|
On November 29 2018 03:02 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2018 02:53 Warfie wrote:On November 29 2018 02:39 sharkie wrote:
wow fabi disappointing big in rapid did you expect better though? well considering how Fabi played timidly the whole classical part of the championship yes I expected better This way I just wonder what Fabi and his team's game plan is. As many of us have noted Carlsen is far from his best form and still comfortably won the whole thing.
Fabi is no. 2 in classical.
No. 6 in rapid.
Magnus is 1st in both. It was obvious things were going to go against Caruana at this point. Honestly this is exactly what I was expecting. Caruana consistently spent a long time thinking the minute he was out of preparation during the 12 games, all suggesting he would start hesitating a lot once they were in rapid games.
Which is exactly what happened.
|
I love how the Norwegian media are using words like " Demolished!!!" . We are basically saying GG no RE get rekt!. Favourite quote from Carlsens post match interview :" I had a good day at work"
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
I’m not very pleased with how this went. At the end of the day the winner was decided by who is more capable of not breaking under time pressure, which we’ve seen consistently that Carlsen is vastly superior at. But this is a classical chess match, and one in which no classical chess victory was obtained.
Will be interested to sit down and watch these games after the end of the work day, but ultimately it came down to time-induced blunders. I can’t be happy about that.
|
On November 29 2018 03:02 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2018 02:53 Warfie wrote:On November 29 2018 02:39 sharkie wrote:
wow fabi disappointing big in rapid did you expect better though? well considering how Fabi played timidly the whole classical part of the championship yes I expected better This way I just wonder what Fabi and his team's game plan is. As many of us have noted Carlsen is far from his best form and still comfortably won the whole thing.
I think Fabi's gameplan was trying to squeeze a win through superior preparation and then holding onto that margin throughout the match. He actually had a couple of chances to win, so the strategy had merit. I don't think they could have come up with something better. It's hard to come up with a winning strategy against someone that's just better than you.
|
On November 29 2018 03:49 Sr18 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2018 03:02 sharkie wrote:On November 29 2018 02:53 Warfie wrote:On November 29 2018 02:39 sharkie wrote:
wow fabi disappointing big in rapid did you expect better though? well considering how Fabi played timidly the whole classical part of the championship yes I expected better This way I just wonder what Fabi and his team's game plan is. As many of us have noted Carlsen is far from his best form and still comfortably won the whole thing. I think Fabi's gameplan was trying to squeeze a win through superior preparation and then holding onto that margin throughout the match. He actually had a couple of chances to win, so the strategy had merit. I don't think they could have come up with something better. It's hard to come up with a winning strategy against someone that's just better than you.
not sure if I agree that you can tell who's better in classical by these results?
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Caruana had clearly superior prep, but once the game went into non-prep play Carlsen caught up whenever he was behind. He didn’t manage to squeeze a win out of vaguely advantageous, but very tricky, positions, a sign that he wasn’t at his best. But based on core strengths, it was hard to imagine the highly time-constrained games not favoring Carlsen by a significant margin.
|
On November 29 2018 02:20 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2018 01:45 fishjie wrote:On November 28 2018 17:52 Longshank wrote:
I think that's the most common critique I've read/heard. That players are just playing computer lines for 20-25 moves yeah that's what i mean by chess solved for the first 15 moves or so. that's actually insane if they're following computer lines for up to 20 moves - didn't even realize it was that bad. its lame and at that point its a competition of who has better memory. for ordinary humans, yes obviously its irrelevant, since we'd never be able to memorize all that crap, so the games are still exciting and dynamic and filled with blunders. and even if you could memorize all the best moves, if opponent deviates you'd still need to know how to take advantage of inaccuracy. but super GMs can do all of that. so at the top tier god GM level its stale and solved. there needs to be a nerf to computer prep - chess960 is the best way to shakeup the meta regarding end game tablebases, you might not know off the bat the best move to make, but just memorizing the fact that your position is winning will give you more confidence and then a super GM can then use their super calculation abilities to figure out the win from there You could easily argue that chess was and is allways about that? It just has gotten much more obvious recently. I barely ever play myself and i'm trash but i like the follow the wm. If people would just shut up about the CPU moves, stuff would still be just as exciting as before.
no way dude chess has never been about rote memorization. simon electronic memory game is rote memorization. chess is a battle of ideas between two players working out a problem over the board, with 99% emphasis on tactics, and 1% emphasis on strategy. memorizing optimal opening moves (apparently up to move 20) removes that exciting cool human element - ACTUAL DECISION MAKING
starcraft 2 was at its worst when games were just two players macroing up on 3 base and then one huge deathball encounter that decided the game. much more exciting when build orders got disrupted with harassment and chaos ensued, and decision making was required, which is why guys like SOS and Maru are beloved
|
On November 29 2018 03:48 LegalLord wrote:
I’m not very pleased with how this went. At the end of the day the winner was decided by who is more capable of not breaking under time pressure, which we’ve seen consistently that Carlsen is vastly superior at. But this is a classical chess match, and one in which no classical chess victory was obtained.
Will be interested to sit down and watch these games after the end of the work day, but ultimately it came down to time-induced blunders. I can’t be happy about that.
rapid chess is the future of chess. a contest of wills that deemphasizes computer-aided preparation. if you wsnt to study the supposed beauty of classical chess or postal chess, just watch some computer matches
|
On November 29 2018 03:48 LegalLord wrote:
I’m not very pleased with how this went. At the end of the day the winner was decided by who is more capable of not breaking under time pressure, which we’ve seen consistently that Carlsen is vastly superior at. But this is a classical chess match, and one in which no classical chess victory was obtained.
Will be interested to sit down and watch these games after the end of the work day, but ultimately it came down to time-induced blunders. I can’t be happy about that.
I felt the same way at first, but on consideration I see it differently; Fabi out of preparation is the real Fabi. All the preparation is about guessing what the opponent will play and using computers to memorise the perfect moves and responses.
Would he really have proven he was the better chess player there?
When it came to real chess, making the right moves in response to your opponent's moves, without infinite time to think about what to do and without a bank of memorised computer moves to work from, Fabiano lost 3-0, and only put Carlsen in trouble once. That seems pretty telling to me.
On November 29 2018 03:02 sharkie wrote:Show nested quote +On November 29 2018 02:53 Warfie wrote:On November 29 2018 02:39 sharkie wrote:
wow fabi disappointing big in rapid did you expect better though? well considering how Fabi played timidly the whole classical part of the championship yes I expected better This way I just wonder what Fabi and his team's game plan is. As many of us have noted Carlsen is far from his best form and still comfortably won the whole thing.
I think you drew quite the wrong conclusions there. A timid player isn't likely to come alive in rapid, which emphasises bold, confident decision making and swift, accurate assessments of board position.
It's far more likely a great rapid player will struggle in classical, where longer-term, more complex planning is emphasised and players are more likely to refuse attempts to simplify a board position.
|
Fabi is a good player, when he was out of preparation, he took long time to think, and in game 1 he was in a bad position, but given some breathing room he was immediately able to stabilize and hold the draw. in game 12 he was able to stabilize enough that magnus went for draw. i don't think fabi is bad when out of opening prep, he just needs a lot of time to think it through. its not clear to me that fabi is inferior to magnus when it comes to classical, rating wise he is basically tied with magnus and the 12 draws show that. its just that magnus is #1 in classical, and his monstrous alter ego dr drunkenstein is #1 blitz and rapid.
EDIT: last sentence mixed magnus and drunkenstein
|
Isn't this whole "computer aided prep" vs "on the fly adjustments" an issue in most all competition nowadays?
|
|
|
On November 30 2018 01:26 fishjie wrote:
Fabi is a good player, when he was out of preparation, he took long time to think, and in game 1 he was in a bad position, but given some breathing room he was immediately able to stabilize and hold the draw. in game 12 he was able to stabilize enough that magnus went for draw. i don't think fabi is bad when out of opening prep, he just needs a lot of time to think it through. its not clear to me that fabi is inferior to magnus when it comes to classical, rating wise he is basically tied with magnus and the 12 draws show that. its just that magnus is #1 in classical, and his monstrous alter ego dr drunkenstein is #1 blitz and rapid.
EDIT: last sentence mixed magnus and drunkenstein
Not meaning to imply Fabi isn't a great player. I'm sure Magnus would have checkmated 90% of every other player in the world (I checked the rankings, the gap between 1 and 2 and the rest of the top 5 is quite large).
But Fabi losing 3-0 in the tiebreaks is pretty brutal.
|
I'm glad Carlsen won.
I wouldn't have mind Caruana as the winner after 12 games, I think he and Carlsen were equal over the 12 games. But for Caruana to win the world title even after not having won a game against Carlsen the past 3 years in classical time controls would have been absurd.
Regarding Carlsen's decision in game 12, offering the draw, I could care less. Except I do care. Hess was in shambles at that moment (although that probably was more as a fan than anything else) and Giri seemed to think it devalues the game of chess. Well, the truth hurts as Finegold always insist. This is modern chess and this was Carlsen trying to win the match. Anything else would devalue the game.
Anyway, it seems many of the super GM's like both Fischer random chess and some rapid games, so I think that's where we are heading.
|
Event was great I think,did enjoy it a lot.
Only point of critizism would be the analyses during the rapid part,it was a bit chaotic at times and difficult to follow but it is difficult to do that in rapid so I can understand.
The positions where very tactical and there is only so much time to go into specific lines.
All in all it was better and more fun then expected. The current format I think is good,maybe 12 games is a bit short for the main match but if going to do a championship every year or every 2 year then much longer would be to much of a strain on the players maybe.
|
Carlsen suggested maybe throwing in some rapids mid-series, so like 2 games of classical then 2 rapid, maybe 2 classical then 2 apocalypse, forcing them to prepare for very different standards and time controls and really test their full chess acumen over the course of the championship.
Both better for viewership and a fuller confirmation of who is the better chess player.
|
On November 30 2018 23:20 iamthedave wrote:
Carlsen suggested maybe throwing in some rapids mid-series, so like 2 games of classical then 2 rapid, maybe 2 classical then 2 apocalypse, forcing them to prepare for very different standards and time controls and really test their full chess acumen over the course of the championship.
Both better for viewership and a fuller confirmation of who is the better chess player.
That would massively favour him over anyone else
|
On December 01 2018 00:26 Sakat wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2018 23:20 iamthedave wrote:
Carlsen suggested maybe throwing in some rapids mid-series, so like 2 games of classical then 2 rapid, maybe 2 classical then 2 apocalypse, forcing them to prepare for very different standards and time controls and really test their full chess acumen over the course of the championship.
Both better for viewership and a fuller confirmation of who is the better chess player. That would massively favour him over anyone else
Forgive my ignorance but this thread gave me the impression the game of chess itself did that anyway (sorta joking). In what aspects of the game does he struggle?
Makes sense if some formats are going to change in order to keep it interesting they shouldn't all favor the already heavy favorite. Unless you'd have to do something completely obscure like make them play with life size pieces and the players have to be able to move 150lb pieces within the time limits or move pieces with drones or some other weird thing like that so as something besides one's ability to read and adjust to the situation on the board can be determinative of the outcome.
*disclaimer I'm not big into chess or anything but the championship caught my attention and I share various opinions I've seen here about the experience as an observer. Also maybe I missed the joke lol.
|
I dont there is a Modus that does not favour one of the all time greats in chess...
|
On December 01 2018 00:26 Sakat wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2018 23:20 iamthedave wrote:
Carlsen suggested maybe throwing in some rapids mid-series, so like 2 games of classical then 2 rapid, maybe 2 classical then 2 apocalypse, forcing them to prepare for very different standards and time controls and really test their full chess acumen over the course of the championship.
Both better for viewership and a fuller confirmation of who is the better chess player. That would massively favour him over anyone else
Why is that a problem?
Are you against one of the best chess players in history being the world champion?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
