Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Magnus Carlsen is now the world chess #1 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Tigran Petrosian
- Start date
the moops
Footballguy
I am a terrible chess player.Can someone explain what the next moves would be for a Carlsen win?
Dr. No
Footballguy
not to mention surely there's some cash in being the #1 chess guy in the world.. don't they win chess tourneys to get there, and presumably money?When a dude has money, he has access to breasts... barring him being crippled or burnt.
that being said.... would you rather be the world #1 in chess (and be that mentally gifted) and make some cash (and never feel a breast)
or live a normal regular life and feel a normal amount of breasts and/or vag's
Last edited by a moderator:
Tigran Petrosian
Footballguy
Radjabov made two terrible moves and was about to lose a rook.
Ozymandias
Footballguy
He was brilliant at chess, but he also had a life.From what I understand he went on to college.
Tigran Petrosian
Footballguy
There's an internet for researching these things.
Tigran Petrosian
Footballguy
Carlsen strikes again beating up the super-smug Wang Yue.
Tigran Petrosian
Footballguy
Just for good measure, Carlsen wins again in his last game agains Jakovenko to win the Nanjing Pearl Spring Super-GM tourney with a score of 8.0/10. His performance rating was an incredible 3002 scoring six wins and allowing only four draws against a world class field (including current world #1 Veselin Topalov).
Tigran Petrosian
Footballguy
Magnus Carlsen now owns a piece of chess history with the highest every live Elo rating of 2857.4. He's still only 22.
Short Corner
Footballguy
##### doesn't have a face.
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Magic Football Shoes
Footballguy
Men dominate the genius end of the spectrum.why would men and women compete seperately in chess?
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Magic Football Shoes
Footballguy
That's some great strategery.
Nah, that's sexist. It's just that every redblooded manchild in the world gets a chess set when he's six months old, and every girl is forced to play with dolls, even though they all hate it.Men dominate the genius end of the spectrum.why would men and women compete seperately in chess?
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
I think Magnus is getting some bad advice in the form of his weirdo father who seems to be living vicariously through his insanely talented son. I also think there is a rich history of politics in chess. It's like you're not a legit star until you have some kind of invented beef with FIDE. Fischer did it. Kasparov did it. They all do it more or less, save Anand who will pretty much play anyone at any time and thoroughly enjoy the experience. I don't think Magnus is all that afraid of Anand, but I do think Anand is probably the top seed in a protracted WC series with classical time controls. Magnus has the advantage in virtually any other format.
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Magnus won the Candidates Tournament with a bit of wild theater and comes away with an astounding 2872 rating and rights to face Vishy Anand for the World Chess Championship in November.
grateful zed
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Psychopav
Help us, Joebi-Wan Brynobi, you're our only ho
Steve Tasker
Footballguy
Anand still on top of his game, IMO.
Sammy3469
Footballguy
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
Kasparov in his prime would've crushed this kid.
HERBERT THE HIPPO
REAL Ultimate Power
So he's the world's strongest man AND the best chess player......dayum
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
He's still 22!
Doug B
Footballguy
Question for chess guys:SacramentoBob said:
Aren't guys like Kasparov (turns 50 Saturday) -- or heck, even Karpov (age 61) -- still considered world-class chess players today? I mean, if you sit them at a table against Carlsen or Anand ... the younger players aren't exactly checkmating the older champs in four moves or anything like that, right?
Are chess skills known to deteriorate with age? Is chess a young man's game? Or does it depend on timing controls and other format variables?
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
They would hold their own. I have no idea what rating Kasparov or Karpov are sporting these days. Both have effectively retired, so whatever Elo rating they have is probably not terribly accurate. Let's say Kasparov has a 2700 rating (might be generous considering the rust). He would be a massive underdog to a guy like Carlsen who is nearing 2900. The Elo system is supposed to carry some predictive ability to gauge probability of a win. If you sat Kasparov at a top tournament today, I doubt he'd be a factor. Yes, skills erode with age. Guys like Korchnoi competed into his 70s but usually skills top out in the 25-35 range and erode significantly beyond 45.
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
The 2013 World Chess Championship runs from November 9-28 in Chennai, India. It pits world #1 Magnus Carlsen (2870) against the cagey veteran Vishy Anand (2775). In keeping with FIDE's complete tone deafness, they dropped this thing right in Anand's backyard. A guy like Fischer would have shot up the organizers with an AK, but the ultra-calm Carlsen probably just wants to embarrass Anand in front of his home audience.
Does Anand have anything left at age 43? Will they try to poison Carlsen's patented orange drink? Could dysentery decide this? Tune in for all of the exciting wood pushing, pacing, and yes, draws.
Does Anand have anything left at age 43? Will they try to poison Carlsen's patented orange drink? Could dysentery decide this? Tune in for all of the exciting wood pushing, pacing, and yes, draws.
dparker713
Footballguy
Haven't we already proved computers are better? What's the point?
Sabertooth
Footballguy
He's no Magnus Ver Magnusson
Man of Zen
Footballguy
No GM beats a decent chess program any more, except under really fast (blitz) or really slow (correspondence) time controls, and then, only a couple guys in the world can make it work. Under the sorts of controls Kasparov played against Deep Blue, he'd no longer have a chance at winning a game against Houdini or Rybka on a decent PC.
timschochet
Footballguy
And we could create a robot pitcher that could throw a 200 mile fastball, and it could pitch every inning of every game, and the team that had it would never lose. But what would that prove?
Man of Zen
Footballguy
Tactics, endgames, and positional play should more or less remain constant, and the greats' ability in those arenas is why they'd still be considered world class even at advanced ages.
Opening theory is what separates "world class" from "title contender" for the most part (with one glaring exception). It's that willingness and ability to spend twelve hours a day, every day, with high end chess software and teams of experts, concentrating, analyzing, and preparing for every eventuality in the bleeding-edge, high-tension openings that separates the contenders from the also-rans. And that kind of effort is definitely more for the young. You can find interviews with super GM's who will tell you that theory is where they put almost 100% of their time and energy, since the tiny advantages or disadvantages that occur coming out of the opening are more than enough to decide games when the rest of one's technique is polished to GM levels.
Carlsen is the one guy who has historically been an outlier, here. He's typically been known as relatively weak in his opening prep, and somehow has figured out how to outplay even the greatest of the great positionally, even from sub-par positions. But it's this same deficiency that can sometimes be best exploited when in a prolonged h2h matchup. Carlsen is all but untouchable against the field in a tournament setting, but this will be the first chance to see how he does against a world champion caliber opponent who has spent a year dedicated to outpreparing him. And Anand is known for being unmatched in his opening prep. It's the one thing that makes this matchup compelling, even though on paper it appears as if it ought to be a rout.
Imagine Tiger Woods in his prime of several years ago, against let's say a 55 y.o. Tom Watson. 72 holes, head to head, winner takes all. Except Tom has been able to spend the last two years designing, building, and practicing on exactly the custom-built course the match is to be played on, which Tiger will not see for the first time until they tee off for hole #1. That's kind of what this match represents.
(Edit: although to be fair, with the stakes being what they are, it would be safe to assume Carlsen has switched up his M.O. at least a little bit, and has decided to design at least a few tricky doglegs of his own.)
Last edited by a moderator:
Man of Zen
Footballguy
SacramentoBob
Footballguy
I'd put my money on Anand.
Side note, I was doing some cleaning the other day and came across my old The Ideas Behind the Chess Openings book by Reuben Fine. About once a year I get all nostalgiac and want to take up chess again, but it passes pretty quickly.
Side note, I was doing some cleaning the other day and came across my old The Ideas Behind the Chess Openings book by Reuben Fine. About once a year I get all nostalgiac and want to take up chess again, but it passes pretty quickly.
Mr. Pickles
Footballguy
Steve Tasker
Footballguy
Bring back the chess team?
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Did Carlsen play in the last World Championship cycle and lose, or was he not competing for some reason?
Last edited by a moderator:
He withdrew, which was a shocker. He apparently felt that the organization of it was chaotic, and he did not like the format. Apparently the matches were going to be run without a break between quarterfinals, semifinals and final. Some felt that Kasparov (who was coaching him) was behind his withdrawal, but Kasparov denied it.
Man of Zen
Footballguy
How to Beat Your Dad at Chess and Chess Tactics for Kids, both by Murray Chandler. These are actually awesome books for anybody who isn't really tactically savvy yet. But are angled toward young players. Any decent instructor will tell you to start an interested junior out on a steady diet of tactics, tactics, tactics. These are the gentlest introductions you'll find. One is all middle-game tactics, the other is all checkmates. Can't go wrong.
Similar in quality and covering the same material is the Predator at the Chessboard series, by Ward Farnsworth.
IMO, the former are better suited toward a younger player, and the latter toward maybe a teen, but you couldn't go too far wrong either way.
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
When I was a very young boy, I was a very good chess player. Not like a prodigy or anything, but exceptional for my age. Every once in a while, they would have tournaments in school and despite being a year younger than the rest of my class, I routinely laid waste to everyone. Don't think I lost a match through all of elementary school. By the time I was 7, I was consistently pounding on my father (an M.D.) By the time I was 8, I was crucifying my grandfather as well, who was a lifelong club player.
After that, all the adults I knew stopped playing me to spare themselves the ignominy of being "outsmarted" by a 65-pound kid. None of the other kids in my class would play me anymore because the result was considered a foregone conclusion. As a result, I basically stopped playing chess around age 9 or 10. I never learned theory or openings or anything, I was just playing on raw instinct.
About 6 months ago, just out of curiosity, I logged on to Yahoo! Chess and played a couple of matches - literally the first time I had played in 30 years. I got HOUSED. I mean, absolutely bushwhacked. Guys with 1400 ratings were lighting me up like a Christmas tree. I chalked it up to rust and kept playing. After about 20-30 matches, I had settled in with what seems to be a valid 1185 rating. Pathetic. I can still beat the 1100 type players who barely know what they're doing, but probably lose 60% of my matches against 1200+ players. People I likely would have toyed with as a child. In fact, I'm confident the 9 year old me would beat the 40 year old me 9 out of 10 games.
So, here's the question : is there any hope for me, or should I just delete my log in and never play again? Maybe I wasn't that good back then, maybe all the other kids in my class sucked balls and maybe I just learned my dad's and grandfather's tendencies instinctively and learned how to beat THEM, but would have gotten spanked by a different but equally skilled opponent. I enjoy playing, but I'm a poor loser and the repeated defeats are souring me on the whole thing.
Summation for anyone that didn't want to read all that : I used to be good at chess, now I stink.
After that, all the adults I knew stopped playing me to spare themselves the ignominy of being "outsmarted" by a 65-pound kid. None of the other kids in my class would play me anymore because the result was considered a foregone conclusion. As a result, I basically stopped playing chess around age 9 or 10. I never learned theory or openings or anything, I was just playing on raw instinct.
About 6 months ago, just out of curiosity, I logged on to Yahoo! Chess and played a couple of matches - literally the first time I had played in 30 years. I got HOUSED. I mean, absolutely bushwhacked. Guys with 1400 ratings were lighting me up like a Christmas tree. I chalked it up to rust and kept playing. After about 20-30 matches, I had settled in with what seems to be a valid 1185 rating. Pathetic. I can still beat the 1100 type players who barely know what they're doing, but probably lose 60% of my matches against 1200+ players. People I likely would have toyed with as a child. In fact, I'm confident the 9 year old me would beat the 40 year old me 9 out of 10 games.
So, here's the question : is there any hope for me, or should I just delete my log in and never play again? Maybe I wasn't that good back then, maybe all the other kids in my class sucked balls and maybe I just learned my dad's and grandfather's tendencies instinctively and learned how to beat THEM, but would have gotten spanked by a different but equally skilled opponent. I enjoy playing, but I'm a poor loser and the repeated defeats are souring me on the whole thing.
Summation for anyone that didn't want to read all that : I used to be good at chess, now I stink.
timschochet
Footballguy
If you're good enough to be around 1100, youre good enough to be around 1700-1800, which is my level. You have to learn openings so that you don't lose in the first 10 moves. Unless you're naturally good at tactics (I'm not) study queen pawn openings- they tend to involve locking up the middle of the board more. And study basic endgame strategy- if you can master that, you'll win many more games than you lose. Lock up the middle, trade pieces off, all the time knowing that you can win in the endgame. That's the ticket, unless you have real talent, which I do not.