Didn't see that. But in gengeral i'd like to propose that FIDE adds their own press officer Anastasyia Karlovich to the commentators, at least when it's video commentary, as she's a real eye catcher, i think this would increase the numbers of spectators a lot.
Sergei Tiviakov - FIDE Grand Prix Commentator
Sort:
Vo1d3mort wrote:
Didn't see that. But in gengeral i'd like to propose that FIDE adds their own press officer Anastasyia Karlovich to the commentators, at least when it's video commentary, as she's a real eye catcher, i think this would increase the numbers of spectators a lot.
They did that during the candidates tournament, and there still weren't that many spectators. I think it's because she's wearing too much...
[COMMENT DELETED]
Vo1d3mort wrote:
Didn't see that. But in gengeral i'd like to propose that FIDE adds their own press officer Anastasyia Karlovich to the commentators, at least when it's video commentary, as she's a real eye catcher, i think this would increase the numbers of spectators a lot.
i dont think so, but i found the moment awesome when Svidler laughed about her question.
[COMMENT DELETED]
by the way is there any site where you can look up what events get official commentary?? i always miss them, guess i have to subscribe to new in chess again.
ive seen him once i cant really say i saw an inflated ego.´But then again i dont remember too much of him.
i dont know i think the most important part is the commentary, if the commentary is good i think the people can have really inflated ego, if its bad i dont want them as commentators be they good or bad.
Tiviakov doesn't mince his words. Here is how he concluded his review of Edward Dearing's Play The Sicilian Dragon (New In Chess Yearbook, #75):
I conclude that the book by E. Dearing is not the best way to learn the Dragon. For white players, it is 100% unsuitable. But even for black players, it is an inadequate guide to play the Dragon successfully.
My evaluation of this book is 4 out of 10. Admittedly, the author has written a large book, which does contain some correct evaluations and advices. But if you can find out what is correct in this book and what isn't, you don't need it at all!
Ouch!
Crazychessplaya wrote:
Tiviakov doesn't mince his words. Here is how he concluded his review of Edward Dearing's Play The Sicilian Dragon (New In Chess Yearbook, #75):
I conclude that the book by E. Dearing is not the best way to learn the Dragon. For white players, it is 100% unsuitable. But even for black players, it is an inadequate guide to play the Dragon successfully.
My evaluation of this book is 4 out of 10. Admittedly, the author has written a large book, which does contain some correct evaluations and advices. But if you can find out what is correct in this book and what isn't, you don't need it at all!
Ouch!
that is an awesome review to be honest!!! Now i automatically like him!!!
Heaven help us.
maybe its just my flawed impression, but i have the feeling honest critical reviews are way too few these days.
Yes! In all aspects of life.
TetsuoShima wrote:
maybe its just my flawed impression, but i have the feeling honest critical reviews are way too few these days.
Sep 25, 2013
0
#14
Crazychessplaya wrote:
Tiviakov doesn't mince his words. Here is how he concluded his review of Edward Dearing's Play The Sicilian Dragon (New In Chess Yearbook, #75):
I conclude that the book by E. Dearing is not the best way to learn the Dragon. For white players, it is 100% unsuitable. But even for black players, it is an inadequate guide to play the Dragon successfully.
My evaluation of this book is 4 out of 10. Admittedly, the author has written a large book, which does contain some correct evaluations and advices. But if you can find out what is correct in this book and what isn't, you don't need it at all!
Ouch!
Once I got three books to review from a publisher. I said ok, I'll take a look. To cut the story short, the reviews were along the lines of:
a) This book is fine, but it has nothing to do with chess.
b) This book is innocous trash, i.e., a way of wasting one's time.
c) This book is harmful trash, i.e., you will not only waste time, but also hinder your chess skills.
The real problem is publishers releasing rubbish titles and then paying reviewers to say good things about them...
Tiviakov is one of the top experts in the Dragon, so in this case I tend to trust him much more than that author...btw who is that guy? :) The Dragon is an incredibly hard opening to master, so most books about the variation are full of mistakes.
expand wrote:
Has anyone been watching the FIDE Grand Prix with commentary by Sergei Tiviakov? This guy is amazing. He has the biggest ego I've ever seen. I hope FIDE does not use him in future events. I can see the players cringe when they go up for post game analysis. He calls their moves "stupid," etc. There are so many negative events that have happened with him commenting on games or interviewing players. I don't want to spent the time to list them all. Very sad.
yes, he's amazing! i find all the awkwardness that usually happens in the commentaries hilarious.
wouldn't like to see him replaced, though somehow i'm sure that it will happen :p
Has anyone been watching the FIDE Grand Prix with commentary by Sergei Tiviakov? This guy is amazing. He has the biggest ego I've ever seen. I hope FIDE does not use him in future events. I can see the players cringe when they go up for post game analysis. He calls their moves "stupid," etc. There are so many negative events that have happened with him commenting on games or interviewing players. I don't want to spent the time to list them all. Very sad.