Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Carlsen–Karjakin World Championship

chessgames.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 88 posts

Re: Carlsen–Karjakin World Championship

#41

Post by wallace_f »

iends wrote: post #40
LanceH wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does it have over ICC?

imho, ICC is the gold standard. You can get at least a simul with a master almost everyday. The GM commentary is incredible for live tournaments, and things like ICC's Game of the Week from GM Joel Benjamin are unmatched.

ICC is also great. To each their own

If you haven't yet taken a look at lichess give it a shot, it's wonderfully elegant and well-done project and there is a lot of great talent that plays there as well as wonderful features such as lichess tv, coaching, analysis and puzzles which are all free -- and there's no ads, the UX design is very click, too!

Edit: I'm not a Master and don't need that level of competitiveness, but on lichess TV I am always seeing Masters playing there.

Re: Carlsen–Karjakin World Championship

#42

Post by ktRolster »

NhanH wrote: post #30
tzs wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to see tiebreaks first in soccer. Yasser Seirawan had an interesting suggestion. Make championship matches 13 games, not 12, with the challenger getting white 7 times and the defending champion getting white 6 times, and with the championing retaining the title in the case of a 6.5 - 6.5 tie. One nice thing about Seirawan's suggestion is that it does not involve rapid or blitz. Many people don't like the ide…

Computer evaluation would cut off all the "human" factors involving in a match, especially championship one. It is part of any sport that being slightly better is not enough, you have to be able to turn that into concrete advantage over the scores. To put it another way, "match strategy" is part of the game. We know with reasonable certainty that Carlsen is the stronger player, thanks to the rating system. Championsh…

The point is that Carlsen was ahead, so if enough games had been played, he eventually would have managed to convert one of those games to victory (by sheer probability).

Because the number of games played was too short, the game score wasn't allowed to reflect the true strength of the players.

Re: Carlsen–Karjakin World Championship

#43

Post by sv3nss0n »

conistonwater wrote: post #11

This time around there was an unusual amount of match strategy involved. In fact, what's interesting is that they always played the Spanish or the Italian, but in the one game where Karjakin wanted to (had to) win, he played the Najdorf. Peter Svidler mentioned a very interesting suggestion that the players should play the tie-breaks before the match, which should produce more interesting games (in particular, it sho…

I fear that the winner of that pre-match tie-break would play as defensive as he could during the match leading to even more defensive matches.

Re: Carlsen–Karjakin World Championship

#44

Post by mehwoot »

ktRolster wrote: post #42
NhanH wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Computer evaluation would cut off all the "human" factors involving in a match, especially championship one. It is part of any sport that being slightly better is not enough, you have to be able to turn that into concrete advantage over the scores. To put it another way, "match strategy" is part of the game. We know with reasonable certainty that Carlsen is the stronger player, thanks to the rating system. Championsh…

The point is that Carlsen was ahead, so if enough games had been played, he eventually would have managed to convert one of those games to victory (by sheer probability). Because the number of games played was too short, the game score wasn't allowed to reflect the true strength of the players.

Yes but that's a feature of almost every sport (to varying degrees). The aim of championships are not necessarily to determine who is stronger.

Re: Carlsen–Karjakin World Championship

#45

Post by zbik »

logicallee wrote: post #22
zbik wrote: post #7

I whipped up a little demo illustrating Carlsen's decisive rapid game 3. It transposes the move sequence to show white's 13-move opening (Karjakin) followed by Carlsen's 13-move response as black, and so on through the game - using the longest possible sequences consistent with legal positions from the original game. http://transpose.fantasychess.co.uk/

hey that's incredibly clear! From your description I thought it'd be practically pointless - but actually you can see each sides strategy developing quite interestingly. I actually saw people play out of sequence - some buskers or homeless or whatever people - just used to playing so many games against each other they'd get through the openings quickly by each person making several moves. It seemed too fast for me to…

Thank you! I was inspired by something I read about the early history of chess:

"In order to save time, and to prevent useless exchanges, it was agreed that the first player should make his (let us say) fifteen moves all at once, without, however, crossing the middle line of the board; after which the adversary was entitled to play up at once an equal number of counter moves... these preliminary maneuvers the Arabs called Ta'biyat, which signifies 'the drawing up of troops in battle array'."

(quoted from Duncan Forbes "Observations on the Origin and Progress of Chess", 1855 - I first came across the variant in Edward Lasker's "The Adventure of Chess".)

Re: Carlsen–Karjakin World Championship

#46

Post by akkartik »

iends wrote: post #40
LanceH wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does it have over ICC?

imho, ICC is the gold standard. You can get at least a simul with a master almost everyday. The GM commentary is incredible for live tournaments, and things like ICC's Game of the Week from GM Joel Benjamin are unmatched.

I'm not nearly good enough to play a master, and I use lichess to play Chess960 (Fischer Random). Can ICC do that?

Edit: The ICC app does seem to have Chess960. However I couldn't tell where my offer went in free mode, and the UI was filled with stuff I couldn't use. Lichess's UX seems slicker. In particular:

a) When you open the app you get a problem. Solve it and you get another, and another and another.

b) You can ask for computer analysis after a game.

Re: Carlsen–Karjakin World Championship

#47

Post by mwana »

akkartik wrote: post #34
slm_HN wrote: post #25

The ending of the match in puzzle form on Lichess: https://en.lichess.org/training/102787

I think I might have been the first to get that today. It said "played 0 times". Very humorous :)

Unreal! Honestly I thought it was over for white, what a brilliant finish!

Re: Carlsen–Karjakin World Championship

#48

Post by wtf_is_up »

wallace_f wrote: post #37
akkartik wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I might have been the first to get that today. It said "played 0 times". Very humorous :)

I just played it and it also said it was played 0 times To anyone that plays chess or would like to: lichess is an all-around wonderful site, and in my opinion the best place to play chess! It's also free, and ad free.

FYI, Lichess code is open source on github.

https://github.com/ornicar/lila

I've referenced it for both Scala (server side) and mithril.js (client side).

Re: Carlsen–Karjakin World Championship

#49

Post by kriro »

CalChris wrote: post #27
stouset wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Peter Svidler mentioned a very interesting suggestion that the players should play the tie-breaks before the match, which should produce more interesting games. This is the first such suggestion I've heard that I actually like.

Since 2003, MLB determines home field advantage in the World Series by the winner of the All–Star Game. Not same but similar.

HFA in the WS might not be an advantage though. I'd argue it has actually been an advantage for the NL team if the AL team gets HFA in recent history because it helped their hitting. The last WS would be a good example.

Re: Carlsen–Karjakin World Championship

#50

Post by Uhhrrr »

tzs wrote: post #29
conistonwater wrote: post #11

This time around there was an unusual amount of match strategy involved. In fact, what's interesting is that they always played the Spanish or the Italian, but in the one game where Karjakin wanted to (had to) win, he played the Najdorf. Peter Svidler mentioned a very interesting suggestion that the players should play the tie-breaks before the match, which should produce more interesting games (in particular, it sho…

I'd like to see tiebreaks first in soccer. Yasser Seirawan had an interesting suggestion. Make championship matches 13 games, not 12, with the challenger getting white 7 times and the defending champion getting white 6 times, and with the championing retaining the title in the case of a 6.5 - 6.5 tie. One nice thing about Seirawan's suggestion is that it does not involve rapid or blitz. Many people don't like the ide…

I don't like the idea of computer evaluation at all. The measure of whether one has a winning position should be winning.
Post reply on HN