yo guys we should have a FIDE universal world cup where all the former and current champions battle to see whos da best champion of all time at chess after the magnus vs nepo world cup finished
FIDE World Championship - Magnus Carlsen vs Ian Nepomniactchi
Sort:
Nov 29, 2021
0
#224
@brianchesscake ... really? you're going to ding me because while writing quickly I inadvertently used tournament instead of match? Really? If you read what I've written, I've used the word "match" correctly a number of times.
Kasparov failed to defeat the Berlin endgame not because he was an inferior player, but because he was absolutely convinced that it was a dubious opening and he was hell-bent on trying to beat it. Sure he had several games, but those several games didn't matter because he was stubborn. Had it been 2021 instead of 2000, he would've just put the position into Stockfish and said "well damn, that line's a draw, let's not go into it again."
So you see, the number of games didn't actually matter for that... match.
NikkiLikeChikki wrote:
Kasparov failed to defeat the Berlin endgame not because he was an inferior player, but because he was absolutely convinced that it was a dubious opening and he was hell-bent on trying to beat it. Sure he had several games, but those several games didn't matter because he was stubborn. Had it been 2021 instead of 2000, he would've just put the position into Stockfish and said "well damn, that line's a draw, let's not go into it again."
I respectully disagree. Kasparov was overconfident to the extreme and had an enormous ego which ultimately clouded his vision. He had the best quality team of seconds of any professional chess player upto the late 1990s, and I am sure they gave him some advice on how to approach the Berlin, which he may or may not have taken into consideration. It doesn't do much good to receive the best advice in the world when you are convinced that you are always right.
Maybe if he had grown up in the "internet era" generation of Carlsen, then he would have been less stubborn in that sense. Remember that when Kasparov lost to Deep Blue in 1997, he was furious because he claimed the engine had been somehow cheating (as in, being fed human grandmaster feedback on what lines to specifically analyze and which to disregard).
Nov 29, 2021
0
#226
You're disagreeing with me without disagreeing with me. I agree with everything you just said. He lost to deep blue, yes, but this was before computers were better than humans in a deep analysis of positions. Anyway, I'm done with this thread unless the topic changes.
amaxing
Great
I don’t know, I think Magnus Carlsen will win, but why not let Nepo get the first win, I mean it will be cool to have a new world champion, right?
Yes
Magnus wants to be the world champion forever?
Lmao
Concordo
Nov 30, 2021
0
#235
Avery150 wrote:
Magnus wants to be the world champion forever?
Not even Lasker could do that.
Five thirty eight is doing wonderful coverage on this, if anyone is interested.
I am really getting bored with the so-called championship. Let's move along please.
Super computers are ruining classical chess
I think Magnus will be unwilling to take any major risks for a win given Nepo is known to just give games away here or there with carelessness. So far, Nepo is also being careful. That's fine by Magnus also because he knows he has a huge edge in the tiebreakers.
This is Magnus' match unless Nepo takes some chances and wins a game to get the lead. He may not be ready to do that, but it's inevitable he has to try because it's going to be incredibly difficult to win a game from Magnus playing it safe and Magnus will beat him in the tiebreak.
@jenium - If you were to ask a statistician how to determine who the best player is, he or she would gather all the top players together, say 100, and have a year-long round robin tournament where each player played every other player about 30 time. 30 is a good number that minimizes the possibility of stochastic variable affecting the results. That would be an excellent way to determine who is the best.
I'd say that's pretty much what we have with the FIDE rating system. That is, the FIDE rating system is a meta-tournament that goes on forever. Whoever's at the top is the best at that time. (Probably.)