Carlsen wins game 9, only needs 1 draw in 3 remaining games • Hacker News Board

Re: Carlsen wins game 9, only needs 1 draw in 3 remaining games

#41

Post by robrenaud » Thu, Nov 21, 2013, 3:27 PM UTC

peeters wrote: post #31

rikacomet wrote: post #20

The worst part about that match is, Anand spent 50+ minute on one move, to loose all the time advantage he had pushed carlsen into. First I thought, it was to make Carlsen loose his nerve, but he lost his own nerve, by moving Qe4, instead of slow push hh4. That was the turning point :( He went from winning position to a clear loss. Also, I don't get the point of resigning, on this level, it should be a fight till the…

I don't see anything wrong with resigning. First off, it acknowledges your weak position, which saves you some face for at least knowing. Second, it is a strong compliment on your opponent's skill, because only poor play from your opponent would put you into a draw/win situation. This in turn is classy, because it's saying "I want to win on my own merits, not on a mistake of my opponent." So honestly I think it makes…

Fuck looks/face/perception. I don't care what you think about me. I just want to win (within the rules, of course).

Re: Carlsen wins game 9, only needs 1 draw in 3 remaining games

#42

Post by dfan » Thu, Nov 21, 2013, 3:28 PM UTC

jrs99 wrote: post #39

Someone wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ratings and differences of ratings may not be comparable across time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system#Ratings_infla... : "It is commonly believed that, at least at the top level, modern ratings are inflated."

dfan, you make good points. But also we need to keep in mind that today's top players on an absolute level, really probably are better than previous era's top players. They simply have access to the past, and technology. More databases, more games played, internet giving opportunity to play many, many more games. Programs to analyze their play, coaching in the modern era, etc. That is something that Anand didn't real…

Yes, exactly! It is no insult to players from earlier eras that today's players have surpassed them, just as it is no insult to track and field athletes from earlier eras that their records don't still stand. Today's athletes have better equipment, better training, and better medicine, just as today's chess players have 24-hour access to computers better than any human and databases with millions of games. It would be surprising if today's top players weren't better than they used to be.

Re: Carlsen wins game 9, only needs 1 draw in 3 remaining games

#43

Post by DanielStraight » Thu, Nov 21, 2013, 3:29 PM UTC

peeters wrote: post #31

rikacomet wrote: post #20

The worst part about that match is, Anand spent 50+ minute on one move, to loose all the time advantage he had pushed carlsen into. First I thought, it was to make Carlsen loose his nerve, but he lost his own nerve, by moving Qe4, instead of slow push hh4. That was the turning point :( He went from winning position to a clear loss. Also, I don't get the point of resigning, on this level, it should be a fight till the…

I don't see anything wrong with resigning. First off, it acknowledges your weak position, which saves you some face for at least knowing. Second, it is a strong compliment on your opponent's skill, because only poor play from your opponent would put you into a draw/win situation. This in turn is classy, because it's saying "I want to win on my own merits, not on a mistake of my opponent." So honestly I think it makes…

Indeed. The comment about "on this level" shows a misunderstanding about high level play. It's at low level play where it makes sense to play it out because a low level player is less likely to realize they are in a losing position, and a low level opponent is actually fairly likely to make a mistake that could turn the tide.

At high levels of play, continuing to play implies that you think you have some chance of winning and that it is therefore worth both players' time to continue the game. If you know you shouldn't win, you are either implying that your opponent may make a stupid mistake that would let you win (an insult to their ability) or you are assuming a right to their time for the mere formality of finishing the game.

At a low or mid level of play, it might even make sense to say that you know you should resign, but you'd like to play it out to see just how the checkmate happens and thus learn more about the game (and giving your opponent that chance to take the resignation rather than assuming you may have their time), but no one is going to learn anything from playing out a losing position at this level of play.

Re: Carlsen wins game 9, only needs 1 draw in 3 remaining games

#44

Post by kamaal » Thu, Nov 21, 2013, 3:31 PM UTC

kzrdude wrote: post #21

kamaal wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I don't know much about chess, but I've read some chess history off late. I think age should not be an issue. But sometimes people go through rough times. It happens, people don't stay in form and the added pressure of the event makes people more desperate and to act in urgency. Big blunders happen in such situations. This isn't just restricted to chess. In nearly walk of life this happens. I know some very bril…

Anand seems to have some frustrations. In an interview he lamented that he reached GM at the age of 18, while the youngest have been able to do that at 12 or 13 (Magnus at 13). He's not content with being the world champion, he wants to be the youngest, most talented, etc too. Can't have everything. Since internet commentary is always interpreted with a negative tone, I'll edit to add: Anand is a fascinating personal…

>>he wants to be the youngest, most talented, etc too. Can't have everything.

As an Indian, and someone who practically looks at Anand as a role mode. I would be disappointed if Anand really had that attitude.

Frankly speaking, I don't like the 'naturally talented' or 'natural genius' or this whole belief that people are born with some skills that can't be matched by other people. This isn't just about chess. This sort of thing manifests in every other walk of life.

Most kids just resign to be incapable at math due to constant comparison with other kids. Though I they would do far better if only they were motivated enough to put more effort.

Re: Carlsen wins game 9, only needs 1 draw in 3 remaining games

#45

Post by jrs99 » Thu, Nov 21, 2013, 3:34 PM UTC

TylerE wrote: post #38

super_mario wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not very likely now that most of us have a computer in our pockets that can beat each of these guys. Chess will never be the same again.

I don't buy that at all, no more so than the existence of motor vehicles have made track and field events irrelevant. If anything, wide accessibility of very strong computer engines only boosts the high-level game, as it enables very deep analysis - opening theory has moved quite a bit in the last 20-30 years.

track and field is largely irrelevant. Chess is pretty irrelevant, no matter how much i love it. avant-garde Novels are also irrelevant.

What i mean is that a huge majority of gifted athletes will not be going into track and field. The best athletes aren't pro runners. I'm not saying that there aren't great runners who are athletes, just that soccer, and basketball will be taking a lot of the talent away from track.

Same is true of chess. Best gameplayers are not deciding to go into chess. It is a very minor game, like rugby. I would even think that Poker has more strategic talent than Chess does.

Re: Carlsen wins game 9, only needs 1 draw in 3 remaining games

#46

Post by jrs99 » Thu, Nov 21, 2013, 3:36 PM UTC

super_mario wrote: post #33

denysonique wrote: post #18

Hopefully Carlsen's becoming the FIDE World Champion will be loud in the media and will bring back the popularity of chess into our times.

Not very likely now that most of us have a computer in our pockets that can beat each of these guys. Chess will never be the same again.

one reason why Poker is becoming the great strategic game for all of the World (or so it seems)

Re: Carlsen wins game 9, only needs 1 draw in 3 remaining games

#47

Post by dfan » Thu, Nov 21, 2013, 3:41 PM UTC

S4M wrote: post #2

Anand's last move was a huge mistake. I am pretty sure it's because of the tension, because even I (fide rating 1900+) wouldn't have made it.

Yeah. It was a standard type of calculation error (forgetting when you visualize a variation that a piece has vacated a square so that it can now be passed through) but not one I would expect a top-level player to make.

Re: Carlsen wins game 9, only needs 1 draw in 3 remaining games

#48

Post by apalmer » Thu, Nov 21, 2013, 3:43 PM UTC

peeters wrote: post #31

rikacomet wrote: post #20

The worst part about that match is, Anand spent 50+ minute on one move, to loose all the time advantage he had pushed carlsen into. First I thought, it was to make Carlsen loose his nerve, but he lost his own nerve, by moving Qe4, instead of slow push hh4. That was the turning point :( He went from winning position to a clear loss. Also, I don't get the point of resigning, on this level, it should be a fight till the…

I don't see anything wrong with resigning. First off, it acknowledges your weak position, which saves you some face for at least knowing. Second, it is a strong compliment on your opponent's skill, because only poor play from your opponent would put you into a draw/win situation. This in turn is classy, because it's saying "I want to win on my own merits, not on a mistake of my opponent." So honestly I think it makes…

In this case, dude lose because of a clear blunder... players of all levels make blunders, so there is some benefit in always playing a game till the end... Its more a question of mental stamina, are you gonna spend 8 hours of concentration on something you have less than a 1% chance of winning... maybe a true overlord of chess would be willing to do this...

Re: Carlsen wins game 9, only needs 1 draw in 3 remaining games

#49

Post by auctiontheory » Thu, Nov 21, 2013, 3:47 PM UTC

po wrote: post #32

During the press questioning the computer they were using froze up a bit and Anand became frustrated and rattled through his thinking out loud instead. The commentator then asks Anand something along the lines of "did you think through all of these complications?" and his response was a curt "no, I was thinking of what to eat tonight." "Yeah… so, do we have questions to the players?" oof... such high stakes and he ju…

his response was a curt "no, I was thinking of what to eat tonight."

I was up at 5am to watch that. Embarrassing. Other great players (e.g. Kramnik) have lost tough matches with a lot more class.

Re: Carlsen wins game 9, only needs 1 draw in 3 remaining games

#50

Post by auctiontheory » Thu, Nov 21, 2013, 3:51 PM UTC

robrenaud wrote: post #41

peeters wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see anything wrong with resigning. First off, it acknowledges your weak position, which saves you some face for at least knowing. Second, it is a strong compliment on your opponent's skill, because only poor play from your opponent would put you into a draw/win situation. This in turn is classy, because it's saying "I want to win on my own merits, not on a mistake of my opponent." So honestly I think it makes…

Fuck looks/face/perception. I don't care what you think about me. I just want to win (within the rules, of course).

Once you get a reputation for playing out positions more than a rook down, you may have a harder time getting tournament invitations, sponsors, collaborators, etc. If you're an amateur, soon even your friends won't want to play you.