5 ms·

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?

by taneq 4y ago

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...
        Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
        > Magnus specifically mentioned Firouzja as an opponent that he would consider playing the WCC against[1]. That is not how it works, and not how it is supposed to work. This is hubris and disrespect to all chess players in the world. For more than 100 years champions changed each other in title matches (well, before Kasparov's limitless ego created a decade of turmoil in Chess), with just one exception by Fischer, and now Carlsen 'doesnt feel any personal benefit'. :ThumbDown:
- 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.

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?

by 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...
      - Andrew_nenakhov 4y ago
        > Magnus specifically mentioned Firouzja as an opponent that he would consider playing the WCC against[1]. That is not how it works, and not how it is supposed to work. This is hubris and disrespect to all chess players in the world. For more than 100 years champions changed each other in title matches (well, before Kasparov's limitless ego created a decade of turmoil in Chess), with just one exception by Fischer, and now Carlsen 'doesnt feel any personal benefit'. :ThumbDown:
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.