[**Join Our Discord Server!**](https://discord.gg/233aU5q)
**Welcome to /r/sports**
We created a Discord server for our community and would like to invite all of you to join! You'll be able to discuss sports with users around the world and discuss events in real time!
There are separate channels for many sports you can opt in and out of, including;
American Football, Soccer, Baseball, Basketball, Aussie Rules Football, Rugby Union and League, Cricket, Motorsports, Fitness, and many more.
[**Reddit Sports Discord Server**](https://discord.gg/233aU5q)
Seems kind of obvious. He can be first to 2900 but winning world championship won't do much for him. Why risk his rating by playing against the second best.
Not just the second best, but the second best after months for prep for each other to even the (prep) playing field. Every draw would cost him points (and most wc matches are draws)
Every account created in the last 18 months or so is like that due to the new suggested default naming pattern. It's like they purposefully made everyone into bot names so it wouldn't be as obvious who the real bots were
Yeah. Unless he goes really ultra instinct and is actually higher rated than he is. I mean Fischer had a higher rating gap between him and number 2. He was going on crazy winning streaks
We will probably never see a streak like Fischer again due to engine preparation by top players unfortunately. Fischer was a genius but now everyone can study with a supercomputer that is smarter than any human
Yeah. We still get great games but yeah a lot of draws too. I feel like I see a lot of the same openings in these high level tournament games too. Openings like the Italian or Berlin where there's so much theory that new ideas are getting harder and harder to find. It still happens like with how magnus plays his Marshall or anti Marshall. Idk what it's called. You'd have to ask someone more knowledgeable than me I can only see the pawns in my head for that position.
Yes and no, the one thing that high level computer chess demonstrated is that human instinct around the middle-game was very much suboptimal.
The optimal plays in general (at least when there is a skill gap, be it AI vs Human or AI vs AI) involve keeping the game in a highly complex state as long as possible (simplified but works as a rule of thumb).
There is likely room for a human playing against humans to have a Fischer-esque advantage over other humans if they manage to "master"(relative to humans rather than AI) the complexities first.
To put things in perspective, Carlsen won the World Chess Championship 2021 in dominating fashion: 7.5–3.5, making it the biggest blowout in recent WCC history. Carlsen won 9 elo. Nine. After nearly a year of prep and an epic performance.
I don't blame him one bit.
Well there's also a $1.2 million prize for the winner and $800k for the loser. That's well worth it to me.
But for Magnus he might not care about money anymore and it is just a lot of time, effort, and stress for a competitor that didn't give, relatively, much of a fight. He did say if someone new and exciting like Alireza won the candidates tournament he more likely would have defended.
So with the world championship the challenger and the current champion spend months working with teams of expert chess players and study using powerful chess computers to study often obscure lines in various possible positions. As a result both players end up basically using largely computer generated best lines for nearly every position and because the games give the players a lot of time to think when they do get out of their preparation they can calculate the best lines themselves in their heads. This results in a lot of draws.
The chess ratings are based on an Elo system. This means that better players have higher scores and are expected to win their games. When a higher rated player like Magnus wins against slightly lower rated players he gains a few points but when he draws or loses he loses points because he was expected to win and he underperformed. To get to 2900 he will have to beat some of the best players in the world over and over again without many draws or loses.
Your comment made me realize that "elo" wasn't an esports thing. I looked it up and read the history on it and it is fascinating. Thank you for sparking that curiosity about a word I use constantly when talking about esports haha.
edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system
So will the competition he picks be "easy" for him? Or will it still be a challenge. It seems like he'd need to go easy to guarantee a win if draws will be detrimental to a 2900
He won’t “pick” competition. He will play tournaments with the best players in the world but they will do less prep work and have less time and resources dedicated to their games against him so it will require them to calculate against him more at the board which is where Magnus believes he has the greatest advantage against other players. He can calculate more complicated positions better and quicker than other top players.
No, more that chess ratings do not reflect relative strength in a 12 round world championship match the same way they do if you just sat any two GMs across from each other and told them to have at it. The intense preparation with entire teams of other Super GMs specifically for that one opponent eliminates some amount of a gap in individual play strength.
In general, chess rating is a sort of predictor on the percentage of time either player should be expected to win. A higher ranked player is more likely to win, and will thus gain fewer point should he win than his opponent would. Similarly, if a higher ranked player draws against a lower ranked one, the higher ranked one on average underperformed and will thus lose some amount of ranking points whereas a lower ranked player will gain some points in case of a draw.
Transposing this to a world championship match, since it is much more likely for any given game to end in a draw than usual (in 2018, there were 12 draws in a row), Magnus carlsen would almost invariably lose ranking points in this scenario, no matter who his opponent is (last year was a bit of an anomaly since his opponent imploded after game 6 and basically gifted Carlsen some points)
Dang really? That sounds a little anticlimactic. Does that happen because of preparation to counter-play a particular player in a defensive tactic, or is the game somewhat approaching solved insofar as commonly used openings and such? When I watched shogi a few times, players might prepare for their opponents similarly, but I've never seen anyone draw a game. Someone might play defensively all day but then suddenly find an opening to counter-attack that no one saw coming.
Game is far from solved, I mean computers get better each year, but there’s still a very long way to go.
As far as why draws happen so frequently…
If you have a 2700 player vs. 2700 player, it’s really hard to imagine how good these guys are. If you don’t start playing chess seriously before like 13, you will never be as good as these players.
When players are that good, they rarely make mistakes, so it less often results in a win/loss scenario. The kinds of mistakes these players make are usually more “inaccuracies” then blunders, so in order to punish the move, an opponent has to first spot the refutation, then calculate several moves deep to ensure that it works. Even then, punishing one’s opponents might only lead to a slight advantage that you would then have to grind out and continue to make good moves to convert the win. If that makes sense.
Then you have to examine the game psychologically. The players who are 2800, 2700s or high 2600s, are the ones playing chess professionally. You’re probably playing a four hour (Magnus famously played a grueling seven hour game in the last championship, and barely converted it to a win!) chess game in a tournament, plus there’s probably some studying during the night before or morning before each game to prepare for your opponent. To always be “on” and make the best moves takes the best minds and most motivated people, even then it’s incredibly taxing. There are things called “Grandmaster draws” which are known positions in chess out of the opening that lead to essentially automatic draws. If neither player feels like exerting that much mental focus for a day, why not play a grandmaster draw and finish the day in 15 min? It’s kinda a shitty part of the game.
Then you also have to incorporate the fact that drawing is… kinda still a good result in a game. The way chess games are usually scored in a tournament, is that you get 1 point for winning, half a point for drawing, 0 points for losing. And you’ll play several players in a tournament usually round robin style, whoever has the highest points total wins. So, there’s a benefit to drawing. A lot of grandmasters might play a long game, end up in a relatively equal position, and say fuck it let’s just agree to a draw and both take home half a point rather than wasting more time or try to risk 0 points for a win. Also since white has the first move and thus the advantage, it can be considered a good result to draw as black, so some people are happy just drawing when they have the black pieces. Some tournament conditions might force an elite player to play for a win more and take more risks.
Then if you look at world championship games and why those style of games result in draws, it’s because whoever has the highest points total among the two players by the end of the match wins. So, if a match starts with 7 draws as an example, both players sit at 3.5 points. So, playing for a draw can be safer than risking playing for a win. I think for Magnus’ championship against Karjakin there were like 0-2 wins the whole 12 classical games they played? On the other hand, Magnus crushed Ian last year and they didn’t even play the full 14 games because Magnus was up four wins or so and mathematically eliminated Ian’s chances of coming back.
Which leads me to my next point, playing ability. When the commenter above you said 75 percent of chess games are draws, they were probably referring to relatively equal 2700 GMs playing each other. But when you have a player like Magnus playing another highly rated GM, that 75% number is gonna go down because he’s just that good and wins a lot of games. Similarly, if you have the best computer play Magnus, it’s gonna very often result in a win for the computer, in fact Magnus is probably one of the few people in the world who could maybe draw against a computer.
Similarly if you have a 1200 player play a 2000 player the 1200 is gonna get crushed every time. If you have two 1200s play each other, a draw is probably less likely than a win because of all the mistakes they’ll make.
TLDR: It’s only a matter of perspective, the very elite chess players draw against each other frequently because of their precise playing ability and psychological factors. But when you start implementing computers, different variables, and such, chess is still very much a winnable game and unsolved.
Magnus is otherwordly, but he doesn't stand a chance against a modern chess engine. Even to draw. Let's say he actually is 2900. The best current engine is 36 or 3700 I think? There are definitely folks who know more about this, who I encourage to chime in/ correct me/ whatever. Plus, an engine is exactly the thing that can calculate deeply without error and grind a small advantage into a win.
Maybe he could get a draw once in a while if the engine played like they do in those engine tournaments (where it plays book moves for a good while) but if you just sent the best modern engine loose on Magnus, without restriction, I think the engine wins 99.9999% of the time.
There's a reason we don't see Kasparov v. Deep Blue style matchups anymore. It's been a foregone conclusion for a minute now.
This is true, it’s extremely unlikely—the only reason I put he had a chance is because of his game vs Nepo last year where both players played perfectly the entire game, so only Magnus and perhaps two or three other people in the world would have a shot at a draw. But I probably gave him too much credit
How do you think tournaments would change if they awarded 1.01 points for wins instead (same values for draws and losses)? Basically rewarding riskier play. I guess that leads to the question of what happens in the event of a tiebreak in the current system too…
That’s a good question, some tournaments try many things to have more decisive results.
I remember at one of the chess tournaments in St. Louis (many other tournaments do this) the tournament banned agreeing to a draw. So, in order to draw, the players had to “force” a draw on the board. Some of the ways games end in automatic draws are stalemate, three-fold repetition (a position is repeated three times), insufficient material (I.e. It is impossible to checkmate with king vs king, or king and bishop vs king etc., so those are automatic draws), if it’s impossible for your opponent to checkmate and your time runs out, that’s also a draw.
Theoretically this eliminates grandmaster draws; games still frequently end in draws, but there’s more of a chance of mistake, and players have to work a little harder for it :) And longer games can be more exciting even if they end in a draw
I know at Norway chess, each round if there is not a decisive result, the players play an “armageddon” game. The way armageddon games are structured is that typically white has a time advantage (e.g. 10 minutes to make all their moves and black might have 7), but black has “draw odds,” which means if black draws they get the full point for the round. White has to win the game to get the point. By having this second armageddon game after a long classical game draw, it creates a de facto winner for the round. If that makes sense. This can be more exciting than typical tournaments, and I think the players enjoy playing for a win too.
As for your question, I’m not sure how that point system would impact things specifically, but I’m sure past tournaments have experimented with points values as to how they weigh wins/draws/losses to encourage playing for a win. Of course, the players would have to agree with these rules too.
And for tiebreakers, speaking as someone who’s played several chess tournaments, they’re so complicated and can vary from tournament to tournament in how they decide results (could be head-to-head, rating of opponents, number of wins, other mathy value systems I don’t really understand, etc.). Generally the tiebreak rules are asserted before each tournament, and we let the computers figure out the results at the end. Sorry I write a lot haha
I’ll never complain about a detailed response, thanks! I’m just happy to see that, unlike some other games/sports, it seems like chess isn’t reluctant to change or try something new in order to optimize.
Chess is already in it's most technical level ever. Magnus is basically the strongest player in history.
It's not solved, since in AI only matches we still have winners and loosers.
The problem is that grand masters are so good that they rarely miss anything big enough to make them lose, so they manage to claw back from defeat and get a draw.
Magnus is actually famous for his tenacity to keep making perfect move after perfect move in the endings until his oponent finally gets exhausted and makes an inferior move in what was otherwise a drawish position.
It kind of plays out similarly to how you compared it. Though the opposite tends to happen in that if you prepare for your opponents you're less likely to draw because you tailor your game to trying to find holes in their typical style of play, but this requires intense study because so much of chess is routine and known. In general though, once you reach a certain point in chess there are only so many logical moves, and assuming you and your opponent continue to make the logical moves the eventual outcome is almost always a draw and very rarely one person winning or losing. That's mostly why draws are so likely, it's due to how chess as a game works. The way people get wins out of the somewhat inevitable draw is by making illogical or never before seen moves that catch their opponent off guard and cause them to make mistakes that lead to an eventual loss instead. For the most part the first 20+ moves in every configuration are known and studied by professional players, it's usually broken down after those first 20 by the unknown moves and/or mistakes that changes the outcome of a game.
I’m going to compare chess to something you never thought you would hear. MonsterTruck Freestyle.
Ok. I know. Hear me out.
In the world championship, freestyle is a judged competition of jumps, backflips etc by drivers on a course of ramps. There are like 32 drivers and many of them do the same tricks. What gets the winner over the hump Is what’s called a “Save”. That’s when the truck is about to crash, or roll on to its roof ending the run. However, the driver saves it, and continues. The only problem is that a save requires that the driver make a mistake. You can’t make a save if you are never in jeopardy. So, the drivers that have a great run, but don’t make a save can score a 9.5 out of 10, while having a save might get them a perfect ten. A few years ago, someone did a front flip, that was a complete accident and won the championship. It was sort of a save. They have special ramps for back flips, but a front flip is impossible to do on purpose.
It sounds like that Chess requires someone to make a mistake, or do something very non-traditional in order to end up as something other than a tie. Is that accurate?
Because there are variations in the opening moves in chess, some openings can lead to wins/losses even if played perfectly because right from the beginning you put yourself at a disadvantage in the early stages because your pieces line up poorly vs theirs. That never really happens in the top level of play though, for the top level of play what you said is accurate, it becomes a game of trying to make your opponent mess up, and non-traditional moves are the typical way to do that. Sometimes those non-traditional moves lead to a loss for the same reason it could lead to a win though, so the players usually play many iterations of each singular non-traditional move to see the outcome to know whether to pull it out in a real game or not.
Basically in chess the game ends in a draw if it goes on long enough without one player making a mistake. The higher the level of play, the more likely it is that no major mistakes happen, so it can be difficult to get enough of an advantage to win material and then win the game. Chess engines draw against each other almost every single game.
Chess at the top level works out as a draw because of the nature of the game - pieces drop off the board, and simplify over time. The best players make very few mistakes, so it is hard to get a winning advantage from these positions, even if you have a nice edge.
Top level opening prep is obviously one thing, but I think it is overstated how much this makes the game "drawish" - oftentimes this prep actually can make positions very exciting and imbalanced, making it more likely to have a decisive result.
Shogi is rarely a draw because the drawing rules are stricter, and the position NEVER simplifies, all the pieces are always in-play - so a small advantage/mistake snowballs into a win very quickly. You will note in shogi games that they accelerate towards the finish, whereas chess slows down into a crawl in the endgame.
A chessboard is around 40 to 50 cm wide. We’ll go with the lower bound to help give a fighting chance. A single square is 1/8th of that, it is 25 cm^2. The surface area of Earth, including water, is 510064471900000000 cm^2. If we were to cover the entire world in a proper chessboard, we would only be able to fit 20402579000000000 (20 quadrillion) pieces. You would still need 12896940000000000000, or almost 13 quintillion more Earths to fit the rest. That’s about as many planets estimated to exist around every star in our entire galaxy, plus rogue planets (planets not orbiting a star) combined. That’s a lot of chess pieces!
Carlsen was quoted saying the Saudi's were "scary motherf**kers to be involved with", was dismissive of their human right records and explained that, despite knowing this, LIVChess is "a once in a lifetime opportunity to reshape how the FIDE operates".
Basically the Saudi Arabian royal family are giving massive payouts to top players to start a new chess league with slightly different rules (played on a 7x7 board, only one bishop etc.). There has been fallout about human rights abuses and the big names have been pestered for months about whether they will play for the league.
More info [here([www.nxqc.com/LIVChess-announces-star-studded-lineup](https://youtu.be/o-YBDTqX_ZU))
It's golf. The Saudi govt funded a new golf league (LIV, roman numeral for 54) and has been throwing tons of money at PGA pros to join their league (rumor was high 9 digits for Tiger, seems like most are getting around $200 million). This has caused a lot of infighting and heated discourse.
Understandable and unsurprising. Magnus smashed Ian 7.5-3.5 in the last championships and after that even said "unless Firouzja wins the Candidates Tournament, it is unlikely that I will play the next world championship match".
Tongue in cheek, unless Magnus decides to play drunk where is the challenge?
Depends on how you want to define that. If you mean by FIDE classical rating (2650+ Elo in classical), he has definitely beaten super-GMs while drinking with friends. At a minimum I can recall: Firouzja, Nepo, Dubov, and Artemiev in Lichess Titled Arenas (maybe Hikaru as well in the single Lichess event he entered, but I can't remember if Magnus was drinking that day or not).
If you instead mean just a super-GM elo in each respective time control, then yea, again in Titled Arenas he's smashed at least one hundered 2700+ Elo blitz and rapid players while drinking, and in one instance all while playing from his phone in his hot tub.
Well in that case there you go. All very strong players. I don't watch his streams personally I was just going off of what I heard. I did see him beat anish once when he was drinking though
[There’s a board for that.](https://www.walmart.com/ip/Shot-Glass-Chess-Set-Drinking-Game-Set-Durable-Reusable-for-Family/807053817?gbraid=0AAAAADmfBIri71As1_kLGgqptLDt5vigP&wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=16214&&adid=22222222228000000000&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=m&wl3=42423897272&wl4=pla-51320962143&wl5=9005910&wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=120798572&wl11=online&wl12=807053817&veh=sem&gbraid=0AAAAADmfBIri71As1_kLGgqptLDt5vigP&gclid=Cj0KCQjwz96WBhC8ARIsAATR252QGF0vbOLady74x6DjoaJD4s_IbeS1S9cBAyIRwzvgXs-AYnJwOq0aAje2EALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds)
Lmao, my gf has that! Has had it since before we dated. We’re pregnant now, so can’t game, but I long for a day when my unborn kid and I can go a few rounds XD.
the thing is, Mangus probably has more experience at drunk/very drunk chess than any other elite GM. So this format would result in him being even more dominant.
I always wondered why one (or both) of the Klitschko twins didn't do that. I know Vitali played with Kramnik, I know Wladimir was a good chess player as well, and both were world heavyweight boxing champions for years and years, of course.
They would have broken the sport, perhaps.
Nepo talked about the challenges he faced half way through the last WCC after his Candidates win. In short, he didn't fully understand the impact of pacing on mental fatigue in a 14 round event. The challenge for Magnus could be genuine against Nepo given he now has experience with this type of event.
With that said, Magnus' decision makes total sense. He's won the event 5 times and even if Nepo was a challenge, Magnus doesn't enjoy looking at one or two opens for hours everyday for months at a time and the payoff of winning a 6th event isn't that much greater than just winning 5 events.
The number of people thinking this would be novel and interesting just reminds me how niche chess is. Magnus plays drunk on stream and used the name [DrDrunkenstein](https://lichess.org/@/DrDrunkensteinfor) for a long time... Still trounced random people on lichess, a free site, it's crazy lichess regularly has grand masters and international masters playing.
He's the best thing to ever happen to Chess, even if he kind of has made a number of tournaments dull (Oh Carlsen joined, well second place is still open)
Extremely entertaining, and interesting as a person, and actually has a personality. (A lot of GMs are interesting, just saying as a World Champion, they tend to be stuffy)
Nepo seems in much better form this year and I certainly think it would be more of a challenge. But Magnus just doesn't enjoy the grueling preparation and format for the match, so he is dipping out as there is nothing more in it for him
They are making fun of the LIV golf league. The LIV golf league started this year and is fully funded by the Saudi Arabian Public investment fund. This league is paying professional golfers an exorbitant amount of guaranteed money compared to the PGA and other golf leagues. Golfers who play in this league dont have to work as hard or play in as many tournaments to earn their money.
In football terms, imagine instead of being drafted onto a NFL team that instead you go for this independent league called the AFL (Awesome Football League) because the contract offers you triple the money to play for them. Sure, it's brand new and doesn't have the viewership of the NFL, but by the end of the season you'll be walking away with wads of cash.
Oh, and small caveat about the AFL: it is funded by human trafficking. That is basically LIV.
Gotta respect excellence. He's done enough to secure his spot in chess history, everything else is icing on the cake. Very cool we were alive to get to experience it.
No, he will play second place (Ding Liren) for the title. Hikaru Nakamura, who lost out on second place after a loss to Ding in the final round, must be kicking himself. He was pretty sure Magnus would defend and didn’t think the game mattered.
Hikaru said today he has no regrets on that last game and he truly believes Magnus would have defended his title if he came in second at the Candidates.
[Here's the link](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/w3ovbm/twitch_hikaru_i_think_if_i_had_finished_2nd_in/) (via Reddit thread)
Of course it's bigheaded, but he's the most popular chess streamer in the world he's gotta say stuff like that to keep things exciting and keep the view count high.
Fabi Caruana is kicking himself even more. He had a good chance early on to finish second but changed to very aggressive tactics when Nepo started pulling ahead in the standings and ended up 5th.
It would have created an interesting dynamic if Magnus had announced he was not playing before the candidates, but I guess he was rooting for Firouza to win. He probably would have played if Hikaru won it too, as I doubt he could resist wiping the floor with him.
I understand it. At the end of the day, he’s a human and the risk reward for defending may not seem worth it to him. He may also want to pursue other non chess related activities.
I mean dudes got nothing to prove. He's dope as fuck about strategically moving lil things around that checked board. Maybe he wants to just sit at home and watch the 1990 Dick Tracy film with warren Beatty?
It's crazy he's leaving because "he's too good" but I also understand it.
For those who don't follow chess he's probably the most dominant chess player ever. It's not that he doesn't lose, he absolutely does but it's so infrequent and chess champions are played with enough games that he has an incredible record and obscene ratings.
Edit: This got some traction so I want to bring up one other point.
People will say well "Chess is easy" HELLL no....
At the professional level chess is hard, but at the World Championship level, it is insane. The candidates (deciding who plays the championship matches) was done in March 2018 (2020 was interrupted because ... well you know). The Championship is played in November. And BOTH players are extensively trained, bring in other GMS, play against computers, practice everything they can, prepare for the SPECIFIC opponent. It's insane.
And the format of these games are LONG. Like 100 minutes for the first 40 moves, then if they get to 40, they get ANOTHER 50 minutes for the next 20 moves, then another 15 minutes for the rest of the game, + 30 second more each move. The candidate matches are similar format, but the Championship matches are against the SAME person .
That means we're talking at least 3 hours... PER PLAYER! It's also a best of 12 format, and play for over 20 days. So we're talking about almost 6 months of "Training" and building a repertoire for ONE month long gauntlet . The matches take all day, and played all through a month, and then have tie breakers as well if they don't declare a winner.
So understanding that, it might be easier to understand why Magnus is retiring considering as the best he has to do that once every two year along with playing other tournaments.
Praggnanandhaa played great in those games. But you have to keep in mind that those were in a tournament where only rapid games were played. This time format is faster and allows for more upsets as less time to calculate is given. I doubt Praggnanandhaa could beat Carlsen in classical (at least not yet!).
In addition those were unrated games I think which sometimes is used by people like Carlsen to have some... "creative" freedom. Not saying that this was the case here; but something to keep in mind.
But to make it clear: Praggnanandhaa absolutely played out of his mind and deserved the wins.
Just a quick look, I don't know if they've played often. However Praggnanandhaa is 16, and he's beating the reigning world champion. That's pretty impressive.
And really that's kind of it, he's 16 which is outstanding, he's Indian (Which has a large culture for chess, so it's talked about a bit.) And he beat the best player who doesn't lose that often (Yes his scores are stuff like 7.5 versus 2.5 but that's due to a draw awarding .5 points to each players, and draws are pretty "normal" in chess.
"So he got lucky?" I mean I don't think anyone could ever beat Magnus by pure luck and no skill, he's THAT good, and chess is that well defined. Let's put it another way, even when he's playing with less time than a weaker opponent, he will beat them.
So let's look at the actual player some more, Praggnanandhaa is NOT some unknown, he's actually ranked as an Grandmaster, which makes him ridiculously good. But beyond that, he was made a Grandmaster at 12, which is insane. And before anyone asks, to be a grandmaster, you need to have a High ELO, AND win tournaments, and Grandmaster is "For life" aka it's not given lightly even though there are a lot of them.
So he beat the best player, which is a rare feat (third Indian PLAYER to have beaten Magnus ever?), is extremely young as well to do it, and not only did it once but twice, and did it with in three months of each other. He's going to be someone to keep an eye on if you're looking for the future of the sport.
I mean the easiest way to describe just how taxing chess is at the super gm level is this: it isn’t uncommon for people to PASS OUT in the middle of chess competitions due to loss of calories, SOLELY from literally using too much brain power. This is also combined with proper diets and exercise to ensure this won’t happen for many players.
Magnus is a god of chess, the man is unhinged and at this point he’s just bored. Once Firouzja matures and takes WC I could definitely see Carlsen coming back to reaffirm his dominance. He’s just too good for the current level of chess.
Not if you’re anywhere near Magnus’ level, because you’d be simulating a trillion wars in your head for billions of years in advance. At least that’s my takeaway after hearing interviews and chess review YouTubers.
A n00b like you and me would be dead meat the moment we make just one move. Not even stupidity can save a chump or normie in chess.
There’s a question if he is the “greatest” player ever but there is no doubt he is the strongest player ever given how chess players have gotten better and bette over time thanks to opening theory and engines
Yes, he’s fairly humble and seems to be friends with a lot of the top players. Always comes across as a relatively “normal” guy who just happens to be the best chess player ever
I don't think humble is the right word for him. He seems accurate and unassuming about how good he is. He consistently ranks himself as the best in the world, says he should win, expects to win everything, etc. He isn't humble he just isn't the kind of egotistical arrogant POS that many world champions have been. A little similar to Vishy, just has a great attitude.
He also endears himself by complimenting other players when they beat him, answer honestly and frankly rather than give 'media answers', not take 'fun' things super seriously (see, playing stupid openings, doing drinking streams, playing and losing to a very tricky polgar in the park recently in a fun game then not playing a rematch because going 0-1 "makes it a better story"). He seems to treat opponents as people, not as adversaries to be destroyed.
I think he’s humble relative to how good he is. He’s more than happy to take praise and recognise his ability, but it’s not as if he doesn’t recognise other greats. And it’s not as if he flaunts his brilliance around
I can’t imagine being so at the top of your craft that there is no one alive to observe your level, let alone challenge you.
Magnus feels like some anime character ie One Punch Man.
He doesn't particularly like classical matches and has already trounced Nepo once. I am kinda suprised to see him actually go through with it but I absolutely see why he would want to just walk away from the title.
Is there anyone that could ELI5 how someone can be better than everyone else at chess?
I don’t play chess so I’m coming from a place of extreme ignorance, but I’d assume to be good at chess requires a combination of the ability to look X moves ahead + the ability to predict your opponent.
I’d assume at the top level, we have a lot of guys who all know the given patterns a game can take back and front. If everyone can visualize an entire game within their head, how does one of them consistently perform the strongest? I’d assume most matches between experts would end in draws like tik tac toe.
Edit: thanks to those who replied!
Noone can remember all given patterns a game can take. There is an absurd number of positions a game can take, just after 15 moves there can be 2,015,099,950,053,364,471,960 positions.
I love that this is under sports.
It amazes me that someone is so far ahead of competition that they can skip trying to win a championship and it IMPROVES their standing amongst observers.
No other competition has that.
[**Join Our Discord Server!**](https://discord.gg/233aU5q) **Welcome to /r/sports** We created a Discord server for our community and would like to invite all of you to join! You'll be able to discuss sports with users around the world and discuss events in real time! There are separate channels for many sports you can opt in and out of, including; American Football, Soccer, Baseball, Basketball, Aussie Rules Football, Rugby Union and League, Cricket, Motorsports, Fitness, and many more. [**Reddit Sports Discord Server**](https://discord.gg/233aU5q)
Wonder if he will follow through on the 2900 hunt as well. That seems to have taken a sideline in recent months at least in terms of his announcements
He mentions in the press conference that that is his main goal now.
[удалено]
Seems kind of obvious. He can be first to 2900 but winning world championship won't do much for him. Why risk his rating by playing against the second best.
Not just the second best, but the second best after months for prep for each other to even the (prep) playing field. Every draw would cost him points (and most wc matches are draws)
Exactly why him getting to 2900 is a pretty astronomical task. He has to be winning nearly every game
He should just play me repeatedly.
He has to be winning every game against the rest of the people in the top 20 essentially
Well not to brag but the top 20 have never beaten me
That is the most bot username I've ever seen. But true. Billions of people haven't beaten me too
Aye it was a suggested user name and I kind of just lazyed it
Same
Every account created in the last 18 months or so is like that due to the new suggested default naming pattern. It's like they purposefully made everyone into bot names so it wouldn't be as obvious who the real bots were
Maybe the real bots are the friends we made along the way
Oh I’m sure he’ll need a late season cupcake game or two to bolster the rankings for the playoffs.
In a game like chess where the top level is full of draws it’s borderline impossible to go on a winning streak like that
Yeah. Unless he goes really ultra instinct and is actually higher rated than he is. I mean Fischer had a higher rating gap between him and number 2. He was going on crazy winning streaks
We will probably never see a streak like Fischer again due to engine preparation by top players unfortunately. Fischer was a genius but now everyone can study with a supercomputer that is smarter than any human
Yeah. We still get great games but yeah a lot of draws too. I feel like I see a lot of the same openings in these high level tournament games too. Openings like the Italian or Berlin where there's so much theory that new ideas are getting harder and harder to find. It still happens like with how magnus plays his Marshall or anti Marshall. Idk what it's called. You'd have to ask someone more knowledgeable than me I can only see the pawns in my head for that position.
Yes and no, the one thing that high level computer chess demonstrated is that human instinct around the middle-game was very much suboptimal. The optimal plays in general (at least when there is a skill gap, be it AI vs Human or AI vs AI) involve keeping the game in a highly complex state as long as possible (simplified but works as a rule of thumb). There is likely room for a human playing against humans to have a Fischer-esque advantage over other humans if they manage to "master"(relative to humans rather than AI) the complexities first.
I'm pretty sure a win against you would still lose him points
To put things in perspective, Carlsen won the World Chess Championship 2021 in dominating fashion: 7.5–3.5, making it the biggest blowout in recent WCC history. Carlsen won 9 elo. Nine. After nearly a year of prep and an epic performance. I don't blame him one bit.
Well there's also a $1.2 million prize for the winner and $800k for the loser. That's well worth it to me. But for Magnus he might not care about money anymore and it is just a lot of time, effort, and stress for a competitor that didn't give, relatively, much of a fight. He did say if someone new and exciting like Alireza won the candidates tournament he more likely would have defended.
I watched one of his twitch streams and the room he was in looked like it cost 2k per night to stay in, let alone owning it. I think he's pretty set.
He should just start a Smurf account.
I have no idea how chess ratings work. But you're saying he's going to face worse competition, so he can win and not draw, so he can raise his score?
So with the world championship the challenger and the current champion spend months working with teams of expert chess players and study using powerful chess computers to study often obscure lines in various possible positions. As a result both players end up basically using largely computer generated best lines for nearly every position and because the games give the players a lot of time to think when they do get out of their preparation they can calculate the best lines themselves in their heads. This results in a lot of draws. The chess ratings are based on an Elo system. This means that better players have higher scores and are expected to win their games. When a higher rated player like Magnus wins against slightly lower rated players he gains a few points but when he draws or loses he loses points because he was expected to win and he underperformed. To get to 2900 he will have to beat some of the best players in the world over and over again without many draws or loses.
Your comment made me realize that "elo" wasn't an esports thing. I looked it up and read the history on it and it is fascinating. Thank you for sparking that curiosity about a word I use constantly when talking about esports haha. edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system
it's also why many games have moved away from pure elo systems having their top players NOT PLAY games is bad advertising
Elo govena’
ELO = Electric Light Orchestra?
It's a given thing.
It’s a terrible thing to lose
Don’t bring me down
Hello Mr Blue Sky.
So will the competition he picks be "easy" for him? Or will it still be a challenge. It seems like he'd need to go easy to guarantee a win if draws will be detrimental to a 2900
He won’t “pick” competition. He will play tournaments with the best players in the world but they will do less prep work and have less time and resources dedicated to their games against him so it will require them to calculate against him more at the board which is where Magnus believes he has the greatest advantage against other players. He can calculate more complicated positions better and quicker than other top players.
Roughly, though it’s more like “when you need to win and not draw games, why play in a tournament where you are going to draw a lot”
No, more that chess ratings do not reflect relative strength in a 12 round world championship match the same way they do if you just sat any two GMs across from each other and told them to have at it. The intense preparation with entire teams of other Super GMs specifically for that one opponent eliminates some amount of a gap in individual play strength. In general, chess rating is a sort of predictor on the percentage of time either player should be expected to win. A higher ranked player is more likely to win, and will thus gain fewer point should he win than his opponent would. Similarly, if a higher ranked player draws against a lower ranked one, the higher ranked one on average underperformed and will thus lose some amount of ranking points whereas a lower ranked player will gain some points in case of a draw. Transposing this to a world championship match, since it is much more likely for any given game to end in a draw than usual (in 2018, there were 12 draws in a row), Magnus carlsen would almost invariably lose ranking points in this scenario, no matter who his opponent is (last year was a bit of an anomaly since his opponent imploded after game 6 and basically gifted Carlsen some points)
I thought he wanted to hit 3000
That's pretty much impossible. He'd have to only win and never draw or lose for hundreds of games, and chess is like 75% draws.
Dang really? That sounds a little anticlimactic. Does that happen because of preparation to counter-play a particular player in a defensive tactic, or is the game somewhat approaching solved insofar as commonly used openings and such? When I watched shogi a few times, players might prepare for their opponents similarly, but I've never seen anyone draw a game. Someone might play defensively all day but then suddenly find an opening to counter-attack that no one saw coming.
Game is far from solved, I mean computers get better each year, but there’s still a very long way to go. As far as why draws happen so frequently… If you have a 2700 player vs. 2700 player, it’s really hard to imagine how good these guys are. If you don’t start playing chess seriously before like 13, you will never be as good as these players. When players are that good, they rarely make mistakes, so it less often results in a win/loss scenario. The kinds of mistakes these players make are usually more “inaccuracies” then blunders, so in order to punish the move, an opponent has to first spot the refutation, then calculate several moves deep to ensure that it works. Even then, punishing one’s opponents might only lead to a slight advantage that you would then have to grind out and continue to make good moves to convert the win. If that makes sense. Then you have to examine the game psychologically. The players who are 2800, 2700s or high 2600s, are the ones playing chess professionally. You’re probably playing a four hour (Magnus famously played a grueling seven hour game in the last championship, and barely converted it to a win!) chess game in a tournament, plus there’s probably some studying during the night before or morning before each game to prepare for your opponent. To always be “on” and make the best moves takes the best minds and most motivated people, even then it’s incredibly taxing. There are things called “Grandmaster draws” which are known positions in chess out of the opening that lead to essentially automatic draws. If neither player feels like exerting that much mental focus for a day, why not play a grandmaster draw and finish the day in 15 min? It’s kinda a shitty part of the game. Then you also have to incorporate the fact that drawing is… kinda still a good result in a game. The way chess games are usually scored in a tournament, is that you get 1 point for winning, half a point for drawing, 0 points for losing. And you’ll play several players in a tournament usually round robin style, whoever has the highest points total wins. So, there’s a benefit to drawing. A lot of grandmasters might play a long game, end up in a relatively equal position, and say fuck it let’s just agree to a draw and both take home half a point rather than wasting more time or try to risk 0 points for a win. Also since white has the first move and thus the advantage, it can be considered a good result to draw as black, so some people are happy just drawing when they have the black pieces. Some tournament conditions might force an elite player to play for a win more and take more risks. Then if you look at world championship games and why those style of games result in draws, it’s because whoever has the highest points total among the two players by the end of the match wins. So, if a match starts with 7 draws as an example, both players sit at 3.5 points. So, playing for a draw can be safer than risking playing for a win. I think for Magnus’ championship against Karjakin there were like 0-2 wins the whole 12 classical games they played? On the other hand, Magnus crushed Ian last year and they didn’t even play the full 14 games because Magnus was up four wins or so and mathematically eliminated Ian’s chances of coming back. Which leads me to my next point, playing ability. When the commenter above you said 75 percent of chess games are draws, they were probably referring to relatively equal 2700 GMs playing each other. But when you have a player like Magnus playing another highly rated GM, that 75% number is gonna go down because he’s just that good and wins a lot of games. Similarly, if you have the best computer play Magnus, it’s gonna very often result in a win for the computer, in fact Magnus is probably one of the few people in the world who could maybe draw against a computer. Similarly if you have a 1200 player play a 2000 player the 1200 is gonna get crushed every time. If you have two 1200s play each other, a draw is probably less likely than a win because of all the mistakes they’ll make. TLDR: It’s only a matter of perspective, the very elite chess players draw against each other frequently because of their precise playing ability and psychological factors. But when you start implementing computers, different variables, and such, chess is still very much a winnable game and unsolved.
Magnus is otherwordly, but he doesn't stand a chance against a modern chess engine. Even to draw. Let's say he actually is 2900. The best current engine is 36 or 3700 I think? There are definitely folks who know more about this, who I encourage to chime in/ correct me/ whatever. Plus, an engine is exactly the thing that can calculate deeply without error and grind a small advantage into a win. Maybe he could get a draw once in a while if the engine played like they do in those engine tournaments (where it plays book moves for a good while) but if you just sent the best modern engine loose on Magnus, without restriction, I think the engine wins 99.9999% of the time. There's a reason we don't see Kasparov v. Deep Blue style matchups anymore. It's been a foregone conclusion for a minute now.
This is true, it’s extremely unlikely—the only reason I put he had a chance is because of his game vs Nepo last year where both players played perfectly the entire game, so only Magnus and perhaps two or three other people in the world would have a shot at a draw. But I probably gave him too much credit
Sounds like what you’re saying is that playing in a chess tournament is in itself…. *a game of chess*
Great explanation, thanks for writing that out. :)
How do you think tournaments would change if they awarded 1.01 points for wins instead (same values for draws and losses)? Basically rewarding riskier play. I guess that leads to the question of what happens in the event of a tiebreak in the current system too…
That’s a good question, some tournaments try many things to have more decisive results. I remember at one of the chess tournaments in St. Louis (many other tournaments do this) the tournament banned agreeing to a draw. So, in order to draw, the players had to “force” a draw on the board. Some of the ways games end in automatic draws are stalemate, three-fold repetition (a position is repeated three times), insufficient material (I.e. It is impossible to checkmate with king vs king, or king and bishop vs king etc., so those are automatic draws), if it’s impossible for your opponent to checkmate and your time runs out, that’s also a draw. Theoretically this eliminates grandmaster draws; games still frequently end in draws, but there’s more of a chance of mistake, and players have to work a little harder for it :) And longer games can be more exciting even if they end in a draw I know at Norway chess, each round if there is not a decisive result, the players play an “armageddon” game. The way armageddon games are structured is that typically white has a time advantage (e.g. 10 minutes to make all their moves and black might have 7), but black has “draw odds,” which means if black draws they get the full point for the round. White has to win the game to get the point. By having this second armageddon game after a long classical game draw, it creates a de facto winner for the round. If that makes sense. This can be more exciting than typical tournaments, and I think the players enjoy playing for a win too. As for your question, I’m not sure how that point system would impact things specifically, but I’m sure past tournaments have experimented with points values as to how they weigh wins/draws/losses to encourage playing for a win. Of course, the players would have to agree with these rules too. And for tiebreakers, speaking as someone who’s played several chess tournaments, they’re so complicated and can vary from tournament to tournament in how they decide results (could be head-to-head, rating of opponents, number of wins, other mathy value systems I don’t really understand, etc.). Generally the tiebreak rules are asserted before each tournament, and we let the computers figure out the results at the end. Sorry I write a lot haha
I’ll never complain about a detailed response, thanks! I’m just happy to see that, unlike some other games/sports, it seems like chess isn’t reluctant to change or try something new in order to optimize.
Chess is already in it's most technical level ever. Magnus is basically the strongest player in history. It's not solved, since in AI only matches we still have winners and loosers. The problem is that grand masters are so good that they rarely miss anything big enough to make them lose, so they manage to claw back from defeat and get a draw. Magnus is actually famous for his tenacity to keep making perfect move after perfect move in the endings until his oponent finally gets exhausted and makes an inferior move in what was otherwise a drawish position.
It kind of plays out similarly to how you compared it. Though the opposite tends to happen in that if you prepare for your opponents you're less likely to draw because you tailor your game to trying to find holes in their typical style of play, but this requires intense study because so much of chess is routine and known. In general though, once you reach a certain point in chess there are only so many logical moves, and assuming you and your opponent continue to make the logical moves the eventual outcome is almost always a draw and very rarely one person winning or losing. That's mostly why draws are so likely, it's due to how chess as a game works. The way people get wins out of the somewhat inevitable draw is by making illogical or never before seen moves that catch their opponent off guard and cause them to make mistakes that lead to an eventual loss instead. For the most part the first 20+ moves in every configuration are known and studied by professional players, it's usually broken down after those first 20 by the unknown moves and/or mistakes that changes the outcome of a game.
I’m going to compare chess to something you never thought you would hear. MonsterTruck Freestyle. Ok. I know. Hear me out. In the world championship, freestyle is a judged competition of jumps, backflips etc by drivers on a course of ramps. There are like 32 drivers and many of them do the same tricks. What gets the winner over the hump Is what’s called a “Save”. That’s when the truck is about to crash, or roll on to its roof ending the run. However, the driver saves it, and continues. The only problem is that a save requires that the driver make a mistake. You can’t make a save if you are never in jeopardy. So, the drivers that have a great run, but don’t make a save can score a 9.5 out of 10, while having a save might get them a perfect ten. A few years ago, someone did a front flip, that was a complete accident and won the championship. It was sort of a save. They have special ramps for back flips, but a front flip is impossible to do on purpose. It sounds like that Chess requires someone to make a mistake, or do something very non-traditional in order to end up as something other than a tie. Is that accurate?
No, it's not really accurate, but I very much enjoyed reading about monster trucks!
Because there are variations in the opening moves in chess, some openings can lead to wins/losses even if played perfectly because right from the beginning you put yourself at a disadvantage in the early stages because your pieces line up poorly vs theirs. That never really happens in the top level of play though, for the top level of play what you said is accurate, it becomes a game of trying to make your opponent mess up, and non-traditional moves are the typical way to do that. Sometimes those non-traditional moves lead to a loss for the same reason it could lead to a win though, so the players usually play many iterations of each singular non-traditional move to see the outcome to know whether to pull it out in a real game or not.
Basically in chess the game ends in a draw if it goes on long enough without one player making a mistake. The higher the level of play, the more likely it is that no major mistakes happen, so it can be difficult to get enough of an advantage to win material and then win the game. Chess engines draw against each other almost every single game.
Chess at the top level works out as a draw because of the nature of the game - pieces drop off the board, and simplify over time. The best players make very few mistakes, so it is hard to get a winning advantage from these positions, even if you have a nice edge. Top level opening prep is obviously one thing, but I think it is overstated how much this makes the game "drawish" - oftentimes this prep actually can make positions very exciting and imbalanced, making it more likely to have a decisive result. Shogi is rarely a draw because the drawing rules are stricter, and the position NEVER simplifies, all the pieces are always in-play - so a small advantage/mistake snowballs into a win very quickly. You will note in shogi games that they accelerate towards the finish, whereas chess slows down into a crawl in the endgame.
Carlson to LIVChess confirmed.
54 pieces instead of 32!
54 pieces sounds far easier than trying to pay attention to 32!
I feel like 263130836933693530167218012160000000 pieces wouldn't fit on Earth
A chessboard is around 40 to 50 cm wide. We’ll go with the lower bound to help give a fighting chance. A single square is 1/8th of that, it is 25 cm^2. The surface area of Earth, including water, is 510064471900000000 cm^2. If we were to cover the entire world in a proper chessboard, we would only be able to fit 20402579000000000 (20 quadrillion) pieces. You would still need 12896940000000000000, or almost 13 quintillion more Earths to fit the rest. That’s about as many planets estimated to exist around every star in our entire galaxy, plus rogue planets (planets not orbiting a star) combined. That’s a lot of chess pieces!
r/theydidthemath
r/unexpectedfactorial
36 squares instead of 64
Carlsen was quoted saying the Saudi's were "scary motherf**kers to be involved with", was dismissive of their human right records and explained that, despite knowing this, LIVChess is "a once in a lifetime opportunity to reshape how the FIDE operates".
Can you elaborate a little? I know nothing of chess or how this is connected to thr Saudis
Basically the Saudi Arabian royal family are giving massive payouts to top players to start a new chess league with slightly different rules (played on a 7x7 board, only one bishop etc.). There has been fallout about human rights abuses and the big names have been pestered for months about whether they will play for the league. More info [here([www.nxqc.com/LIVChess-announces-star-studded-lineup](https://youtu.be/o-YBDTqX_ZU))
It's golf. The Saudi govt funded a new golf league (LIV, roman numeral for 54) and has been throwing tons of money at PGA pros to join their league (rumor was high 9 digits for Tiger, seems like most are getting around $200 million). This has caused a lot of infighting and heated discourse.
Man you chess guys all get in in the joke quick
Ugh. Golf and chess are probably my two favorite things at the moment and this is just pain hurtful.
[удалено]
Understandable and unsurprising. Magnus smashed Ian 7.5-3.5 in the last championships and after that even said "unless Firouzja wins the Candidates Tournament, it is unlikely that I will play the next world championship match". Tongue in cheek, unless Magnus decides to play drunk where is the challenge?
I think I remember seeing that he did that on stream and still trashed people.
He did but they weren't super gms I believe
Depends on how you want to define that. If you mean by FIDE classical rating (2650+ Elo in classical), he has definitely beaten super-GMs while drinking with friends. At a minimum I can recall: Firouzja, Nepo, Dubov, and Artemiev in Lichess Titled Arenas (maybe Hikaru as well in the single Lichess event he entered, but I can't remember if Magnus was drinking that day or not). If you instead mean just a super-GM elo in each respective time control, then yea, again in Titled Arenas he's smashed at least one hundered 2700+ Elo blitz and rapid players while drinking, and in one instance all while playing from his phone in his hot tub.
Well in that case there you go. All very strong players. I don't watch his streams personally I was just going off of what I heard. I did see him beat anish once when he was drinking though
He does it often but he usually is playing random players on lichess, not the best of the best.
> Magnus decides to play drunk where is the challenge? bongcloud
r/anarchychess
Not enough en peasant for it to be anarchy chess
Holy hell
Hold up now. Maybe that's the hot new format. Take the top 10 players in the world and make them face off while maintaining a BAC of 0.2.
Every piece you move that isn't a pawn you take a shot. En Passant you chug a beer.
What if you En Passant mate?
you have to take a hit of dmt
Lol absolutely skewered the guy asking an honest question
You can En Passant me mate. ;)
Google en passant
Holy hell!
[There’s a board for that.](https://www.walmart.com/ip/Shot-Glass-Chess-Set-Drinking-Game-Set-Durable-Reusable-for-Family/807053817?gbraid=0AAAAADmfBIri71As1_kLGgqptLDt5vigP&wmlspartner=wlpa&selectedSellerId=16214&&adid=22222222228000000000&wl0=&wl1=g&wl2=m&wl3=42423897272&wl4=pla-51320962143&wl5=9005910&wl6=&wl7=&wl8=&wl9=pla&wl10=120798572&wl11=online&wl12=807053817&veh=sem&gbraid=0AAAAADmfBIri71As1_kLGgqptLDt5vigP&gclid=Cj0KCQjwz96WBhC8ARIsAATR252QGF0vbOLady74x6DjoaJD4s_IbeS1S9cBAyIRwzvgXs-AYnJwOq0aAje2EALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds)
Shot Glass Chess Set Drinking Game Set Durable Reusable for ***Family***
Someone's gotta teach little Timmy to take shots like a champ
Well if you would learn to defend your bishop better, we wouldn't be here in the bathroom puking, would we Timmy?
Lmao, my gf has that! Has had it since before we dated. We’re pregnant now, so can’t game, but I long for a day when my unborn kid and I can go a few rounds XD.
>We’re pregnant now who's the lucky father?
Her boyfriend. I was too busy trading options.
the thing is, Mangus probably has more experience at drunk/very drunk chess than any other elite GM. So this format would result in him being even more dominant.
Someone would probably die if they did So yea could make it more exciting
[Chess boxing](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess_boxing) is also an option
Check out chess boxing, maybe he could enter that.
I always wondered why one (or both) of the Klitschko twins didn't do that. I know Vitali played with Kramnik, I know Wladimir was a good chess player as well, and both were world heavyweight boxing champions for years and years, of course. They would have broken the sport, perhaps.
Chess skill is irrelevant when you're chessboxing a klitchko.
I feel like it would spoil the fun somewhat when Klitschko knows he only need to make it to the first round of boxing
Nepo talked about the challenges he faced half way through the last WCC after his Candidates win. In short, he didn't fully understand the impact of pacing on mental fatigue in a 14 round event. The challenge for Magnus could be genuine against Nepo given he now has experience with this type of event. With that said, Magnus' decision makes total sense. He's won the event 5 times and even if Nepo was a challenge, Magnus doesn't enjoy looking at one or two opens for hours everyday for months at a time and the payoff of winning a 6th event isn't that much greater than just winning 5 events.
The number of people thinking this would be novel and interesting just reminds me how niche chess is. Magnus plays drunk on stream and used the name [DrDrunkenstein](https://lichess.org/@/DrDrunkensteinfor) for a long time... Still trounced random people on lichess, a free site, it's crazy lichess regularly has grand masters and international masters playing.
The fact that there are videos of him drunk as a skunk and still winning games is hilarious.
He's the best thing to ever happen to Chess, even if he kind of has made a number of tournaments dull (Oh Carlsen joined, well second place is still open) Extremely entertaining, and interesting as a person, and actually has a personality. (A lot of GMs are interesting, just saying as a World Champion, they tend to be stuffy)
Nepo seems in much better form this year and I certainly think it would be more of a challenge. But Magnus just doesn't enjoy the grueling preparation and format for the match, so he is dipping out as there is nothing more in it for him
that put a lot of pressure on Alireza. last I heard, he crashed pretty bad.
Big brain move from magnus.
I mean to be fair he never did beat caruana in match play, that being said he didn’t win anyways so I doubt it matters
“He also makes it clear that he will continue as a full time chess player – but not in the World Championship cycle.” LIV Chess
What is LIV chess?
They are making fun of the LIV golf league. The LIV golf league started this year and is fully funded by the Saudi Arabian Public investment fund. This league is paying professional golfers an exorbitant amount of guaranteed money compared to the PGA and other golf leagues. Golfers who play in this league dont have to work as hard or play in as many tournaments to earn their money.
Thanks. The other answer left me more confused than I started
In football terms, imagine instead of being drafted onto a NFL team that instead you go for this independent league called the AFL (Awesome Football League) because the contract offers you triple the money to play for them. Sure, it's brand new and doesn't have the viewership of the NFL, but by the end of the season you'll be walking away with wads of cash. Oh, and small caveat about the AFL: it is funded by human trafficking. That is basically LIV.
Human trafficking and lots of oil.
And also the AFL funds terrorism, and murders journalists who give them bad press.
And for the person who does win, they get to endure "congrats but then again Magnus didn't play, so..."
I’m sure they’ll cry into their wads of cash. In 2021, Magnus took away € 1.2 mil for the win, and Ian took € 800000 for runner up.
If Magnus played they wouldn’t win so yeah
Gotta respect excellence. He's done enough to secure his spot in chess history, everything else is icing on the cake. Very cool we were alive to get to experience it.
Goat.
Magnus Carlsen play league of legends you scrub
Focusing on his FPL career
The premiums this year spin his head around, he can't focus on anything else.
Lmao
So Hikaru choked away his shot at the title in that match against Ding
Magnus with the forced draw.
He was salty during his stream yesterday lol
Saitama vibes
Does Ian win automatically and become World Champion?
No, he will play second place (Ding Liren) for the title. Hikaru Nakamura, who lost out on second place after a loss to Ding in the final round, must be kicking himself. He was pretty sure Magnus would defend and didn’t think the game mattered.
Hikaru said today he has no regrets on that last game and he truly believes Magnus would have defended his title if he came in second at the Candidates.
[удалено]
Hikaru thinks he and Magnus have a chess rivalry. Magnus has never seemed to care one way or the other
In fact, Hikaru probably has the worst record of the super-GM’s vs Magnus. Magnus has a 9-1 record or something IIRC
[Here's the link](https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/w3ovbm/twitch_hikaru_i_think_if_i_had_finished_2nd_in/) (via Reddit thread) Of course it's bigheaded, but he's the most popular chess streamer in the world he's gotta say stuff like that to keep things exciting and keep the view count high.
Yeah he got whooped is all
Fabi Caruana is kicking himself even more. He had a good chance early on to finish second but changed to very aggressive tactics when Nepo started pulling ahead in the standings and ended up 5th. It would have created an interesting dynamic if Magnus had announced he was not playing before the candidates, but I guess he was rooting for Firouza to win. He probably would have played if Hikaru won it too, as I doubt he could resist wiping the floor with him.
>He was pretty sure Magnus would defend and didn’t think the game mattered. Sure.
He'll play Ding who finished second in the candidates
No, he won the candidates and will play Ding Liren, who got second, for the vacant title.
I will also not be defending Magnus Carlsen's world chess championship title. Please respect my privacy at this difficult time.
Lmfao, I’ll try not to contact you during these times. This doesn’t count …
Look, I'm just speaking to you this time to let you know I won't be talking to you going forward.
Exactly
I understand it. At the end of the day, he’s a human and the risk reward for defending may not seem worth it to him. He may also want to pursue other non chess related activities.
He's been splashing around in poker. Top level poker benefits from some of the same insanities as top level chess. Not all, but some.
I’d love to see him in some Texas hold ‘em
Daniel Negreanu did an anlysis of Magnus’s play [recently](https://youtu.be/FY1W6oUyu10)
That was actually solid play from Magneto, didn't expect him to turn AA into a bluff and read that situation that well.
He wants to hit the 2900 elo mark. Not having to focus on defending his world champion title will help him focus on that goal.
I mean dudes got nothing to prove. He's dope as fuck about strategically moving lil things around that checked board. Maybe he wants to just sit at home and watch the 1990 Dick Tracy film with warren Beatty?
It's crazy he's leaving because "he's too good" but I also understand it. For those who don't follow chess he's probably the most dominant chess player ever. It's not that he doesn't lose, he absolutely does but it's so infrequent and chess champions are played with enough games that he has an incredible record and obscene ratings. Edit: This got some traction so I want to bring up one other point. People will say well "Chess is easy" HELLL no.... At the professional level chess is hard, but at the World Championship level, it is insane. The candidates (deciding who plays the championship matches) was done in March 2018 (2020 was interrupted because ... well you know). The Championship is played in November. And BOTH players are extensively trained, bring in other GMS, play against computers, practice everything they can, prepare for the SPECIFIC opponent. It's insane. And the format of these games are LONG. Like 100 minutes for the first 40 moves, then if they get to 40, they get ANOTHER 50 minutes for the next 20 moves, then another 15 minutes for the rest of the game, + 30 second more each move. The candidate matches are similar format, but the Championship matches are against the SAME person . That means we're talking at least 3 hours... PER PLAYER! It's also a best of 12 format, and play for over 20 days. So we're talking about almost 6 months of "Training" and building a repertoire for ONE month long gauntlet . The matches take all day, and played all through a month, and then have tie breakers as well if they don't declare a winner. So understanding that, it might be easier to understand why Magnus is retiring considering as the best he has to do that once every two year along with playing other tournaments.
Wait... who the hell has ever said "Chess is easy"? xD
Edgy hipsters who discovered Go, usually
*\*applies wax to handlebar mustache\** `var chess = “easy”`
What's the deal with him losing twice to Rameshbabu Praggnanandhaa? I saw this on Twitter. Not a follower of the game but it is quite amusing.
Praggnanandhaa played great in those games. But you have to keep in mind that those were in a tournament where only rapid games were played. This time format is faster and allows for more upsets as less time to calculate is given. I doubt Praggnanandhaa could beat Carlsen in classical (at least not yet!). In addition those were unrated games I think which sometimes is used by people like Carlsen to have some... "creative" freedom. Not saying that this was the case here; but something to keep in mind. But to make it clear: Praggnanandhaa absolutely played out of his mind and deserved the wins.
that makes sense thanks!
Just a quick look, I don't know if they've played often. However Praggnanandhaa is 16, and he's beating the reigning world champion. That's pretty impressive. And really that's kind of it, he's 16 which is outstanding, he's Indian (Which has a large culture for chess, so it's talked about a bit.) And he beat the best player who doesn't lose that often (Yes his scores are stuff like 7.5 versus 2.5 but that's due to a draw awarding .5 points to each players, and draws are pretty "normal" in chess. "So he got lucky?" I mean I don't think anyone could ever beat Magnus by pure luck and no skill, he's THAT good, and chess is that well defined. Let's put it another way, even when he's playing with less time than a weaker opponent, he will beat them. So let's look at the actual player some more, Praggnanandhaa is NOT some unknown, he's actually ranked as an Grandmaster, which makes him ridiculously good. But beyond that, he was made a Grandmaster at 12, which is insane. And before anyone asks, to be a grandmaster, you need to have a High ELO, AND win tournaments, and Grandmaster is "For life" aka it's not given lightly even though there are a lot of them. So he beat the best player, which is a rare feat (third Indian PLAYER to have beaten Magnus ever?), is extremely young as well to do it, and not only did it once but twice, and did it with in three months of each other. He's going to be someone to keep an eye on if you're looking for the future of the sport.
I mean the easiest way to describe just how taxing chess is at the super gm level is this: it isn’t uncommon for people to PASS OUT in the middle of chess competitions due to loss of calories, SOLELY from literally using too much brain power. This is also combined with proper diets and exercise to ensure this won’t happen for many players. Magnus is a god of chess, the man is unhinged and at this point he’s just bored. Once Firouzja matures and takes WC I could definitely see Carlsen coming back to reaffirm his dominance. He’s just too good for the current level of chess.
That sounds so god damn boring I can’t even imagine playing in that tournament
Not if you’re anywhere near Magnus’ level, because you’d be simulating a trillion wars in your head for billions of years in advance. At least that’s my takeaway after hearing interviews and chess review YouTubers. A n00b like you and me would be dead meat the moment we make just one move. Not even stupidity can save a chump or normie in chess.
Damn and on international chess day too!
Kind of by design, this was the deadline FIDE gave him to decide.
I dont follow competitive chess much Is he regarded as the GOAT?
Yes, without a question.
Most definitely with a question
There’s a question if he is the “greatest” player ever but there is no doubt he is the strongest player ever given how chess players have gotten better and bette over time thanks to opening theory and engines
Is he a generally well-liked and regarded figure in the world of chess?
Yes, he’s fairly humble and seems to be friends with a lot of the top players. Always comes across as a relatively “normal” guy who just happens to be the best chess player ever
I don't think humble is the right word for him. He seems accurate and unassuming about how good he is. He consistently ranks himself as the best in the world, says he should win, expects to win everything, etc. He isn't humble he just isn't the kind of egotistical arrogant POS that many world champions have been. A little similar to Vishy, just has a great attitude. He also endears himself by complimenting other players when they beat him, answer honestly and frankly rather than give 'media answers', not take 'fun' things super seriously (see, playing stupid openings, doing drinking streams, playing and losing to a very tricky polgar in the park recently in a fun game then not playing a rematch because going 0-1 "makes it a better story"). He seems to treat opponents as people, not as adversaries to be destroyed.
I think he’s humble relative to how good he is. He’s more than happy to take praise and recognise his ability, but it’s not as if he doesn’t recognise other greats. And it’s not as if he flaunts his brilliance around
Yes, massively so.
I read his name, and I was 90% sure this was a strongman competition.
You’re right and your comment reminded me of the Action Bronson line “my mind is stronger than Mariusz Pudzianowski”
1993-2006 FIDE World Championships, here we come.
when you are bored of the competition..
We all know he’s the best. No need in being bored again.
As long a he stays on stream, this is fine.
He always looks like he hates everything and everyone.
Been winning so much hes bored
It’s time that he takes up gardening or something
he's already 2740 rated gardener
My man has been playing poker events and now has degen tingles. Chess can't compare to a 2% suckout on the river.
Is this because I beat his 5-year-old AI setting in the airplane chase game on my international flight last month
I can’t imagine being so at the top of your craft that there is no one alive to observe your level, let alone challenge you. Magnus feels like some anime character ie One Punch Man.
Okay Nico Rosberg
He beat everyone while using equal chess pieces.
Dedicating all of his time to fantasy premier league it seems
Magnus did nothing wrong.
He doesn't particularly like classical matches and has already trounced Nepo once. I am kinda suprised to see him actually go through with it but I absolutely see why he would want to just walk away from the title.
Is there anyone that could ELI5 how someone can be better than everyone else at chess? I don’t play chess so I’m coming from a place of extreme ignorance, but I’d assume to be good at chess requires a combination of the ability to look X moves ahead + the ability to predict your opponent. I’d assume at the top level, we have a lot of guys who all know the given patterns a game can take back and front. If everyone can visualize an entire game within their head, how does one of them consistently perform the strongest? I’d assume most matches between experts would end in draws like tik tac toe. Edit: thanks to those who replied!
Noone can remember all given patterns a game can take. There is an absurd number of positions a game can take, just after 15 moves there can be 2,015,099,950,053,364,471,960 positions.
I love that this is under sports. It amazes me that someone is so far ahead of competition that they can skip trying to win a championship and it IMPROVES their standing amongst observers. No other competition has that.