You've been watching the French Open?
point, game, set, match... it's chess, not tennis...
Sort:
Not yet... I will when it get to the finals...
Hope so... We must request FIDE... 
...
PardalsemCasa wrote:
I was wondering if chess wouldn't be as popular as tennis if it was played in tennis format in world class tournaments, where each point would be a bullet game and playing white would be equivalent to having service...
If I understand you well, your idea is to transform all serious events in ultra-blitz.
Sure it would make chess more popular for patzers, but the quality of the moves will decrease very abruptly.
If you do not see what I mean :
And this is five times the time control you are suggesting.
Irontiger wrote:
If I understand you well, your idea is to transform all serious events in ultra-blitz.
Sure it would make chess more popular for patzers, but the quality of the moves will decrease very abruptly.
If you do not see what I mean
And this is five times the time control you are suggesting.
Of course I see what you mean... and that's exactly what makes sports popular and magic... look how excited was both narrators...
If anyone wants perfect play, put computers to play...
We are humans and we want to know who is the best human player...
And the best is the one who can play strong in any pace...
And to play strong in fast pace, one must train and train, as in any other sport...
And not only study chess, but also be physically prepared to keep all your body and specially your brains ready to react fast...
BTW, thnx for the video... And I was thinking something like 2 min games...
PardalsemCasa wrote:
(...)
We are humans and we want to know who is the best human player...
And the best is the one who can play strong in any pace...
(...)
No.
The best at 5-second chess without increment is certainly good at moving his hands from the board to the clock, but probably not better than me at chess.
I know this is extreme, but it highlights the weak spot in your reasoning.
Btw, I do not like playing slow games either. I am much better in rapid events, and I fare decently in blitz here. But still, I prefer that serious tournaments are played with more than 1h/player.
Irontiger wrote:
The best at 5-second chess without increment is certainly good at moving his hands from the board to the clock, but probably not better than me at chess.
The best at 5-second chess without increment is certainly good at moving his hands from the board to the clock, but probably not better than me at chess.
I know this is extreme, but it highlights the weak spot in your reasoning.
Well, 2 min is much more than 5 sec...
BTW, have you ever watched top players 1 min live games here? It's amazing...
And with some technology improvement players would not have to pat clocks...
Irontiger wrote:
Btw, I do not like playing slow games either. I am much better in rapid events, and I fare decently in blitz here. But still, I prefer that serious tournaments are played with more than 1h/player.
Btw, I do not like playing slow games either. I am much better in rapid events, and I fare decently in blitz here. But still, I prefer that serious tournaments are played with more than 1h/player.
Anyway that's your opinion and I respect that...
I just want to find a way to make chess something more popular... something which would catch some more kids around the world...
PardalsemCasa wrote:
I was wondering if chess wouldn't be as popular as tennis if it was played in tennis format in world class tournaments, where each point would be a bullet game and playing white would be equivalent to having service...
The problem with that is tennis itself isn't that popular. In the US basketball and football are much more popular, and worldwide soccer is more popular. So instead of having points, games, sets and matches, we should have goals, touchdowns and penalty shootouts (when a series of blitz games is used as a tiebreak).
macer75 wrote:
PardalsemCasa wrote:
I was wondering if chess wouldn't be as popular as tennis if it was played in tennis format in world class tournaments, where each point would be a bullet game and playing white would be equivalent to having service...
The problem with that is tennis itself isn't that popular. In the US basketball and football are much more popular, and worldwide soccer is more popular. So instead of having points, games, sets and matches, we should have goals, touchdowns and penalty shootouts (when a series of blitz games is used as a tiebreak).
ok... but what you suggest to be goals and touchdowns in chess?
BTW, I never said the most popular, just as popular as, or something more popular...
Talvez jogos normais, blitz ou bullet não fazem tanta diferença para grandes mestres, mas para amadores faz. A qualidade do jogo é outra e faz muita diferença você ter 5 minutos para analisar um único lance e ter 5 minutos num jogo inteiro. Mas é claro que um jogador completo deve estar preparado para qualquer ritmo. Acho que uma idéia possível de ser colocada em prática imediatamente e já mudaria a cara dos torneios é acabar com os empates. Assim como no futebol tem as prorrogações e os pênaltis, poderia fazer num torneio de xadrez (em suas fases finais) isso: se o jogo empata, terão outras partidas cada vez com menor tempo até desempatar. Isso por si só já traria mudanças bem positivas eu acho.
May 30, 2013
0
#15
Maybe you could change it to be like Tennis. Maybe that's how they should do the World Championship match.
Player to serve gets White. If he wins, 15-Love. If he loses, Love-15. If he draws, Fault. If he draws twice consecutively, Double Fault, Love-15. He continues to play White until 15-30-40-Game (Win by 2) is achieved by either White or Black. Then that player is up 1 to nothing. First to 6 win by 2 gets the set. If tied at 5, first to 7. If 6-6, then tie break, player that serves first gets White-Black-Black-White-White-Black-Black-White-White-etc, first to 7 win by 2. Winner gets the Set.
Best 3 sets out of 5. 6-6 in the 5th set is played like normal, not tiebreak, play until you win by 2.
Time control: 40 Moves in 2 Hours, Sudden Death in 1 Hour.
Estimated Match Time: 10 Years (35 Years if Kramnik is involved - And you thought Karpov/Kasparov 1984 took a long time!)
PardalsemCasa wrote:
macer75 wrote:
PardalsemCasa wrote:
I was wondering if chess wouldn't be as popular as tennis if it was played in tennis format in world class tournaments, where each point would be a bullet game and playing white would be equivalent to having service...
The problem with that is tennis itself isn't that popular. In the US basketball and football are much more popular, and worldwide soccer is more popular. So instead of having points, games, sets and matches, we should have goals, touchdowns and penalty shootouts (when a series of blitz games is used as a tiebreak).
ok... but what you suggest to be goals and touchdowns in chess?
BTW, I never said the most popular, just as popular as, or something more popular...
lol I was joking. Partly, at least :)
Only for girls...
I was wondering if chess wouldn't be as popular as tennis if it was played in tennis format in world class tournaments, where each point would be a bullet game and playing white would be equivalent to having service...