6 ms·

> And against Nepo it was a steamroll, understandably meeting him again isn't that exciting. The first half of the match wasn't even close to a steamroll. It's

> And against Nepo it was a steamroll, understandably meeting him again isn't that exciting. The first half of the match wasn't even close to a steamroll. It's just Ian broke mentally after that famous 6th game. The candidate tournament showed that he had more than recovered from that loss and I think he would be in a much better shape to challenge Carlsen again. Also, with Carlsen's current attitude, it is quite possible that he would be closer to breaking first. (One may assume he already broke since he gives up the title without a fight)

taneq 4y ago
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?
- Enginerrrd 4y ago
  Yes, that's what people mean, almost by definition. In highly competitive events, even a slight break in focus and drive toward winning are often really problematic. Once that wolf-like focus and readiness to fight is broken, a competitor is usually done.
  - SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
    Even wolves are only focused during occasional hunts. They also play, raise their young, mate, sleep, and care for their sick and injured.
  - Bootvis 4y ago
    I think Magnus just changed focus to being the first 2900. I bet the way the last match went was a bit of a let down for him as well.
    - cupofpython 4y ago
      i have to imagine there are only so many 'tricks'/new lines left for him to use to win games at that level. revealing them on center stage for a single win is wasteful of the resources he has. the WCC games get studied by everyone, not only live with the worlds best engines, but after the fact too. much better to use those resources in tournaments where you can actually play a lot of games with it before people really get a chance to study it in depth. By resources i mean things like going into a position that gives your opponent an incredibly small advantage but is hard for them to play. It's one of the best ways to win games. it's hard work to find those lines, and he's been doing it for so long at WCC level it's not surprising that he's tapping out against someone he's already beaten. if you use a line in the WCC, it becomes very risky to use it again - because if your opponent studied it and plays it correctly then all you've done is make it even harder for you to win the game. to reach 2900 he has to win games, not tie
      - Scarblac 4y ago
        > much better to use those resources in tournaments where you can actually play a lot of games with it before people really get a chance to study it in depth. That doesn't exist anymore, any game Carlsen plays is studied in depth by the world immediately, and especially by his opponents. Same for other top grandmasters.
      - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
        > that he's tapping out against someone he's already beaten. Many observers overplay the importance of one match loss. More than one chess champion title was taken by a challenger who had lost in the previous attempt [1] - and considering there was just a handful of champions, it is a lot. [1]: Spassky and Kasparov have lost in their first attempts against Petrosyan and Karpov.
        cupofpython 4y ago
        while true, it is still fair to say Carlsen views nepo as a waste of time. While it would be easy to dismiss this as hubris - i think the bigger point is that he doesnt gain anything from beating him again. It's not that Nepo has no chance of winning. Magnus specifically mentioned Firouzja as an opponent that he would consider playing the WCC against[1]. So while not the most important factor in his decision, the fact that Nepo won the candidates again and was the last challenger before Magnus made the Firouzja statement seems relevant. Also relevant is that the candidates tournament concluded on July 5th and Magnus released his withdrawal now in the same month. It seems to me like the challenger being Nepo was the last significant piece of information towards his decision. How specific it is to Nepo or a more general feeling of Nepo being one of many people he doesnt feel any personal benefit from playing against, who knows. [1] https://chess24.com/en/read/news/magnus-carlsen-unlikely-i-will-play-another-match-except-against-firouzja https://chess24.com/en/read/news/magnus-carlsen-unlikely-i-w...
  - Retric 4y ago
    Depends on the game, but people will often come back much stronger after a ~6 months break. It’s a mix of having a new perspective, dealing with stress, and having time to heal etc. This is one of the reasons most sports have an off season. Even if basketball could easily be played year round, the game would suffer.
- piker 4y ago
  Not sure there will be much distinction in the history books unless there’s an accompanying rule change, etc. that comes out of it.
- dwighttk 4y ago
  It is both okay to stop and do other things eventually and it also counts as ‘breaking’
  - BobbyJo 4y ago
    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.
    - Accacin 4y ago
      For me it's the intent at the time a decision was made.
      - BobbyJo 4y ago
        What intent constitutes 'breaking'?
        noirbot 4y ago
        It's a temporal question. If you decide in the middle of a competition that you don't care any more and want to quit/forfeit/throw the match, then you broke. You committed to playing an event, presumably because you thought you could win or at least compete, and instead your mental stamina broke and you gave up. IMO, it's less the intent that you have when you quit - the intent is almost always at that point that you don't want to be there any more doing the thing. The more important part is the intent that led up to the moment where you quit. In some ways, it's similar to quitting any job. If you just have a bad day or week at work and put in your resignation with no other plan because you just can't stand coming in to work again, you "broke". If you're still working, but interviewing elsewhere, get another job, put in your notice and walk away with something else lined up, it's a bit different.
    - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
      You can honorably lose while giving it all, like most other champions did, except Fischer, who forfeited, and Alekhin, who died while holding the title.
- slowmovintarget 4y ago
  Magnus isn't stopping. He's playing chess everywhere else, at tournaments all over the world. He's pursuing his goal of a 2900 rating (he currently has the world record for his peak rating, though he's dropped a bit from that). He's just not playing in the FIDE World Championship because he dislikes the process.
- noirbot 4y ago
  I think the difference, and what Carlsen is doing well in this case, is just backing out now instead of trying to defend his title and then getting 5 games in and just going "I hate this and I want to leave. I forfeit". That would look even worse for him, and be unsatisfying for his opponent and the public. In this case, he realizes he doesn't have the passion for this event any more, so he's doing the best thing for the sport and just letting two people who are still passionate about it compete instead of doing the mental-sports version of playing injured.
toolz 4y ago
nepo at candidates was in my opinion favored to beat magnus...he dominated the candidates harder than anyone else has in the history of the candidate matches - and it was not an easy pool of candidates, either. Sure, there were a lot of sloppy games, but only a couple vs nepo - with one of them being after the 1st place spot had been guaranteed. If nepo plays like he did in the candidates, I would not be so quick to favor magnus.
- tzs 4y ago
  > nepo at candidates was in my opinion favored to beat magnus...he dominated the candidates harder than anyone else has in the history of the candidate matches - and it was not an easy pool of candidates, either. What about Fischer? The format was a little different then, but here was his route to the Championship. 1. Won the Interzonal tournament 18.5/23 (+15-1=7). The top 8 from the Interzonal then played a knockout series of matches using a bracket system. 2. In his quarter-final match of that he beat Taimanov 6-0. 3. In his semi-final match against Larsen he also won 6-0. 4. In his final match against former world champion Tigran Petrosian, he won 6.5-2.5 (+5-1=3). In the 21 games total that his candidates matches lasted, he won 17 games, lost 1, and drew 3. If we include the Interzonal it is 32 wins, 2 loses, 10 draws. In the combined Interzonal and knockout matches he had a streak of 20 consecutive wins against the world's top players. And then in the Championship against Spassky he won 12.5-8.5 (+7-3=11) (and one of those loses was a forfeit when he skipped the game over some complaint about the playing conditions). Nepo's performance in this Candidates was pretty dominating, but doesn't come anywhere near Fischer's level of dominance.
  - toolz 4y ago
    You make a very strong argument, but if you take fischers score vs the top 8 in the interzonal and double it, fischer would've had 10/14 to nepos 9.5/14, which given it was just 1 game vs the top 8 and given the ELO spread was vastly more spread than current candidates games(easily fischer had 100+ more ELO than the other top 7 opponents) I think it's fair to say you could say nepo was more dominant when compared to the interzonal granted it becomes more clear that fischer dominated in the quarterfinals forward, but it still is worht pointing out that his opponents weren't nearly as strong as nepo's opponents, relatively speaking I imagine nepo's score would've been MUCH stronger if he was playing 100-200 ELO points weaker opponents all candidates. Instead nepo had 3 opponents with higher ELO and his weakest opponents ELO was only 19 points lower than his own... in summary, I think you're correct and I was wrong, but I'm not so sure it's quite so clear-cut when you factor in other variables

taneq 4y ago

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?

Enginerrrd 4y ago
Yes, that's what people mean, almost by definition. In highly competitive events, even a slight break in focus and drive toward winning are often really problematic. Once that wolf-like focus and readiness to fight is broken, a competitor is usually done.
- SamoyedFurFluff 4y ago
  Even wolves are only focused during occasional hunts. They also play, raise their young, mate, sleep, and care for their sick and injured.
- Bootvis 4y ago
  I think Magnus just changed focus to being the first 2900. I bet the way the last match went was a bit of a let down for him as well.
  - cupofpython 4y ago
    i have to imagine there are only so many 'tricks'/new lines left for him to use to win games at that level. revealing them on center stage for a single win is wasteful of the resources he has. the WCC games get studied by everyone, not only live with the worlds best engines, but after the fact too. much better to use those resources in tournaments where you can actually play a lot of games with it before people really get a chance to study it in depth. By resources i mean things like going into a position that gives your opponent an incredibly small advantage but is hard for them to play. It's one of the best ways to win games. it's hard work to find those lines, and he's been doing it for so long at WCC level it's not surprising that he's tapping out against someone he's already beaten. if you use a line in the WCC, it becomes very risky to use it again - because if your opponent studied it and plays it correctly then all you've done is make it even harder for you to win the game. to reach 2900 he has to win games, not tie
    - Scarblac 4y ago
      > much better to use those resources in tournaments where you can actually play a lot of games with it before people really get a chance to study it in depth. That doesn't exist anymore, any game Carlsen plays is studied in depth by the world immediately, and especially by his opponents. Same for other top grandmasters.
    - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
      > that he's tapping out against someone he's already beaten. Many observers overplay the importance of one match loss. More than one chess champion title was taken by a challenger who had lost in the previous attempt [1] - and considering there was just a handful of champions, it is a lot. [1]: Spassky and Kasparov have lost in their first attempts against Petrosyan and Karpov.
      - cupofpython 4y ago
        while true, it is still fair to say Carlsen views nepo as a waste of time. While it would be easy to dismiss this as hubris - i think the bigger point is that he doesnt gain anything from beating him again. It's not that Nepo has no chance of winning. Magnus specifically mentioned Firouzja as an opponent that he would consider playing the WCC against[1]. So while not the most important factor in his decision, the fact that Nepo won the candidates again and was the last challenger before Magnus made the Firouzja statement seems relevant. Also relevant is that the candidates tournament concluded on July 5th and Magnus released his withdrawal now in the same month. It seems to me like the challenger being Nepo was the last significant piece of information towards his decision. How specific it is to Nepo or a more general feeling of Nepo being one of many people he doesnt feel any personal benefit from playing against, who knows. [1] https://chess24.com/en/read/news/magnus-carlsen-unlikely-i-will-play-another-match-except-against-firouzja https://chess24.com/en/read/news/magnus-carlsen-unlikely-i-w...
- Retric 4y ago
  Depends on the game, but people will often come back much stronger after a ~6 months break. It’s a mix of having a new perspective, dealing with stress, and having time to heal etc. This is one of the reasons most sports have an off season. Even if basketball could easily be played year round, the game would suffer.
piker 4y ago
Not sure there will be much distinction in the history books unless there’s an accompanying rule change, etc. that comes out of it.
dwighttk 4y ago
It is both okay to stop and do other things eventually and it also counts as ‘breaking’
- BobbyJo 4y ago
  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.
  - Accacin 4y ago
    For me it's the intent at the time a decision was made.
    - BobbyJo 4y ago
      What intent constitutes 'breaking'?
      - noirbot 4y ago
        It's a temporal question. If you decide in the middle of a competition that you don't care any more and want to quit/forfeit/throw the match, then you broke. You committed to playing an event, presumably because you thought you could win or at least compete, and instead your mental stamina broke and you gave up. IMO, it's less the intent that you have when you quit - the intent is almost always at that point that you don't want to be there any more doing the thing. The more important part is the intent that led up to the moment where you quit. In some ways, it's similar to quitting any job. If you just have a bad day or week at work and put in your resignation with no other plan because you just can't stand coming in to work again, you "broke". If you're still working, but interviewing elsewhere, get another job, put in your notice and walk away with something else lined up, it's a bit different.
  - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
    You can honorably lose while giving it all, like most other champions did, except Fischer, who forfeited, and Alekhin, who died while holding the title.
slowmovintarget 4y ago
Magnus isn't stopping. He's playing chess everywhere else, at tournaments all over the world. He's pursuing his goal of a 2900 rating (he currently has the world record for his peak rating, though he's dropped a bit from that). He's just not playing in the FIDE World Championship because he dislikes the process.
noirbot 4y ago
I think the difference, and what Carlsen is doing well in this case, is just backing out now instead of trying to defend his title and then getting 5 games in and just going "I hate this and I want to leave. I forfeit". That would look even worse for him, and be unsatisfying for his opponent and the public. In this case, he realizes he doesn't have the passion for this event any more, so he's doing the best thing for the sport and just letting two people who are still passionate about it compete instead of doing the mental-sports version of playing injured.

toolz 4y ago

nepo at candidates was in my opinion favored to beat magnus...he dominated the candidates harder than anyone else has in the history of the candidate matches - and it was not an easy pool of candidates, either. Sure, there were a lot of sloppy games, but only a couple vs nepo - with one of them being after the 1st place spot had been guaranteed. If nepo plays like he did in the candidates, I would not be so quick to favor magnus.

tzs 4y ago
> nepo at candidates was in my opinion favored to beat magnus...he dominated the candidates harder than anyone else has in the history of the candidate matches - and it was not an easy pool of candidates, either. What about Fischer? The format was a little different then, but here was his route to the Championship. 1. Won the Interzonal tournament 18.5/23 (+15-1=7). The top 8 from the Interzonal then played a knockout series of matches using a bracket system. 2. In his quarter-final match of that he beat Taimanov 6-0. 3. In his semi-final match against Larsen he also won 6-0. 4. In his final match against former world champion Tigran Petrosian, he won 6.5-2.5 (+5-1=3). In the 21 games total that his candidates matches lasted, he won 17 games, lost 1, and drew 3. If we include the Interzonal it is 32 wins, 2 loses, 10 draws. In the combined Interzonal and knockout matches he had a streak of 20 consecutive wins against the world's top players. And then in the Championship against Spassky he won 12.5-8.5 (+7-3=11) (and one of those loses was a forfeit when he skipped the game over some complaint about the playing conditions). Nepo's performance in this Candidates was pretty dominating, but doesn't come anywhere near Fischer's level of dominance.
- toolz 4y ago
  You make a very strong argument, but if you take fischers score vs the top 8 in the interzonal and double it, fischer would've had 10/14 to nepos 9.5/14, which given it was just 1 game vs the top 8 and given the ELO spread was vastly more spread than current candidates games(easily fischer had 100+ more ELO than the other top 7 opponents) I think it's fair to say you could say nepo was more dominant when compared to the interzonal granted it becomes more clear that fischer dominated in the quarterfinals forward, but it still is worht pointing out that his opponents weren't nearly as strong as nepo's opponents, relatively speaking I imagine nepo's score would've been MUCH stronger if he was playing 100-200 ELO points weaker opponents all candidates. Instead nepo had 3 opponents with higher ELO and his weakest opponents ELO was only 19 points lower than his own... in summary, I think you're correct and I was wrong, but I'm not so sure it's quite so clear-cut when you factor in other variables