So where's the game notations?
Anand vs World was a joke.
Sort:
SerbianChessStar wrote:
Did anyone play in the Carlsen vs the world?
How did that turn out? was there more communication? Did you like the 3 gm's picking a move so essentially cancelling out any patzer moves (like Bb4 today)?
I wasnt in that simul because of school (facepalm), so I would like people's opinions who played in both today and Carlsen vs the world.
I played in Carlsen, but not today. The format didn't work very well then either, because the 3 GMs couldn't communicate with each other. The way it turned out was that people would choose a move or two of 1 GMs plan, and then a move or two of another GMs plan, etc. You can imagine how well that worked. It's like you're trying to drive to a certain location, and you have 3 potential routes to get there. You don't know which is best, so you take a left and then the 3rd right from the first route, and then the 2nd right and a left from second route, etc.
It worked about as well as it sounds like today's fiasco worked.
Aug 14, 2012
0
#44
johnmusacha wrote:
So where's the game notations?
On the other thread
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-analysis/anand-vs-the-world
Having played on the side of the one vs the many--it is clear that if you want a more competitive game--you need to allow as much time as practical for both sides.
A fast time limit gives a big advantage to Anand or Carlson or whoever is the "one"
It seems also clear that the "one" should be paid according to result. Maybe no pay for a loss and reasonable pay for a draw and good pay for a win?
Petrosianic wrote:
it seemed to me players were using top moves from the opening explorer.
5...Bb4 is about the 10th most popular move.
I never know why people think more is better in chess.
Aug 14, 2012
0
#47
The gm's commenting on the game were discuraging communication about move orders and best moves. That bugged me a bit when we were all supposed to be on the same team
Aug 14, 2012
0
#48
Estragon wrote:
The fast time limit was necessary as it was part of a simul. The rule of simuls is when the player gets to your board, you must move. Most GMs allow each opponent three "passes" to keep thinking, but that's it. So it had to be done fast.
The time and date was because that was when he was giving the simul. Chess.com managed to get us in on the event, it wasn't staged for us.
It's the typical Vote Chess games that go on for months, but even there when it's a GM opponent, you get so many casual players who sign up and respond to the alert that it's our move by logging in and voting right away.
If they look at comments at all, they only look for those "status" posts giving the current move votes, and then they vote for the leader. They pay no attention to discussion at all, and there are enough of them to out-vote the players trying to work together.
That's why I am not in there.
Aug 14, 2012
0
#49
I thought it was a free opportunity to play against a World Champion. Maybe play didn't go as people wanted but it still blows my mind that such things are free to us.
The OP (SerbainChessStar) has got a very good point and I don't see anything wrong in his statements.
Since the whole thing is free, u cant really expect much out of it.
Carlsen Vs The World was much better! Idk whats wrong with Anand. The game really upsets me.
sapientdust wrote:
SerbianChessStar wrote:
Did anyone play in the Carlsen vs the world?
How did that turn out? was there more communication? Did you like the 3 gm's picking a move so essentially cancelling out any patzer moves (like Bb4 today)?
I wasnt in that simul because of school (facepalm), so I would like people's opinions who played in both today and Carlsen vs the world.
I played in Carlsen, but not today. The format didn't work very well then either, because the 3 GMs couldn't communicate with each other. The way it turned out was that people would choose a move or two of 1 GMs plan, and then a move or two of another GMs plan, etc. You can imagine how well that worked. It's like you're trying to drive to a certain location, and you have 3 potential routes to get there. You don't know which is best, so you take a left and then the 3rd right from the first route, and then the 2nd right and a left from second route, etc.
It worked about as well as it sounds like today's fiasco worked.
I see your point but when the world played they did not play with a plan either, we threw the opening, we played some illogical moves, and then we wanted to draw. If it was GM's option, we wouldnt play a bad opening, we wouldnt blunder to the point that we are lost 10 moves in.
Overall it would be better because you are picking 3 solid moves rather than voting for a solid move but the majority 1400's outvote you with a crappy move.
Also, I think the main difference was in the Carlsen one it was organized play, he only focused on our game, he was on top of a building, there was a lot of streams on it, it was on newspaper's, we had a famous female actress participate in the event and 3 GM's also helped out. A lot of people played in it and overall chess was correctly advertised to the people who dont play chess.
In this match, I bet there will be a newspaper about "WC Anand hosts chess simul in LA," rather than something like "WC Anand plays the world." Another major factor is he didn't take us seriously so it was more of a slap to the face more than anything else.
I would rather have the true story behind all of this if a staff would be kind to explain.
Aug 14, 2012
0
#55
my only criticism was is that the commentary on the actual game was fairly limited and far more time were given at looking at other boards.
Also if I were Anand preparing against the World and knew anything about the previous World matches, such as the one versus Danny Rensch (with the insights of Pruess and Shankland to help Rensch) the World was playing well enough to beat them - at the level of a strong GM - and I would think it likely he saw that game. Of course Anand is going to play c5 and ask the World whether they want to take risk or a draw.
At least we got a draw, it would have been worse if we lost
I just seen the game and reviewed the moves. It was kind of weird after like what "25 moves and no middle game" he just wanted to get a draw I had a feeling he was going to lose in my mind if he was the world champ instead of repetitioning for a draw why didnt he just make his plan and attack.
Could someone post the game? I'm curious to see the "bland" game of Anand vs World
Please show some respect people. The guy is world champ and I'm sure he did what hè did for reasons that none of us can completely understand.
The time for voting should be around 2 or 3 minutes so that it is quick and the result may be different.