easy draw for Magnus, starts with 25 minutes on the clock ends it with 24.41 remaining
 
Wesley So is being ragdolled by Magnus in the 1st SCC semi final.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.