Check out Symmetric Chess, our featured variant for March, 2024.


[ Help | Earliest Comments | Latest Comments ]
[ List All Subjects of Discussion | Create New Subject of Discussion ]
[ List Earliest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]

Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Earlier Reverse Order Later
[Subject Thread] [Add Response]
Gary Gifford wrote on Wed, Sep 12, 2007 10:42 PM UTC:
The opening ceremony for the World Chess Championship 2007 was today.  The
first round is tomorrow.  You can read about the schedule, players, at the
site in Mexico City at:

http://www.chessmexico.com/es/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=78&Itemid=101

This should be a very exciting World Chess Championship with several
players.  The site provides good player biographies, some notable games,
and even great combinations from the players.

In other news: China recently defeated Britain in a chess match. 
Information on that match can be found here: 

http://www.liverpoolchessinternational.co.uk/

Gary Gifford wrote on Fri, Sep 14, 2007 12:44 AM UTC:
Round 1: An eight way tie exists after Round 1:
Anand - Gelfand: 1/2 // 
Grischuk - Leko: 1/2 // 
Kramnik - Svidler: 1/2 // 
Morozevich - Aronian: 1/2

Joe Joyce wrote on Fri, Sep 14, 2007 01:12 AM UTC:
You know, I don't think FIDE is quite dead, but this sort of thing shows
it's not doing as well as it used to be. At the very least, they should
change the scoring. I'm almost tempted to say players should lose 0.1
points each for a draw, and only the stalemating player should get 0.5
points. I know the arguments about having to capture the king before he
could suicide, so checkmate is the win, and nothing else, but how many
hockey fans would be content to see their teams win only a handful of
games in a year [as hockey allows draws, also]? It's tough for an
outsider to see the excitement in a tourney where everyone started out
even, and after the first round, everyone is still even. I'd like to see
these guys play in a variants tournament. Bet we'd see winners and losers
then.

Sorry to step on anyone's toes, but how popular would the World Series
be, if the Yankees won/lost [pick one] a 7-game series by the score of 1
game to none? No matter how much you love/hate the Yankees, who'd watch
such a yawner? [I'm a New Yorker, and a Mets fan, and I wouldn't watch 7
games to see the Yankees lose once and draw 6, even to the Mets - I'd
watch the game the Mets won, but who can tell beforehand? So after a few
draws, I'd stop watching.]

Charles Daniel wrote on Fri, Sep 14, 2007 02:29 AM UTC:
The scoring changes were tried before - I think Clint 'something' ...
suggested 3pt for black win, 2pt for white win, 1pt for black draw and 0
for white draw. 

There is nothing wrong with the game of chess (orthodox) - its just
analyzed to death.
If only the top players (GMs) can look through every chess variant and
pick the one that they feel keeps the beauty, strategy etc of the original
game. 

A 10x10 with a few new pieces seems best in my opinion .. 

That would be a chess tournament worth watching.

Gary Gifford wrote on Fri, Sep 14, 2007 08:37 AM UTC:
In a very true sense, chess games are lost.  Chess is a game of mistakes.
Players will not lose if they don't make A mistake (unless that mistake
is missed or their opponent makes a bigger mistake).  When we see world
championship games end in draws it should not be too surprising.  Yes, it
is likely not very exciting... A different game with more variables could
add spice to these championships.  Still, it would come down to making
mistakes. So, a new scoring system, as suggested... might be needed at
some point to minimize the draw factor.  Making a game where draws were
not possible would be nice.  The Chinese Chess stalemate is not a draw. 
Also they have rules against 3-move repetition... it is a start.

Gary Gifford wrote on Sat, Sep 15, 2007 12:55 AM UTC:
Results are in for Round 2 of the World Chess Championship.  Draw lovers
will see that we have 2 more drawn games....
 
Svidler - Leko: 1/2  
Kramnik - Morozevich: 1-0 
Gelfand - Grischuk: 1/2 
Aronian - Anand: 0-1

Joe Joyce wrote on Sat, Sep 15, 2007 01:39 AM UTC:
Alright, two emerge from the pack! That's more like it. Kramnik and Anand,
aren't these two the favorites?

Charles Daniel wrote on Sat, Sep 15, 2007 01:46 AM UTC:
Chess (orthodox at least) has in my opinion perfected the rules governing
the draw. Stalemate been a draw is very important in chess, and yes,
Chinese chess it is a win, but I think it is not logical that way. It
looks more like the draw outcome was not considered important. 
The problem in FIDE chess championships/tournaments - short agreed draws.

Once that is not allowed - the draws are PERFECTLY acceptable. 
The only other problem with orthodox chess is the analysis factor - too
many games - too much theory. A new game with the SAME rules but 1 or 2
new pieces will be an ideal candidate for 'evolution'. 

Sure you can play around with eliminating draws, but most chess lovers
will take issue and righfully so. 

Also, the games played today esp. Anand and Kramnik were very exciting. So
even at this high level it has a lot of life left.

Gary Gifford wrote on Sat, Sep 15, 2007 10:02 AM UTC:
Charles Daniel, excellent comment regarding the draws.  Thanks.  However,
in Chinese Chess I find stalemate wins still to be logical.  In that game
you can work hard at setting up a stalemate much like setting up a
checkmate.  The Cannons and pawns are often key pieces in that setup.  In
Fide Chess stalemates are often easy to achieve via a simple oversight...
not so in Chinese Chess.

Gary Gifford wrote on Sun, Sep 16, 2007 02:20 AM UTC:
Round 3, World Chess Championship: 
Morozevich - Svidler: 1-0 
Anand - Kramnik: 1/2
Grischuk - Aronian: 1/2 
Leko - Gelfand: 1/2

Charles Daniel wrote on Sun, Sep 16, 2007 02:54 AM UTC:
Yup -.. Regarding chinese chess - Yes, it may very well be logical within
that context. It is the idea of Orthodox chess have stalemate=win by
comparing to Chinese Chess that's flawed  

Regarding WC
The two Draws:
Anand - Kramnik: 1/2
Leko - Gelfand: 1/2 
were even more exciting than 
Morozevich - Svidler: 1-0 
These were hard fought draws, not the horrible short agrement draws.

Gary Gifford wrote on Sun, Sep 16, 2007 08:36 AM UTC:
Yes Charles, you are correct about these draws being exciting.  I watched
the the last 40 moves or so of the Round 3 Leko versus Gelfand live. Early
in the game Leko looked better, then Gelfand appeared to get the upper
hand.  The game went to move 100 and Gelfand had 37 seconds remaining on
his clock and  Leko had 3 minutes / 2 seconds remaining). It seemed they
may have been using Fischer Time because when they moved fast some bonus
time was added to their clocks.  For those last 40 moves I could not tell
who was going to win.  Gelfand was close to getting a second Queen... but
constant checking by Leko put a stop to that.  With about 20 moves left I
was expecting a draw or a time loss.

You can play over the games on your PC or watch live games when in
progress at this link: http://partidas.chessmexico.com/

Gary Gifford wrote on Mon, Sep 17, 2007 04:28 PM UTC:
Round 4 results of the World Chess Championship:
We see three more draws and a win of Aronian over Leko.

Peter Svidler  ½ -  Boris Gelfand ½ 
Levon Aronian  1 -   Peter Leko  0
Vladimir Kramnik  ½ -  Alexander Grischuk  ½
Alexander Morozevich  ½ - Viswanathan Anand  ½

Gary Gifford wrote on Wed, Oct 3, 2007 09:56 AM UTC:
The Indian Chess Grand Master Vishwanathan Anand is the new world Chess
Champion.  He drew with Peter Leko, in the 14th [last] round of the World
Chess Championship held in Mexico City. That gave him 9 points.    I heard
that Anand was very close to losing Round 13, and was even expected to lose
- but have not verified that yet.  A tie-break round was being prepared,
but not needed.

Israeli chess grandmaster Boris Gelfand now shares the No. 2 spot with
outgoing world chess champion Vladimir Kramnik of Russia.  Both with 8
points.

Gelfand had three wins, 10 draws and one loss. Anand had four wins
and 10 draws and was the only undefeated player. Each player earned one
point per win and half a point per draw.  The match was 14 rounds. 
Gelfand's only loss was unexpected to one of the weaker players in the
field... had Gelfand won that game we would have seen a tie-break round
between him and Anad.

George Duke wrote on Mon, Oct 8, 2007 11:51 PM UTC:
Anand wins. A fitting follow-up to World Chess Championship in nearby
Mexico?  Chess: Che: Que?  Tuesday 9 October is fortieth anniversary of the death of heroic-thinker Argentina-born Che Guevara(1928-1967), avid chess player who played in tournaments from age 12. Cuba marks the occasion today with a gathering of 3000 people(1500 boards) playing Chess, Guevara's favourite game.  Great WC#3 Jose R. Capablanca (1888-1942), Cuban of course, is one of three(or four with Morphy) western hemisphere WCCs. Argentine GM Miguel Najdorf (1910-1997) died in Spain after fulfilling a desire to watch a last Chess tournament there. Najdorf in his career played Chess with Che Guevara, Castro, Krushchev, Winston Churchill, the Shah of Iran,  Juan Peron. Readers of Najdorf's chess column in Argentinan newspaper Clarin once could also study a chess problem contributed by chess-enthusiast John Paul II. Guevara's traversing Latin America by motorcycle in 1950's, chronicled in 'The Motorcycle Diaries', has precedent in the book 'My Hike' from late 1920's of Argentine adventurers, one of whom succeeded in hiking  from south of Buenos Aires to New York in somewhat over a year.  Cuban schoolchildren in daily pledge recite 'We will be like Che!' Like FIDE's motto 'Gens una sumus', it is appropriate that their 'unification' Champion be equally determined in the other 'one'(Western) of two hemispheres.

Sam Trenholme wrote on Thu, Oct 11, 2007 03:12 PM UTC:
This is a big change in Chess. Ever since Steinitz, to become the world champion was non-trivial. You had to defeat the current champion in a grueling 1-on-1 tournament against the world champion. FIDE made it harder to stay champion in the 1940s: You had to fight every three or four years to stay champion, which resulted in Botvinnik briefly losing the crown twice, once to Smyslov, and once to Tal. This was probably a good change: It stopped Fischer from pulling an Alekhine: Staying world champion by refusing to play a player you know is better than you.

However, now it has become even easier to be world champion. You no longer have to win a 1-on-1 against the current champion. You merely have to win a single round robin tournament to hold the crown. I think this will make the championship more dynamic and exciting. From Steinitz to Kramnik, there were only 14 world champions. Now we should have a different world champion every two or three years.

It's a very interesting change in the world of chess, but one it needs to breathe some life in to a game that I feel is in a slow death spiral.

- Sam


George Duke wrote on Thu, Oct 18, 2007 12:07 AM UTC:
World Chess Championship was just held at Mexico City. From the other end
of Latin America, in the 1920's the Argentine adventurer who wrote the
book about his hike(no motorized help whatsoever) from near Buenos Aires
to New York took just over two years not one(two competitors died en route and others dropped out). It was popular in North America too then to have cross-continent road and running races both(50 miles a day L.A. to N.Y. over couple of months). Che Guevara and Miguel Najdorf were both avid chess players from Argentina. What other recent chess connection to Buenos Aires? Of course Fischer Random Chess, the ingenious locale chosen by Bobby Fischer to announce in June 1996 his version of randomized initial positions actually invented by the 1820's. He still propounds it to stress talent over memorization. GM Najdorf died in 1997, the other of the two leading western hemisphere Grandmasters since Capablanca. Someone may know whether Najdorf attended any of the Argentine ceremonies starting FRChess(Chess960).

George Duke wrote on Tue, Oct 23, 2007 12:55 AM UTC:
Chess is Sport. Just when mentioning the successful hike over two years
from Buenos Aeres to New York in 1920's(relating it to Chess players), when FIDE and Capablanca Chess were new, there is an announcement. In spring 2008 Marshall Ulrich, 56, and Charlie Engle, 44, will attempt to break the record for running across the United States. Starting in Seattle(a Chess connection being Yasser Seirawan's Seattle Chess Foundation), they plan to run at least 68 miles--probably 15 to 17 hours a day--for 47 days, ending in Washington D.C. Hey 46, 48 and then 50 were progressively the number of USA states in 1900, 1912, and 1960, for state-based 46-, 47-, 48-square contests. Mexico City where the World Chess Championship took place, is closer to either city than the USA distance between them, the longest leg of triangle.

18 comments displayed

Earlier Reverse Order Later

Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.