<Comment deleted by user>
@Manglecopter:
The article you linked states the opposite of what you are talking about. The prize money growed enourmously. The last WCM between Carlsen and Anand had some very special problems:
""It is a situation which has occurred in the past with other World Championship events and were positively resolved," Freeman told TOI on Friday.
This development, though, could have an impact on the Fide presidential election later this year. One of the criticisms against Fide president Kirsan Iiyumzhinov has been his inability to bring in funds." (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Sports/Chess/No-takers-for-Anand-Carlsen-title-rematch/articleshow/34571500.cms)
"New viewers prefer rapid"
You are free to claim this as often as you want but that makes this sentence neither true nor proven by some relevant facts.
I started playing chess totally without any clock. Then I played long games and often lost on time anyway. Its frustating to lose on time and beginners are normally unable to play under huge time pressure. That only makes sense for somewhat experienced players.
There are allot of player for example on lichess who should stop playing short time controls because they urgently have to learn basics first. But they obviously never had the chance to do so because they started playing online with short time controls. Its ome kind of vicious circle.
I once played a game with you and experienced exactly this: You should try to slow down and you would improve. Until you are not willing to do so your level of play will be like it is.
Best wishes
Nada
The article you linked states the opposite of what you are talking about. The prize money growed enourmously. The last WCM between Carlsen and Anand had some very special problems:
""It is a situation which has occurred in the past with other World Championship events and were positively resolved," Freeman told TOI on Friday.
This development, though, could have an impact on the Fide presidential election later this year. One of the criticisms against Fide president Kirsan Iiyumzhinov has been his inability to bring in funds." (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Sports/Chess/No-takers-for-Anand-Carlsen-title-rematch/articleshow/34571500.cms)
"New viewers prefer rapid"
You are free to claim this as often as you want but that makes this sentence neither true nor proven by some relevant facts.
I started playing chess totally without any clock. Then I played long games and often lost on time anyway. Its frustating to lose on time and beginners are normally unable to play under huge time pressure. That only makes sense for somewhat experienced players.
There are allot of player for example on lichess who should stop playing short time controls because they urgently have to learn basics first. But they obviously never had the chance to do so because they started playing online with short time controls. Its ome kind of vicious circle.
I once played a game with you and experienced exactly this: You should try to slow down and you would improve. Until you are not willing to do so your level of play will be like it is.
Best wishes
Nada
It's good for chess.
First of all if you are not a titled player this huge amount of opening theory provided with the help of computers is largely irrelevant to you and you would be no better than a player 50 or more years ago. So for 99% of chess players nothing has changed.
On the other hand I think the development of theory and game preparation that goes into top play today is fascinating. I even find the high amount of draws amazing. It just shows how competitive the game has become at the top level.
First of all if you are not a titled player this huge amount of opening theory provided with the help of computers is largely irrelevant to you and you would be no better than a player 50 or more years ago. So for 99% of chess players nothing has changed.
On the other hand I think the development of theory and game preparation that goes into top play today is fascinating. I even find the high amount of draws amazing. It just shows how competitive the game has become at the top level.
Carlsen would beat most of the chess players in the world without a knight, no need for opening theory
"Carlsen would beat most of the chess players in the world without a knight, no need for opening theory"
As could any GM and Carlsen would probably lose to most GMs playing without a Knight :^)
Good point
As could any GM and Carlsen would probably lose to most GMs playing without a Knight :^)
Good point
Nadastar Re - many of the greatest games ever played are pre-engine
"This statement is totally wrong. Many of the famous historical games are pre-engine of course."
Your comment states that yes, many famous games are pre-engine yet my statement is totally wrong? It sounds more like you agree with me, thank you.
To be fair, there is no definition of what makes a chess game great, but take a look at the list of the best chess games of all time on chess games.com and you will see why I said "many" of those games are pre-engine. Granted, being on this list does not make a game great and will vary from player to player based on what they think is great. It's very subjective. Nonetheless, check out the list.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1001601
Lot's of great games for you to review!
"This statement is totally wrong. Many of the famous historical games are pre-engine of course."
Your comment states that yes, many famous games are pre-engine yet my statement is totally wrong? It sounds more like you agree with me, thank you.
To be fair, there is no definition of what makes a chess game great, but take a look at the list of the best chess games of all time on chess games.com and you will see why I said "many" of those games are pre-engine. Granted, being on this list does not make a game great and will vary from player to player based on what they think is great. It's very subjective. Nonetheless, check out the list.
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1001601
Lot's of great games for you to review!
Not a single game on that list from 2015 and 2016, proof that people don't know how to play chess in 2015 and 2016!
Did you ever consider that there are just many more games played in the pre-computer era? Because you know chess has been around for quite some time. Or the effects of nostalgia when comparing things from the past?
Did you ever consider that there are just many more games played in the pre-computer era? Because you know chess has been around for quite some time. Or the effects of nostalgia when comparing things from the past?
These are some of the great games in 2015. I especially like Navara – Wojtaszek, Biel 2015. White's King travels all the way to H8 and half way back before earning the win.
http://en.chessbase.com/post/best-of-2015-best-game
enjoy.
http://en.chessbase.com/post/best-of-2015-best-game
enjoy.
@26:
I wanted to say that classical games are famous. But if you have a closer look to modern top games then you can easily spot that there are allot of masterpieces available. Allot more than in the old days because the level of play is much higher.
The author of this list must be a big fan of Nakamura...
Best wishes
Nada
I wanted to say that classical games are famous. But if you have a closer look to modern top games then you can easily spot that there are allot of masterpieces available. Allot more than in the old days because the level of play is much higher.
The author of this list must be a big fan of Nakamura...
Best wishes
Nada
Yeah, amazing games, every single one of them. While everyone and their mother was talking about Wey Yi's immortal, Khismatullin's 44.Kg1 deserved much more love. These damned computer players and their preparation. Chess is dying obviously.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.