Fide fails

Sort:
yedddy

Why is it so difficult for fide to cover the world chess championship properly. last year was bad, but this year is terrible. type into google 'world chess championship 2014' and you get random pages. some news sites from random sources and the first main page link is to wikipedia?? what the... if you were to type in world series during the recent baseball playoffs you would for sure be redirected to the mlb.com website with loads and loads of coverage and articles and videos and press confernces etc. so my question is this- why is the fide coverage of such a great event so pathetic???

yedddy

no comments?

Ziryab

They have an official website which turns up easily when the search is Sochi2014. The website is pretty, but needs better logic and functionality. For the live feed they are using a web application developed by Chess24. It is not as useful as the one that has been standard the past couple of years.

Of course, you can always follow the event on my Chess Skills blog. The commentator there lacks the understanding of GM Peter Svidler and IM Sopiko Guramishvili, and he may not keep everything up to date when other responsibilities intervene. It does come up in Google searches, however.

yedddy

wow... i type 'sochi2014' get olympic stuff. type 'sochi2014 chess' and it's the 4th on the list after some basement server type domains. am i wrong, or is this not as in the forefront as it should be???

yedddy

chessnetwork (jerry) has better coverage. and i mean that!

Ziryab

Maybe my searches are different because Google remembers where I've been before. I just time in the Chrome address bar. 

Using another person's MS Surface tablet yesterday at a chess tournament, I typed sochi2014.fide and got the site quickly. 

JonHutch

For sure, you can count on Jerry to get it done.

pawnwhacker

A site such as chess.com has done far, far more to bring chess to the masses than an entity like FIDE.

 

Rather a pity. But...same old, same old. What would anyone expect?

yedddy
tigerprowl5 wrote:
yedddy wrote:

chessnetwork (jerry) has better coverage. and i mean that!

Where is that?  Hopefully not a blog site.

youtube and he's also a member here.. chessnetwork

yedddy
pawnwhacker wrote:

A site such as chess.com has done far, far more to bring chess to the masses than an entity like FIDE.

 

Rather a pity. But...same old, same old. What would anyone expect?

not sure i care about it being brought to the masses. i just want it brought to my computer when i type it in to my google search bar!

macer75
yedddy wrote:
pawnwhacker wrote:

A site such as chess.com has done far, far more to bring chess to the masses than an entity like FIDE.

 

Rather a pity. But...same old, same old. What would anyone expect?

not sure i care about it being brought to the masses. i just want it brought to my computer when i type it in to my google search bar!

Have you tried Bing?

yedddy

way to go

OldChessDog

The 2014 WCC coverage seems decent enough to me. I've watched both games.

Synaphai
yedddy wrote:

the first main page link is to wikipedia?? what the...

It's common for Wikipedia to be one of the top three hits in a Google search on any major topic.

OldChessDog

Sopika may feel intimidated. On the first day, her main contribution was, "Yeah."

However, during the second game she offered some lines, and Svidler complimented her on her insight. Svidler has a tendency to monopolize the conversation--he seemed though to try to draw her out a bit the second day.

Ziryab
OldChessDog wrote:

Sopika may feel intimidated. On the first day, her main contribution was, "Yeah."

However, during the second game she offered some lines, and Svidler complimented her on her insight. Svidler has a tendency to monopolize the conversation--he seemed though to try to draw her out a bit the second day.

I agree. Inasmuch as few commentators offer analysis withh merit in the same league as Svidler, I'm happy when he monopolizes the conversation. 

pawnwhacker
yedddy wrote:
pawnwhacker wrote:

A site such as chess.com has done far, far more to bring chess to the masses than an entity like FIDE.

 

Rather a pity. But...same old, same old. What would anyone expect?

not sure i care about it being brought to the masses. i just want it brought to my computer when i type it in to my google search bar!

You appear to be obtuse. You ARE one of the masses. Get used to it. Wink

yedddy
pawnwhacker wrote:
yedddy wrote:
pawnwhacker wrote:

A site such as chess.com has done far, far more to bring chess to the masses than an entity like FIDE.

 

Rather a pity. But...same old, same old. What would anyone expect?

not sure i care about it being brought to the masses. i just want it brought to my computer when i type it in to my google search bar!

You appear to be obtuse. You ARE one of the masses. Get used to it. 

on the contrary. it appears to be you who has missed the point. if the original comment was making a point that chess.com is trying to bring chess to the masses, which obviously hasn't happened since it's not covered by any major media source, then that would make any chess fan (including myself) a part of a minority. ipso facto we, including you, are not one of the masses.it's called 'logic' get used to it.

pawnwhacker

I think you've been around too much fuel vapor.

 

10,000,000 players (alledgedly) at this one website is far, far more vast than fide, uscf, etc. combined.

 

So....neener...neener...

yedddy
pawnwhacker wrote:

I think you've been around too much fuel vapor.

 

10,000,000 players (alledgedly) at this one website is far, far more vast than fide, uscf, etc. combined.

 

So....neener...neener...

ok. think about what you said. 10, 000, 000 isn't even a fraction of the wolrds population. secondly, how many of those supposed accounts are alter egos of know trouble makers and cheaters?