|
Any exciting/noteworthy games?
|
| # ? Sep 6, 2012 17:39 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2013 08:29 |
|
|
I've mostly been following the Canada games where it looks like our board 4 is going to claim his GM title and our board 2 may also cinch up his 2nd and 3rd norms (hooray Olympiad double norms). They've had a few games, and their board 1 (Sambuev) faced down a piece sacrifice in I think his first 3 games. Here he is defeated by multiple sacrifices from the Mexican GM Manuel Leon Hoyos. You can go through all the games, by round and by team, here. I just checked out Aronian-Naiditsch which had a sweet opposite coloured bishop endgame.
|
| # ? Sep 6, 2012 18:05 |
|
|
No Bluvshtein or Charbonneau at the Olympiad for Canada?
|
| # ? Sep 6, 2012 18:08 |
|
|
gret posted:No Bluvshtein or Charbonneau at the Olympiad for Canada? Bluvshtein retired earlier this year to go into finance and Charbonneau's played like 2 tournaments in the last 4 years. Which is a shame, really, since they both have fairly significant upsets at the Olympiad. Thomas Roossel-Roozmon also retired after achieving his GM title at the 2010 Olympiad. Canada has such a terrible retention rate for good players.
|
| # ? Sep 6, 2012 18:22 |
|
|
BIGFOOT PEE BED posted:Any exciting/noteworthy games? Right on cue, Ivanchuk - Hao  From Polgarblog, here are the results: code:Hand Knit fucked around with this message at Sep 9, 2012 around 17:54 |
| # ? Sep 9, 2012 17:50 |
|
|
Hand Knit posted:Right on cue, Ivanchuk - Hao Pretty! There's a kingscrusher video on it and now a chessexplained one too http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCqpifXaAxg
|
| # ? Sep 12, 2012 13:51 |
|
|
Incidentally, do real life chess players actually say "Exclama-biyatch"?
|
| # ? Sep 12, 2012 19:31 |
|
|
Maybe Bryan Nickoloff, but he was kind of "special."
|
| # ? Sep 12, 2012 22:40 |
|
|
Hand Knit posted:Maybe Bryan Nickoloff, but he was kind of "special." I meant to ask you about him at some point! I wrote an article about him for his brother, who I did a small amount of freelance work for. He was certainly...a character.
|
| # ? Sep 13, 2012 01:21 |
|
|
OrangeKing posted:I meant to ask you about him at some point! I wrote an article about him for his brother, who I did a small amount of freelance work for. He was certainly...a character. I was basically too young to have met him, and unfortunately I'm not in the right place to get stories from our 'local social historian.' The reason I thought of his name here is that my one interaction with him was watching him 'analyze' after his game at a Labour Day Open one year. I'm not even sure if the round was over, but he drew a crowd and for almost every single one of his moves he's throw the piece down and declare "Ex!" The way he through his hands with every move, he looked like a scraggly, homeless magician.
|
| # ? Sep 13, 2012 09:13 |
|
|
I just spent the last hour looking at Ivanchuk games. The guy lives in a completely different mental realm, so when his play is working it's incredible to watch. I don't know how looking at 20-year-old replays can be viscerally exciting but it is. Probably his most famous move of all time: White to move and win 
|
| # ? Sep 15, 2012 16:29 |
|
|
I know the answer is 1. Qg7!!, but that's a bit misleading as the move is not a win on the spot, as far as I saw from the analysis from the game it's from.
|
| # ? Sep 20, 2012 16:30 |
|
|
Twahhn posted:I know the answer is 1. Qg7!!, but that's a bit misleading as the move is not a win on the spot, as far as I saw from the analysis from the game it's from. Way to hate, hater >  Anyway, there is a lot of chess going on right now. On one hand, we have a FIDE GP event going on in London right now. Full roster is here. After 4 rounds, Boris Gelfand is in first at +2, with wins over Hao with white and Nakamura with black. On the other side of the earth, the Bilbao Masters just started with Carlsen, Aronian, Anand, Caruana, Karjakin, and Games on Chessbomb and coverage on chess.fm as per usual.
|
| # ? Sep 24, 2012 19:17 |
|
|
So I have no idea exactly what went down, but Gelfand's opening today was hilarious with 10...f6 and 11...Kf7. It's like something I would play in blitz to troll my opponent. Through 7 rounds, Gelfand is clear first at +3 -0 =4, and Mamedyarov is clear 2nd at +3 -1 =3. Nakamura is tied for last at +1 -3 =3 and it's difficult to see this tournament ending as anything other than a total humiliation for him.
|
| # ? Sep 29, 2012 00:42 |
|
|
Twahhn posted:I know the answer is 1. Qg7!!, but that's a bit misleading as the move is not a win on the spot, as far as I saw from the analysis from the game it's from. Why not Bh3? Also, I'm really interested in the thought process behind 23. in Ivanchuk vs Topalov would someone please explain? CivilDisobedience fucked around with this message at Nov 12, 2012 around 03:07 |
| # ? Nov 12, 2012 03:02 |
|
|
CivilDisobedience posted:Why not Bh3? quote:Also, I'm really interested in the thought process behind 23. in Ivanchuk vs Topalov would someone please explain? 23. Qd2 is sparked by preventing trading his queen for a bishop. There's no piece you can intervene with for an even trade, and you are not in a position to want an even trade anyway. Where else would you place the queen? a1,b1,c1,e1 are all safe for your queen. They don't open up any interesting lines for you and continue to keep your rook on f1 in a trapped position. Qa1 is removed as an option by Nc6, something black wants to play soon anyway. Qb1, Qc1 leave your queen with nowhere interesting to go later. Qe1 seems somewhat reasonable. Black can then encourage Qd2 with Be6 (but Qc3 and Qf2 as a response to Be6 also look valid), and Be6 is a good move for black even if you go to d2 to begin with. 23. Qe1 Nc6 24. Ra3 Ne7 25. Ne3 Be6 makes it look like you should just go to d2. Qd2 lets your rook free allowing you more options, maintains influence on d5 and c2, creates a trap if black plays Nc4, and has all of the benefits of Qe1. It is also where black Be6 coerces you to be anyway so you are saving a move. Black Nc6 forces the rook to retreat with Ra3 or Ra1. Maybe Ra6 if you want black to play Qc8. It's one of the easiest moves to see for black on the board. The benefit of getting the rook off of 7 is that you can move your queen or rooks in to better positions. It takes pressure off of f7. It has the added benefit of putting your knight in a position to go with Ne7 as a follow up. It's worth noting that Be6 is valid for black as well, but it's not as strong as Nc6. Bh5 is also interesting for black, and it's the kind of move I like to play. Nc6 is likely the strongest black move, though. It still lets you play those other moves down the line. Black's response to 24. g6 was questionable. fxg6 or f6 both look better for black after white plays g6. I'm not sure why it was ignored. Anyone feel free to chime in and correct me. I'm not particularly good at chess, but that was fun to analyze. Khorne fucked around with this message at Nov 18, 2012 around 05:55 |
| # ? Nov 18, 2012 05:20 |
|
|
I have some chess clock questions. 1. What do app-based chess clocks do poorly? 2. By international rules: a. Is the move limit an overall move limit? (i.e., 40 moves for the ENTIRE game) b. If one side enters endgame time, does the other enter as well? (i.e., white runs out of time and goes into 30 min overtime, does black enter 30 min overtime as well, or does black continue with the move/normal time limit)? c. Do move bonuses (+30 seconds per move) apply in overtime?
|
| # ? Nov 20, 2012 07:23 |
|
|
tarepanda posted:I have some chess clock questions. 1. Basically everything. Chess clocks are highly specialized in their designs and an iphone clock will utterly fail at, among other things, visibility, glare reduction, ergonomics, and, most significantly, durability. Good clocks are built like tanks for good reason, and using your phone as a clock is something I would only do if it was already obsolete and you were looking for a novel way to destroy it. 2 - The international organization is known as FIDE (Fédération International des Échecs) but, while they have requirements that must be met, time controls are ultimately left up to individual tournament organizers. 2a. No. The only move limit on the game is that which incidentally arises out of the rules (that is, you can only play on so far before the game falls prey to either checkmate or a draw by insufficient matieral, threefold repetition, or the 50-move rule). In practice, it is nearly impossible for a game to go past 150 moves. There have been ten games to exceed 200 moves. 2b. Within normal time controls (i.e. 2 hours for 40 moves followed by 1 hour), each player gains the extra time upon making their final move of the first control (in this case, move 40). Depending on the make of the digital clock, the time will either be displayed immediately, or not added until one player has their first 2 hours run out. With analogue clocks, the initial time control is set so that it will expire at "6 O'clock." If 40 moves have been made, then the time simply is considered to expire at "& O'clock" and nothing actually has to be changed. If you're playing with lunatics who have non-hour secondary time controls, then at TC you have to stop the clock, write down each player's time, and preferably get an arbiter to adjust the clock for you. But that sucks. 2c. This depends on what the time controls are for the game. In most cases, if there is increment at the start there will be increment throughout. This is because the main function of increment is to allow both players time to write their moves, so their are no longer games where moves are lost to the chaos of a time scramble. However, you will sometimes find tournaments where there is one TC without increment. If it starts without increment and only adds it later, it is likely to facilitate endgame play. The FIDE standard time control is "90 minutes for the first 40 moves followed by 30 minutes for the rest of the game with an addition of 30 seconds per move starting from move one." For reference, here is what FIDE has to say about clocks: quote:5.
|
| # ? Nov 20, 2012 09:00 |
|
|
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know (generally speaking) how the logic changes on different difficulty settings when you play against a computer. Take just the basic Chess Titans game on Windows for example, does it just give the computer worse opening strategies on lower difficulty, or is it limiting how far ahead the computer can look for strategy during the match, etc?
|
| # ? Nov 21, 2012 14:22 |
|
|
I think most programs will start picking second and third best moves. All of them will start thinking for less time. I know there have been attempts to change the positional evaluation function to mimic different play styles, but I've never noticed a real difference.
|
| # ? Nov 21, 2012 15:24 |
|
|
Somebody will make a decent amount of money if they can come up with an AI that realistically plays like a class player vs. *plays perfectly for a series of moves, then randomly hangs a piece*
|
| # ? Nov 21, 2012 16:46 |
|
|
I enjoy *perfect*perfect*perfect*move king a square to the left*
|
| # ? Nov 21, 2012 18:10 |
|
|
BIGFOOT PEE BED posted:I enjoy *perfect*perfect*perfect*move king a square to the left* I brought up the question since I noticed the first 5 or so difficulty levels of Chess Titans plays like this. It opens with pretty good moves then makes a random mistake mid-way through the match and then will just hang its queen out there or leave the king open for an easy checkmate.
|
| # ? Nov 21, 2012 18:35 |
|
|
tadashi posted:I brought up the question since I noticed the first 5 or so difficulty levels of Chess Titans plays like this. It opens with pretty good moves then makes a random mistake mid-way through the match and then will just hang its queen out there or leave the king open for an easy checkmate. If I remember correctly, although I haven't read about this since high school, chess programs operate on essentially two algorithms. The first is a purely evaluative one, with values assigned for various material and positional considerations. The second is a meta-evaluative one where, once a branch on the tree of variations has gone a certain depth while being sufficiently worse than the best line, inferior lines are cut so processing power can focus on depth for stronger lines. There are also database components, with respect to openings and endgame tablebases, but I don't remember quite how those work (other than, in the case of endgame tablebases, "controversially"). There are, I believe, three ways for a computer's strength to be adjusted. The first, which is the one you're talking about, is to insert blunders at random intervals. There's a certain intuitive sense in that - worse players are defined as much as anything by the rate and severity of their blunders - but the problem is that the algorithm can't put the blunders in intuitive places. That way you end up with absolute howlers. The second way, which isn't much better and can lead to situations similar to the first, is to alter the meta-evaluative algorithm. These programs can be especially infuriating, since they'll never miss a two or three move combo, but turn into a flailing idiot on any line that extends past 10 moves. The free analysis engine for Gameknot.com has a horizon of 10 moves and gives some absolute howlers, like a 10-move "winning" line that ends with either your queen hanging or your king open to a mate in one. The third way, which is the best but hardest, is to tinker with the evaluative engine. Tilting towards, say, material or positional considerations is how an engine's play style can be changed. Strength can be altered either by adding ranges to evaluations, which, at best, creates the fuzziness and unclarity of the evaluative process of low-level players. So, for example, to switch an engine from ~2200 to ~1900 the computer may slightly increase the range of simple positional considerations, greatly increase the range of complex positional considerations, and set the range on tactical considerations to progressively increase on each move past the third.
|
| # ? Nov 21, 2012 20:07 |
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL5bBKEqiy0
|
| # ? Nov 21, 2012 23:57 |
|
|
In the year of our Lord two thousand and twelve, Judit Polgar, playing the black pieces, beat Magnus Carlsen in a Real Live Chess Game. I'll post the PGN when it goes up.
|
| # ? Nov 25, 2012 23:57 |
|
|
As someone who sporadically keeps up with professional chess and has been out of it for a while, I'm confused as to how Carlsen managed to lose to Polgar and yet is apparently still on track to possibly beating Kasparov's FIDE record less than a week later (well he'll have to wait for the update either way, but you know). Chess works in mysterious ways I guess, and good on Polgar. Any link to the PGN yet?
|
| # ? Dec 1, 2012 21:15 |
|
|
Insurrectionist posted:As someone who sporadically keeps up with professional chess and has been out of it for a while, I'm confused as to how Carlsen managed to lose to Polgar and yet is apparently still on track to possibly beating Kasparov's FIDE record less than a week later (well he'll have to wait for the update either way, but you know). Chess works in mysterious ways I guess, and good on Polgar. The odd loss to a 2700 player isn't going to hurt your ratings too much... I'm sad Luke wasted an advantage against Magnus today. But then, I wish that bastard would stop working for Goldman effing Sachs and just be a chess player.
|
| # ? Dec 1, 2012 22:43 |
|
|
I actually haven't found a pastable PGN yet. Also I think the game was rapid time controls, so the loss wouldn't hurt the March To 2850 or whatever (which he will apparently hit with a score of something like +3 this tournament). Also the tournament hall is swank as hell. If you can make it down, I really recommend you do.
|
| # ? Dec 2, 2012 00:50 |
|
|
Hand Knit posted:I actually haven't found a pastable PGN yet. Also I think the game was rapid time controls, so the loss wouldn't hurt the March To 2850 or whatever (which he will apparently hit with a score of something like +3 this tournament). I'm really disappointed that I haven't been able to make a trip over there for one of these. I hope they keep doing them so I can take a vacation, play in the Open, and watch the Classic. Edit: If the Polgar loss was a rapid game, it could still hurt his standing on the all-important rapid rating list 
|
| # ? Dec 2, 2012 00:59 |
|
|
You have no idea how bummed I am that Spraggett has a rapid rating. I was so looking forward to being the highest rated Canadian in two out of three FIDE-tracked ratings and trolling everyone.
|
| # ? Dec 2, 2012 01:04 |
|
|
Not gonna be satisfied until there's an official FIDE bullet ratings list.
|
| # ? Dec 2, 2012 01:05 |
|
|
gret posted:Not gonna be satisfied until there's an official FIDE bullet ratings list. And a blindfold list. Small sample size? What's that?
|
| # ? Dec 2, 2012 01:14 |
|
|
Yeah I'd definitely love to make it to the London Chess Classic and also Wijk aan Zee at some point in my life.
|
| # ? Dec 2, 2012 01:20 |
|
|
http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8678 Chessbase has the video of the London participants giving post-mortem analyses. Also Carlsen's endgame plan against McShane is sweet as heck.
|
| # ? Dec 2, 2012 09:05 |
|
|
So far the online coverage of the tournament has been an embarrassment on every level. Streams going down, they can't get the display boards right. Commentary is badly organised even though I like the people they have doing it, especially Short and Daniel King. But the tech set-up has been atrocious. What a shame, and what a missed opportunity. And seriously, they've been doing this a while now. Edit - now they're showing the auditorium, too distant to see anything, and playing phone on hold music.
|
| # ? Dec 2, 2012 16:39 |
|
|
On the unofficial live list, Carlsen is now up to 2856 (rounding up). Keep on keeping on, you crazy little Norwegian.
|
| # ? Dec 2, 2012 22:27 |
|
|
Everyone thinks it's soooooo funny to play the English in London 
|
| # ? Dec 3, 2012 17:41 |
|
|
I feel really bad for Polgar.
|
| # ? Dec 3, 2012 22:09 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2013 08:29 |
|
|
Hand Knit posted:I feel really bad for Polgar. Yeah I noticed she didn't turn up to analyse her game yesterday.
|
| # ? Dec 4, 2012 09:08 |
|
