Anyone watching Jennifer, Maurice, and Yasser?
Sort:
I've been watching the commentators for the U.S. Chess championship, and I really enjoy Yasser and Jen's commentary, but Maurice Ashley and using his engines for all his commentary really rub me the wrong way. He isn't ever looking at positions on his own, but he keeps being critical of players for not seeing the engines move. Come on, Maurice! Is it just me? Even when he interviews the players afterward, it comes out. The best part is that chess players are a tough interview, so when he asks the silly questions they don't even humor him with the answers he wants.
I foresee a couple members (names withheld to prevent moderators from being flooded with reports) here reporting Maurice for using an engine.
I didn't like all the engine variations either
I hoped they would spend more time on the personal interplay during matches and just look at the meter (how the white or black bar varies after each move) once in awhile
Otherwise, why wouldn't we just watch to engines play each other?
I hoped they would spend more time on the personal interplay during matches and just look at the meter (how the white or black bar varies after each move) once in awhile
Otherwise, why wouldn't we just watch to engines play each other?
I watched the live stream via St. Louis chess club us 2017 champs via YouTube;
They played over the weekend and there may have been 5 separate "streaming vids"
They might still be active and you may be able to watch them still
They might still be active and you may be able to watch them still
Apr 3, 2017
0
#8
Why does everybody complain about Maurice being the engine man? It's not like it's hidden. I want to see how the computer is evaluating the positions!
And it's not Maurice's fault that some of the players have the personality of a toad and make for bad interviews.
Gata Kamsky sits there and mumbles three word sentences.
And it's not Maurice's fault that some of the players have the personality of a toad and make for bad interviews.
Gata Kamsky sits there and mumbles three word sentences.
Next round starts in 3 minutes. https://youtu.be/6WbK94fXSss
Apr 3, 2017
0
#10
baptistpreach wrote:
I've been watching the commentators for the U.S. Chess championship, and I really enjoy Yasser and Jen's commentary, but Maurice Ashley and using his engines for all his commentary really rub me the wrong way. He isn't ever looking at positions on his own, but he keeps being critical of players for not seeing the engines move. Come on, Maurice! Is it just me? Even when he interviews the players afterward, it comes out. The best part is that chess players are a tough interview, so when he asks the silly questions they don't even humor him with the answers he wants.
As a GM, I'm sure Maurice is able to analyze a position on his own for hours, and enjoy every minute of it.
However the 3 commentators each have a role. It's an orchestrated performance with the audience in mind. Yasser is the play by play guy whose job it is to give us analysis. Jen is the "color commentary" to add interesting asides to the main analysis. She might even bring up what someone is wearing, or something she saw on TV. It gives the listener a break form pure play by play analysis.
Maurice does two things. He's the engine guy, and the foil to Yasser's sort of Bob Ross personality. Maurice is the hype man. His job is to give engine lines and add excitement. Sure some people find this annoying, but he doesn't honestly expect the players to see the engine moves all the time, and he's not criticizing them by saying "BIG MISTAKE" he's just trying to add drama.
The_Chin_Of_Quinn wrote:
baptistpreach wrote:
I've been watching the commentators for the U.S. Chess championship, and I really enjoy Yasser and Jen's commentary, but Maurice Ashley and using his engines for all his commentary really rub me the wrong way. He isn't ever looking at positions on his own, but he keeps being critical of players for not seeing the engines move. Come on, Maurice! Is it just me? Even when he interviews the players afterward, it comes out. The best part is that chess players are a tough interview, so when he asks the silly questions they don't even humor him with the answers he wants.
As a GM, I'm sure Maurice is able to analyze a position on his own for hours, and enjoy every minute of it.
However the 3 commentators each have a role. It's an orchestrated performance with the audience in mind. Yasser is the play by play guy whose job it is to give us analysis. Jen is the "color commentary" to add interesting asides to the main analysis. She might even bring up what someone is wearing, or something she saw on TV. It gives the listener a break form pure play by play analysis.
Maurice does two things. He's the engine guy, and the foil to Yasser's sort of Bob Ross personality. Maurice is the hype man. His job is to give engine lines and add excitement. Sure some people find this annoying, but he doesn't honestly expect the players to see the engine moves all the time, and he's not criticizing them by saying "BIG MISTAKE" he's just trying to add drama.
+1
There's nothing more for me to add, other than that I quite enjoy the commentary by all three of them.
Seriously. watch here http://uschesschamps.com/2017-us-championships/information/live
Today was an off day but it resumes tomorrow at 1:00p CT. There are six more rounds so they'll play through Sunday, same time each day.
If you don't like this crew, and speak Spanish, you can go to chess24, click the small Spanish flag under the video and you'll get Alejandro Ramírez doing the commentary.
Apr 3, 2017
0
#17
not to boast but I've never used an engine. it seems more complicated than just going over your game with a friend. that's what we do at our club
Kpop4Life wrote:
I had YouTube send me a notification for tomorrow
Didn't know youtube did live. You can watch it right here on chess.com or chess24.com. I usually watch the latter because you can see all the boards for both the men's and women's tourneys.
Apr 3, 2017
0
#19
I don't mind that Maurice has an engine. It also helps if there's a blatant oversight, which I've seen in high level tournament commentary. I remember one event (can't remember it right now) where the two high rated commentators spent a long time going deep into a tactical variation without realizing that the player on the move was in check, which totally screwed up their analysis.
That being said, I'm not a big fan of his personality. Agree that his role is to be the hype man, but I'm not really into it. I think he would do better using the engine to explain moves and lines that aren't very good to weaker play. Yas would do the probable moves, Jen would do color commentary, and Maurice would explain to lower rateds watching why certain obvious-looking moves aren't good. The engine helps with this and so does the computer screen, which makes it easier to track multiple lines
The problem is that he IS saying BIG MISTAKE whenever they don't see the tactics of a position, or some obscure king move that he can't explain. I think that's what irks me. After he's looking at the engine lines, he says "wow, I can't believe he/she didn't see that." They just missed that move / motif, etc when I could appreciate it more if he himself had actually seen the line.