7 ms·

The psychological drama of the world chess championship

62 points by axiomdata316 5y ago

axiomdata316 5y ago
https://archive.md/sh9kr https://archive.md/sh9kr
DarylZero 5y ago
- adharmad 5y ago
  Granted Nepo self-destructed starting Game 8, so any psychological sub-currents paled in comparision with the on-the-board blunders. But I wouldn't go as far to call Classical chess "lame".
  - DarylZero 5y ago
    It's all draws even when it's not the WC. But the better the players, the more draws. So the WC is the most drawing of all. That's a lame sport.
- pixelpoet 5y ago
  Regarding the last point, everyone who has looked at the game of Go with its 0.5 point komi (compensation to white for black playing first) must agree that it is a stroke of brilliance to prevent endless draws.
  - ludamad 5y ago
    Most draws could be wins for black, give some to white. You don't need a point system to divide up the drawn outcomes
  - rdlw 5y ago
    Some chess tournaments make draws worth ⅓ instead of ½ to incentive aggressive play, but they seem to end up with similar draw rates as normal tournaments. Of course, that wouldn't work at all for a 1v1 event like the WCC, it would probably just make it ~50% longer. The main thing to decrease draws seems to be shorter time format, but the Blitz championship seems to attract less attention than the classical, and of course blunders are more likely, which is a double edged sword. Maybe the next WCC will be more exciting, since Alireza probably has far better winning odds, or if Magnus doesn't compete then the challengers won't be terrified into playing 14 Berlin draw lines. (For those who don't know why Magnus may not compete: https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/chess/only-alireza-firouzja-as-title-contender-interests-magnus-carlsen-7673343/ https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/chess/only-alireza-... - first decent looking article I found)
  - dragontamer 5y ago
    Go didn't have komi just 60ish years ago. The issue is that chess has lost its ability to make rule changes, like komi, superko, passing stones or whatever. We can erase draws from chess with Black wins stalemates, white wins 50 move / three move repetitions.
    - CalChris 5y ago
      The time format in chess changed. It used to have adjournments where the Russians had a tremendous advantage. When Fischer played Botvinnik at the Olympiad in 1962, they adjourned. Fischer sealed his 45th move and Botvinnik gave the position to his seconds who sent it to Moscow to a room full of GMs. Botvinnik himself went to sleep and woke up to be handed a saving brilliancy. The time format also really changed in that rapid and blitz are heavily contested. Magnus and the other super GMs even play bullet. There has been some interest in FischerRandom or Chess 960. Not a rule change, but computers have democratized chess and massively improved play. A modern GM would simply crush Tal. Stockfish taught a level of accuracy that is insane. And now players learn new strategies from Alpha Zero class machines.
      - dragontamer 5y ago
        > There has been some interest in FischerRandom or Chess 960. Do people really want to give up all of the past 100-years of opening theory? I don't think so. The #1 issue of Chess is "boring, everything's a draw". Well, good news. We can get rid of draws with "Stalemate == Black Wins. 50-move / 3-move repetition == White Wins". Very small rule change. Not only that, it keeps Stalemate-practice as a key-study for Black players. So all the skills you've gained for the past 100 years (from opening theory, to stalemate practice) remains relevant. Fischer Random / 960 is for people who want to throw away the entirety of chess opening theory. I'm sure that's a valid concern and/or criticism of chess, but I don't think its something the entire community agrees upon (after all: everyone keeps playing Chess / Shogi with exactly the same opening setup. There's something deeply cultural about keeping the setup the same for hundreds of years).
        mehwoot 5y ago
  - DarylZero 5y ago
    There's something kind of similar, Armageddon chess, where black wins draws and white gets a time advantage. Of course this is not "classical chess," but it's used as a third line of tie-break in the classical championship. This is also lame, since a world championship specifically for classical chess should not be decided by non-classical chess.
    - dragontamer 5y ago
      > There's something kind of similar, Armageddon chess, where black wins draws and white gets a time advantage. Black wins draws is a bit too inelegant, as that leads to a Black advantage. Splitting the draws into Stalemate / Impossible / 50-move end / 3-move repetition gives us 4 draw-conditions to "split" between the two players. > This is also lame, since a world championship specifically for classical chess should not be decided by non-classical chess. There's something to be said that classical chess is definitely becoming boring because of the frequency of draws... possibly due to the increase of computer analysis and advanced play we have today. Some kind of "no-draw chess" should be the new classic chess standard applied to the game.
- SoylentOrange 5y ago
  There were plenty of amazing games in classical chess this year (and just because a game is a draw doesn’t mean it wasn’t exciting). An example of a great game this year is Carlsen v So at the Champions Tour. Another great game was Dominguez vs MVL at Sinquefield (Dominguez won the brilliancy award). Many up and coming (young) players are also really exciting: Alireza, Duda, and Dubov. Duda’s win over Karjakin in the World Cup was pretty spectacular.
- bananamerica 5y ago
  You would be right if not for the high amount of decisive games.
rdlw 5y ago
It's hard to call the event as a whole exciting, especially from Game 7 on, but if you have any interest in chess I highly recommend watching a recap of Game 6—that one's going into the history books, I think. GothamChess made my favourite recap of it, but Agadmator's dry wit is always available if you find Levy annoying :)
- macintux 5y ago
  Apparently this is the GothamChess recap in question. https://youtu.be/PmQs1KhB948 https://youtu.be/PmQs1KhB948
- ycombinete 5y ago
  I like Daniel King [0]. He was a highly rated GM in his time (2600s) and it shows. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7QwZAGJpJI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7QwZAGJpJI
- jstx1 5y ago
  I thought it was an entertaining watch. I think the chess community is a bit too picky about what makes a good match. - many draws -> "chess is dead", "yawn, another draw", "they should change the format" - one player wins decisively -> "this isn't World Championship level", "how embarrassing for Ian", "someone else should play instead" So you really need to have very very close wins (like game 6 this year) throughout the entire match to satisfy people. Realistically that's not going to happen very often.
  - zigman1 5y ago
    If we're totally honest, people who are complaining about draws are usually recent new fans, or people who watch it for spectacle. I think it is very similar to football (soccer), those games that fans perceive as boring, dull, are tactically the most interesting to watch and analyze.
SoylentOrange 5y ago
What this article misses is Nepo is famous in the chess community for caving into pressure after losing once. A lot of people have said that Nepo was immensely lucky with the Candidates Tournament (the tournament that allowed him to play for the World Championship) since that tournament was split into two parts due to COVID. The break happened precisely after Nepo lost a crucial game and allowed him some time to regain his composure. I doubt Nepo would have won the Candidates if he had to play immediately after his loss. On the other hand, Carlsen is well-known for his mental fortitude. It’s something that Vishy Anand, the previous champion, has talked about extensively. Carlsen’s style is often called “squeezing blood from a stone” because he will play equal-looking endgames and mentally exhaust his opponent into making a tiny mistake that he will convert into an advantage. It was indeed a tough match-up for Nepo, and most knew it would end tragically for Nepo. Despite being an excellent player, he’s not on the same level as Carlsen.
- CalChris 5y ago
  The detail of game 6 was just that, a detail. Most people thought Nepo would cave after a loss and that's what he did. Magnus proved with Karjack that he doesn't cave. I thought Caruana was a much better match up, and he held serve in the classical format. But Carlsen is strong in all three, hell, in all four formats. I think Firouzja has the potential to be a great match up. But it's just really hard to beat Magnus. He has Fischer's will to win with even more accuracy.
  - SoylentOrange 5y ago
    After his most recent title defense, Carlsen has been quite vocal that he is only interested in defending his title against the “new generation” of chess players like Duda and Alireza: https://www.chess.com/news/view/magnus-carlsen-defend-world-chess-title-alireza-firouzja https://www.chess.com/news/view/magnus-carlsen-defend-world-...
- ycombinete 5y ago
  > he will play equal-looking endgames and mentally exhaust his opponent into making a tiny mistake that he will convert into an advantage I watched Carlsen do this live last night. In his first game of the Rapid and Blitz World Championship[0]. Relentless pressure. Constantly demanding accuracy from his opponent until they blundered into a tactic. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dhCTxwHGUg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dhCTxwHGUg
billfruit 5y ago
Is there any similar article/in-depth look at this years intensely competative Formula 1 championship?

62 points by axiomdata316 5y ago

axiomdata316 5y ago

https://archive.md/sh9kr https://archive.md/sh9kr

DarylZero 5y ago

adharmad 5y ago
Granted Nepo self-destructed starting Game 8, so any psychological sub-currents paled in comparision with the on-the-board blunders. But I wouldn't go as far to call Classical chess "lame".
- DarylZero 5y ago
  It's all draws even when it's not the WC. But the better the players, the more draws. So the WC is the most drawing of all. That's a lame sport.
pixelpoet 5y ago
Regarding the last point, everyone who has looked at the game of Go with its 0.5 point komi (compensation to white for black playing first) must agree that it is a stroke of brilliance to prevent endless draws.
- ludamad 5y ago
  Most draws could be wins for black, give some to white. You don't need a point system to divide up the drawn outcomes
- rdlw 5y ago
  Some chess tournaments make draws worth ⅓ instead of ½ to incentive aggressive play, but they seem to end up with similar draw rates as normal tournaments. Of course, that wouldn't work at all for a 1v1 event like the WCC, it would probably just make it ~50% longer. The main thing to decrease draws seems to be shorter time format, but the Blitz championship seems to attract less attention than the classical, and of course blunders are more likely, which is a double edged sword. Maybe the next WCC will be more exciting, since Alireza probably has far better winning odds, or if Magnus doesn't compete then the challengers won't be terrified into playing 14 Berlin draw lines. (For those who don't know why Magnus may not compete: https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/chess/only-alireza-firouzja-as-title-contender-interests-magnus-carlsen-7673343/ https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/chess/only-alireza-... - first decent looking article I found)
- dragontamer 5y ago
  Go didn't have komi just 60ish years ago. The issue is that chess has lost its ability to make rule changes, like komi, superko, passing stones or whatever. We can erase draws from chess with Black wins stalemates, white wins 50 move / three move repetitions.
  - CalChris 5y ago
    The time format in chess changed. It used to have adjournments where the Russians had a tremendous advantage. When Fischer played Botvinnik at the Olympiad in 1962, they adjourned. Fischer sealed his 45th move and Botvinnik gave the position to his seconds who sent it to Moscow to a room full of GMs. Botvinnik himself went to sleep and woke up to be handed a saving brilliancy. The time format also really changed in that rapid and blitz are heavily contested. Magnus and the other super GMs even play bullet. There has been some interest in FischerRandom or Chess 960. Not a rule change, but computers have democratized chess and massively improved play. A modern GM would simply crush Tal. Stockfish taught a level of accuracy that is insane. And now players learn new strategies from Alpha Zero class machines.
    - dragontamer 5y ago
      > There has been some interest in FischerRandom or Chess 960. Do people really want to give up all of the past 100-years of opening theory? I don't think so. The #1 issue of Chess is "boring, everything's a draw". Well, good news. We can get rid of draws with "Stalemate == Black Wins. 50-move / 3-move repetition == White Wins". Very small rule change. Not only that, it keeps Stalemate-practice as a key-study for Black players. So all the skills you've gained for the past 100 years (from opening theory, to stalemate practice) remains relevant. Fischer Random / 960 is for people who want to throw away the entirety of chess opening theory. I'm sure that's a valid concern and/or criticism of chess, but I don't think its something the entire community agrees upon (after all: everyone keeps playing Chess / Shogi with exactly the same opening setup. There's something deeply cultural about keeping the setup the same for hundreds of years).
      - mehwoot 5y ago
- DarylZero 5y ago
  There's something kind of similar, Armageddon chess, where black wins draws and white gets a time advantage. Of course this is not "classical chess," but it's used as a third line of tie-break in the classical championship. This is also lame, since a world championship specifically for classical chess should not be decided by non-classical chess.
  - dragontamer 5y ago
    > There's something kind of similar, Armageddon chess, where black wins draws and white gets a time advantage. Black wins draws is a bit too inelegant, as that leads to a Black advantage. Splitting the draws into Stalemate / Impossible / 50-move end / 3-move repetition gives us 4 draw-conditions to "split" between the two players. > This is also lame, since a world championship specifically for classical chess should not be decided by non-classical chess. There's something to be said that classical chess is definitely becoming boring because of the frequency of draws... possibly due to the increase of computer analysis and advanced play we have today. Some kind of "no-draw chess" should be the new classic chess standard applied to the game.
SoylentOrange 5y ago
There were plenty of amazing games in classical chess this year (and just because a game is a draw doesn’t mean it wasn’t exciting). An example of a great game this year is Carlsen v So at the Champions Tour. Another great game was Dominguez vs MVL at Sinquefield (Dominguez won the brilliancy award). Many up and coming (young) players are also really exciting: Alireza, Duda, and Dubov. Duda’s win over Karjakin in the World Cup was pretty spectacular.
bananamerica 5y ago
You would be right if not for the high amount of decisive games.

rdlw 5y ago

It's hard to call the event as a whole exciting, especially from Game 7 on, but if you have any interest in chess I highly recommend watching a recap of Game 6—that one's going into the history books, I think. GothamChess made my favourite recap of it, but Agadmator's dry wit is always available if you find Levy annoying :)

macintux 5y ago
Apparently this is the GothamChess recap in question. https://youtu.be/PmQs1KhB948 https://youtu.be/PmQs1KhB948
ycombinete 5y ago
I like Daniel King [0]. He was a highly rated GM in his time (2600s) and it shows. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7QwZAGJpJI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7QwZAGJpJI
jstx1 5y ago
I thought it was an entertaining watch. I think the chess community is a bit too picky about what makes a good match. - many draws -> "chess is dead", "yawn, another draw", "they should change the format" - one player wins decisively -> "this isn't World Championship level", "how embarrassing for Ian", "someone else should play instead" So you really need to have very very close wins (like game 6 this year) throughout the entire match to satisfy people. Realistically that's not going to happen very often.
- zigman1 5y ago
  If we're totally honest, people who are complaining about draws are usually recent new fans, or people who watch it for spectacle. I think it is very similar to football (soccer), those games that fans perceive as boring, dull, are tactically the most interesting to watch and analyze.

SoylentOrange 5y ago

What this article misses is Nepo is famous in the chess community for caving into pressure after losing once. A lot of people have said that Nepo was immensely lucky with the Candidates Tournament (the tournament that allowed him to play for the World Championship) since that tournament was split into two parts due to COVID. The break happened precisely after Nepo lost a crucial game and allowed him some time to regain his composure. I doubt Nepo would have won the Candidates if he had to play immediately after his loss. On the other hand, Carlsen is well-known for his mental fortitude. It’s something that Vishy Anand, the previous champion, has talked about extensively. Carlsen’s style is often called “squeezing blood from a stone” because he will play equal-looking endgames and mentally exhaust his opponent into making a tiny mistake that he will convert into an advantage. It was indeed a tough match-up for Nepo, and most knew it would end tragically for Nepo. Despite being an excellent player, he’s not on the same level as Carlsen.

CalChris 5y ago
The detail of game 6 was just that, a detail. Most people thought Nepo would cave after a loss and that's what he did. Magnus proved with Karjack that he doesn't cave. I thought Caruana was a much better match up, and he held serve in the classical format. But Carlsen is strong in all three, hell, in all four formats. I think Firouzja has the potential to be a great match up. But it's just really hard to beat Magnus. He has Fischer's will to win with even more accuracy.
- SoylentOrange 5y ago
  After his most recent title defense, Carlsen has been quite vocal that he is only interested in defending his title against the “new generation” of chess players like Duda and Alireza: https://www.chess.com/news/view/magnus-carlsen-defend-world-chess-title-alireza-firouzja https://www.chess.com/news/view/magnus-carlsen-defend-world-...
ycombinete 5y ago
> he will play equal-looking endgames and mentally exhaust his opponent into making a tiny mistake that he will convert into an advantage I watched Carlsen do this live last night. In his first game of the Rapid and Blitz World Championship[0]. Relentless pressure. Constantly demanding accuracy from his opponent until they blundered into a tactic. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dhCTxwHGUg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dhCTxwHGUg

billfruit 5y ago

Is there any similar article/in-depth look at this years intensely competative Formula 1 championship?