181–190 of 461 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it count as 'breaking' if you're just tired of the game and don't want to play any more? Surely it's OK to stop and do other things eventually?
It is both okay to stop and do other things eventually and it also counts as ‘breaking’
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fischer is clearly the goat in my view. But it’s not so obvious to me that Kasparov and Carlsen are better than say Vishy or Morphy or Botvinnik or Capablanca…
I find these conversations amusing because it really is the nerd (I mean that as a nerd myself; not perjoratively) version of arguing about whether LeBron is better than Jordan (in their respective primes) or whether the GOAT is Brady, Woods or LeBron. It's just funny that this same argument structure repeats in radically different fields with (often) very different people. Personally I've never gotten too invested i…
Can someone please explain to me (someone complete out of the world of chess) why he doesn’t like to compete in the World Championship but likes to compete in other tournaments?
While he's (this goes without saying) perfectly within his rights to do so. I feel this decision will undermine his status as one of the GOATs of the game in the long run. "However, one cannot say that he has beaten Caruana or Karjakin convincingly. [Both matches were decided on tiebreaks]. There were questions in his match against Anand too. If he had beaten all three of them as clearly as he won against Nepomniacht…
Honest question: Would somebody at this "level" be better than good at something like StarCraft ? Noted that SC takes more than "just strategy" i.e micro comes to mind. Like I would pay good money to see Serral Vs Magnus, maybe after some coaching sessions with Harstem ? :D ? EDIT: Just out of curiosity will there be anything else that someone at this level is "exceptional" good at besides chess ?
Time to change the format. It's understandable you don't want to spend your whole career preparing for these long matches all the time. For the challenger it's 6 months of preparing, but for Carlsen it would've been his 6th time of preparing for this in a few years. They have also become less entertaining. 12 matches is long (edit, 14 now), but no one dares to take any risks. Caruana was just defensive and all games…
Chess' centre of gravity is increasingly online centred now. Carlson himself has a lot to do with it. So do other charismatic super GMs like Nakamura. A light hearted, unplanned and unadvertised naka-carlsen bullet match can attract a lot of viewers. They both stream, and lots of other chess streamers will switch to watching and doing commentary when these matches happen. They'll play silly openings like the double b…
It's kinda fun to see this referenced recently in a television quiz show:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is both okay to stop and do other things eventually and it also counts as ‘breaking’
So the only way for it not to be considered not 'breaking' is by losing. That makes no sense
Yes, every championship title eventually goes to someone else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't elo eventually inflated by the number of ranked players anyway? The more people will be eventually fide rated and climb through the distribution the more the better players will drift at higher elos. That's also a reason why in modern days we have more 2750+ ranked players than ever. One common, wrong, argument is that modern players play better, while this is true this does not affect the elo ranking at all. T…
I think that the rating inflation debate has concluded that there isn't that much inflation. Compared to the old 2600 generation, the 2700 people now are just that much better. An analysis here: https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-elo-ratings-inflation-or-d... It claims that a 2500 player now is better than a 2500 player in 2000. So in that sense it's actually been a deflation. Also https://www.playmagnus.com/en/news/p…
If you take, e.g. two unranked players that are very bad at chess or two unranked masters they are still going to end up with a +16 and -16 elo change. And you can keep adding great or bad players to the pool, and elo is still going to only look at the outcome not how players play.
The point with elo is that if there's only 2 players it is basically impossible to reach a 2000 elo, because even if one consistently wins at some point he's not gaining any point by beating the same opponent, thus to go from 1700 to 1800 he'll need to face an opponent that has a similar elo.
The more people slightly below his skill the more he'll rise in the elo distribution, this trickles down all the way up and down.
Of course it is very likely that modern 2500 players are better as they have better tools than players of 20 years ago, but the same applies to people lower and higher in rating.
Thus, at the end of the day, the only factor that matters in an elo distribution and how wide it is, is the number of games and players.
If tomorrow there will be an influx of another million ranked players the distribution will get a bit wider and this would also inflate in the long run ratings of the highest rated players.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is both okay to stop and do other things eventually and it also counts as ‘breaking’
So no one can ever quit without it being considered 'breaking'? If not, what would distinguish between 'breaking' and not 'breaking'? Surely, if one can quit without it being considered breaking, resigning while on top is how.
Time to change the format. It's understandable you don't want to spend your whole career preparing for these long matches all the time. For the challenger it's 6 months of preparing, but for Carlsen it would've been his 6th time of preparing for this in a few years. They have also become less entertaining. 12 matches is long (edit, 14 now), but no one dares to take any risks. Caruana was just defensive and all games…
Chess' centre of gravity is increasingly online centred now. Carlson himself has a lot to do with it. So do other charismatic super GMs like Nakamura. A light hearted, unplanned and unadvertised naka-carlsen bullet match can attract a lot of viewers. They both stream, and lots of other chess streamers will switch to watching and doing commentary when these matches happen. They'll play silly openings like the double b…
I'd bet a 20 game rapid series over 4 days between naka-carlsen would attract more viewers than the world championship.