World Chess Championship

[vulcanlogician]

Anyone been watching the match between Caruana and Carlsen? 10 draws so far... and only 2 more games to go. It's looking like this match might be settled in rapid or blitz, which I think gives Carlsen the edge.

I thought games 6 and 10 were quite interesting, but most of the games are being played so carefully (ie nobody wants to go into risky/sharp lines it seems) that it's no wonder there are so many draws.

[c172]

What link are you watching it on? I've dibble dabbled, but never joined a club. My favorite book, though, is about Bobby Fischer. Fascinating individual.

[EvieTheAvocado]

I've always found chess theory interesting. And I've read books on chess. I enjoy playing chess. And I LOVE the Elo system, used in Chess, which is also used in many other games now ... and it's awesome.

But I've never enjoyed watching Chess. I'd much rather play it.

Which reminds me, I used to play at chess.com. But now I play at lichess after concluding that it's definitely way better. I'm not sure whether it was Mr Obvious or you who introduced me to it, but I think it may have been you VL. My memory is really shakey over whether we played there together? Or whether you just introduced me to lichess? Or did me and Mr Obvious just play? Did we play?

Anyway, I haven't been keeping track of the World Championship as I don't watch Chess, but, despite the fact that I suck, I'd love to play Chess with anyone here who has the patience with me to beat me repeatedly (if they're an at all regular Chess player. I may be able to beat someone who doesn't play Chess much).

But I honesty find games much more enjoyable when I play for Elo. So, hopefully the skill gap won't be so wide that I'm basically giving the other player points. So I guess that's my only rule: I don't mind losing repeatedly as long as I'm basically not giving you points repeatedly. The Elo system works ... but there does become a point where the skill gap is so large that the weaker player can't lose. That's not good. But I just find rated games are a lot more fun ... because provided you have ANY chance in winning, I think it's a rather accurate way to measure your current level and whether you're improving or not.

[vulcanlogician]

What link are you watching it on? I've dibble dabbled, but never joined a club. My favorite book, though, is about Bobby Fischer. Fascinating individual.

There are many different online sources covering the match. There is a twitch channel you can access from lichess.org -- but they won't play until tomorrow. You can also watch post analysis of each game on youtube (in case you don't want to sit through an entire 6-7 hour game). The analyses are 30-45 minutes. Matojelic or ChessNetwork are good channels for that.

Fischer was certainly a genius. A wizard on the chess board. Too bad he was such a troubled individual...

My favorite world chess champion has to be Mikhail Tal. Except for the fact that they were both masters of the game, Tal was pretty much the opposite of Fischer. Crazy on the chess board... sane in real life.

[vulcanlogician]

Which reminds me, I used to play at chess.com. But now I play at lichess after concluding that it's definitely way better. I'm not sure whether it was Mr Obvious or you who introduced me to it, but I think it may have been you VL. My memory is really shakey over whether we played there together? Or whether you just introduced me to lichess? Or did me and Mr Obvious just play? Did we play?

I told you about it, but we haven't played. Must have been Obvs.

[EvieTheAvocado]

I told you about it, but we haven't played. Must have been Obvs.

Are you quite good at Chess? Maybe the skill gap between us would be too far. I've never played regularly. But I do like the game.

The problem that I tend to find is I either play someone who has never really played before, and I win, or I play someone who plays regularly, and I get utterly destroyed. That imbalance makes it hard for me to get into it regularly myself

I want balanced games where I win some and lose some.

I guess if I keep playing on the Elo system that will happen ... I just need patience to get enough games that I hit my true current rating. And that takes time.

And on that matter, there are different Elos for different speed settings and I can never decide which to play at... so I end up near the default rating on all of them. Any particular speed system you'd recommend for beginners? When playing with strangers, I mean. I'd play Chess without a speed limit but I want to get lots of games played so my Elo can develop, rather than play like one move a day or something, and many strangers I find are far too AFK ... but I can't decide whether to play like 15 minute time limit, 10 minute time limit, 5, 3 or 1 minute bullet Chess, etc. I'm not sure what's the best way to learn for beginners. What do you recommend?

[vulcanlogician]

I'm not sure what's the best way to learn for beginners. What do you recommend?

I'm not really all that good. My advice: play for fun and nothing else.

The slower the better for learning to get better at chess. All that playing speed chess improves is your speed. On lichess there is a tactics trainer (select "puzzles" under "learn"). Use that.

Learning a handful of openings can help too. I play the albin countergambit against the queen's gambit. I also like the scotch game/scotch gambit a lot. I play openings based on what has the most potential for crazy games. That usually means gambits for me. (I have no patience for boring/slow chess.) Try to learn openings that suit your playstyle. And then try to learn some common traps in those openings.

[EvieTheAvocado]

I only know one opening: The Roy Lopez.

I never understand how learning multiple openings works ... I mean ... if it's just the opening, and there are many different ones that are good, and different experts use different openings, surely there are plenty that are good to open with? And as far as I know the Roy Lopez is the most popular overall ... so I stick to that one.

Although I'm interested in the idea of learning multiple openings being helpful. How does that work?

[vulcanlogician]

I only know one opening: The Roy Lopez.

I never understand how learning multiple openings works ... I mean ... if it's just the opening, and there are many different ones that are good, and different experts use different openings, surely there are plenty that are good to open with? And as far as I know the Roy Lopez is the most popular overall ... so I stick to that one.

Although I'm interested in the idea of learning multiple openings being helpful. How does that work?

YouTube is a good way to get started. The Ruy is a very solid opening, played by grandmasters. When you play the Ruy, just be careful of the fishing pole trap and the Noah's Ark trap. These two videos have traps for you to use.

[c172]

Are you rated? How did you do that?

[vulcanlogician]

Are you rated? How did you do that?

I'm not rated. You have to join a chess club for that. My unofficial "online" ratings range from 1600 (slow chess) down to 1200 (blitz). But I'm rated higher than that on lichess. IDK what kind of rating system is used on lichess but it's different than other sites... all ratings are 300-ish points higher on that site for some reason.

[EvieTheAvocado]

Yeah, VL, you'd absolutely destroy me, lol.

[EvieTheAvocado]

So, VL, what is the advantage of me learning more than one opening? Thanks for telling me about those traps, by the way.

[c172]

Watching this, kind of randomly:

[EvieTheAvocado]

By the way, instead of Chess championships, I watch this, as a spectator sport:



And I don't wanna clog up your Chess thread, so here's more info if you're interested: https://waypoint.vice.com/en_us/article/...ears-later

[vulcanlogician]

Another draw. There is no way Caruana can beat Carlsen in tomorrow's game. Carlsen can draw the game if he wants too-- and he will. It's just like I said: this match will be settled over the rapid or blitz boards.

[c172]

What's the OT protocol, or if there isn't one, who decides rapid or blitz?

[vulcanlogician]

What's the OT protocol, or if there isn't one, who decides rapid or blitz?

If all twelve games are draws, they will play...

• a series of 4 games, with each player receiving 25 minutes for the entire game, plus 10 seconds per move. The winner of this series is the winner of the match.
  
  
• If the scores are tied after this, they play a 2-game blitz match, with a time control of 5 minutes for the entire game, plus 3 seconds per move. If this fails to produce a winner, they repeat this process up to 4 more times (a total of 5 blitz matches).
  
  
• The Armageddon game is indeed a time control of 5 minutes for white, 4 minutes for black and 3 seconds per move for each player.
  

If the Armageddon game is a draw, then black wins. So there will be resolution one way or another.

[c172]

I noticed on, I think, game 9, players building up time. I wonder how that works.

[vulcanlogician]

After so many moves (30, I think?) the players are granted another half hour of time. Then they get more at like 60 moves or something. (I forget the exact move numbers.) In addition to this, they get one minute added to their time per move.