Chess seems to be more fun to play than to watch other people play. I don't think it's a natural spectator sport unless you can really understand what's going on in the games?
Okay admit it, Carlsen Caruana is a borefest.
Sort:
Nov 23, 2018
0
#43
Even if I were given the chance, I think I'd rather watch from home and tune in to Sasha, Soiko, Svidler and Giri. It'd be nice to meet Fabi and Magnus, but I'd go to the opening or closing ceremony for that.
tipish schreef:
ventudius wrote:
at least the engines had lots of wins and losses against each other check out TCEC Houdini Komodo StockFish all of them lost games to each other.
The people who are saying these two guys are like computers are out of their mind. I much rather watch two engines battle it out than this. You can call this kind of chess fascinating, but don't tell me it's exciting chess, because it's not.
Yes that's why I said I'd rather watch two engines battle it out. Saying these guys play like computers is an insult for chess engines. Engines play 100x more creative chess. Carlsen and Caruana play like scared humans.
The previous WC match that held the record for most draws was Karpov vs Kasparov. Have a look at those games, it's nothing like this. Karpov and Kasparov played exciting chess games. This is the dullest WCC ever. I can't wait for Wijk aan Zee/Tata Steel Masters in February, so we can watch some proper chess again.
lfPatriotGames schreef:
Complaining about a chess match like this being boring is like complaining about math because it uses too many numbers, boxing because there is too much punching, or car racing because they drive too fast.
This is a boxing match where the fighters circle eachother for 12 rounds without throwing a punch, just little feints every now and then. If this is the pinnacle of chess, then chess is screwed. Another good analogy would be catenaccio football, not playing to win, but playing not to lose.
Nov 23, 2018
0
#47
Yes, do look at the games from the 1984-1985 match and compare both the fighting quality and objective quality of those games to this match.
There were some great games, but once Kasparov decided to fight for a draw in every game, both the quality and the excitement of the match dropped dramatically.
Test match cricket can take 5 days to draw, and you complain about a 3 hour chess game?
SmyslovFan wrote:
Unclear Pawn sacrifices, novelties, tension, great defenses and brilliant endgames have all featured in this match.
if that bores you, perhaps chess isn't the game for you.
+1. Anyone who can't appreciate the struggle that is going on might want to switch over to tiddlywinks.com. That little disc lands in the cup quite frequently.
In my opinion, the match is way too short. With only 12 games, it is dangerous to take risks because if you fail there may not be enough games left to recover. I would favor a return to the 24 game format.
Nov 23, 2018
0
#51
CavalryFC wrote:
tipish wrote:
I think it's a combination of being strong and equal. They are struggling to convert advantages. I will go look at the TCEC but I suspect the draw rate is high when the ratings are within 50 points of each other.
old-patzer wrote:
so your saying these guys are better more accurate than Komodo Houdini Stockfish cuz those 3500 engines are indeed losing to each other. go check out TCEC...
I agree, I would like to see more decisive games, but as my name states, these guys play at such a high level (engine help or not) it is mind boggling at how accurately they play over the board. With 2 2830+ players playing (with only 3 rating point dividing them), do you REALLY expect one to overpower the other? Game on, BRING ON THE BLITZ!
So I went ahead and looked at it. In the final round of the recent blitz championship that was shown on here (the cross table is available in a current article), when 1 played 2 they drew approximately 80% of their games. When 3 played 4 they also drew approximately 80% of their games. Chess is a difficult game to win at the top levels. That said that does mean 20% of the games had a decision so you would think with those odds that we would have seen at least one win in the first 10 games...
It's no borefest at all, especially during the tenth game I was very excited, but I admired the deep concepts in other games, too. Maybe there is an other thing, that strike us: if all twelve games were drawn and Caruana wins the tie-break, he would be champion without winning any classical game in a championship match and this feels somewhat wrong.
jjupiter6 wrote:
Test match cricket can take 5 days to draw, and you complain about a 3 hour chess game?
Now THERE *is* a snoozefest: cricket (baseball is just as bad mind you).
PardonMyBlunder, the reason they keep playing draw is because they are equal in rating and knowledge about the game.
Here is the current rating https://2700chess.com/
Caruana blundered a pawn at game 11, in a flat equal position, but this was not enough to give magnus winning chances.
"h3" all that needs to be said lol
Nov 24, 2018
0
#58
To have a sense of the tension these guys are feeling, watch the last two games of the Women’s World championship. Lagno fell apart and even dropped her Q!
Magnus will play for a draw in game 12. And rightfully so. The pressure is with Caruana now. Doubt it will make a difference though. Having the WCCC decided by rapid and blitz time controls really makes you think what's the meaning of all this. But we'll see, maybe game 12 will bring a surprise.
I live about 15 miles (25 km) away so I suppose I should go and watch it. I just haven't found it interesting but that's probably because I'm a weak player.