Printable View
I meant 2 (has to be challenging) to cover the demanding bit. I included skill as well as power/endurance because I wanted to cover sports like shooting, archery etc. That's definitely where it starts getting into a grey area though.Quote:
1. Has to be physicality demanding.
So... porn?Quote:
If you can pull a groin muscle, it is a sport.
Hack you getting really close to the "S" word, hey if it ain't rough it ain't fun kids.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hack
Horseracing, sport or just desperates beating their wage package?
I was looking at the FIDE top 100 rated Chess players. Topolov is # 2 on the list and Anand is # 4. The # 1 spot is held by a 20 year old Magnus Carlsen from Norway. There are only 4 players from the US in the top 100. None of those 4 were born in the US.
A "game" is where you sit on your keester, stuffing your face with Doritos and gulping Big Red, while accomplishing very little.Quote:
Originally Posted by honeybee
A "sport" requires moderate to high levels of physical exertion in order to obtain a goal.
There is some luck involved because you might make a move that appears to be good to you. There might be many reasons that the move is actually a great move but you don't see why so there can be some luck in it.
There's always a lot of luck involved, even in chess.Quote:
Originally Posted by jstnice
Though Magnus Carlson may top the list today, it's only a number game. Just like any other stats, you need to observe it over a period of time and not at any single point of time. Also there are many other achievements which are not rated. Bobby Fischer was probably the last US-born grandmaster to have dominated the world chess, but even then he wasn't a true blue American.
Another interesting point regarding chess is the blindfold games and the simultaneous games. In a blindfold game, the player playing blindfold cannot see the board. Throughout the duration of the game he has no access to the board. The opponent's move is communicated to him and his response is played back on the board by a third person. The player with the blindfold must have the ability to visualize the situation on the board and work out the different combinations in order to succeed.
Then there's the simultaneous play, where typically a strong player (such as a grandmaster) plays against a number of opponents (typically club player strength). Here the stronger player always plays White and all his opponents must play Black.
The deadliest of the types involves a combination of blindfold and simultaneous games. This involves a player playing blindfold against multiple opponents at the same time. This is the ultimate test of the memory and processing power of one's brains. However, the strain of playing such games proved too much for some players who went insane, and so these types of exhibitions were officially banned by the FIDE (so I hear).
The last anecdote on this as heard from my father is a grandmaster playing blindfold simultaneous match against more than 20 opponents announced a mate in four on a particular board. The spectactors (who included some renowned players of the time) gathered around the said board to find out ANY way of prolonging the mate beyond the fourth move. Any attempts would bring the mate closer, but not push it farther. No board in front of him, analysing hundreds of combinations on the various boards only with his mind, the grandmaster had the ability to announce mate on a specific board! Hats off.
And finally, Miguel Najdorf, who 'invented' the Najdorf variation of the Sicilian defence (for non-chess enthusiasts, the Sicilian Defense is one of the most popular - or probably the most popular - response to the traditional White's first move of e4, and the Najdorf variation in the Sicilian is almost as popular), was trounced in 24 moves by Bobby Fischer in an olympiad. The point to be noted is the night before the US team was to play Argentina, Fischer had bet he would defeat Najdorf in 25 moves, Fischer always opened with e4 and the game turned out to be a Sicilian Najdorf, kind of a home turf for the Argentinian grandmaster. It goes to prove the tremendous confidence Fischer had in his own game.
About luck, when Viktor Korchnoi played Anatoly Karpov for the world championship (Karpov became the world champion when Fischer refused to defend his title, and Korchnoi challenged Karpov after that), at a crucial game the situation on the board was tense. A clutch of players (with some famous grandmasters) were analysing the board situation and soon they concluded the position was lost for Karpov. There was a mate in five that could not be avoided. But Korchnoi (who was called the candidates' champion) faltered, could not find the move that would win him the game. Karpov saved the game and went on to defend his title.
.
Anand vs Topolov match is tied at 5 points for each. Anand apparently had a drawn game which he made a big mistake on and handed the game to Topolov. I can remember a game where I had a strong winning advantage and which I should have been able to easily convert to a win but my opponent didn't give up and I made a big mistake and ended up losing. Sometimes being ahead in a game makes you relax your concentration and then you make one move that completely wipes out the advantage you had.
I recall a game played in the University qualifying rounds, where me and my opponent were playing with two Bishops and a Pawn each, a dead draw position. I doggedly refused about three offers of draw from my opponent. He could have referred the matter to the arbiter who would have gladly obliged with a draw, but he decided to play on. Then he gave up his Pawn, then a Bishop and I then got his other Bishop on threatening to queen my Pawn. I can't forget the stupidity I showed in refusing the draw, and the stupidity shown by my opponent in handing the game over to me.
Anand Topalov is now tied at 5.5 each, I regreat Anand having squandered his one point advantage. A draw today would have handed him victory. Alas.
.
honeybee do you ever play any online chess? I just started a new trial membership on ICC for one week free. After that I'd have to pay. It's $ 40 for 6 months. I let my membership lapse long enough that they're giving me a free trial again. There are free sites out there too. Did you ever have a USCF rating?
Nope, never played online chess.
In my last year of college I came close to earning a FIDE rating, but never pursued it seriously after college. Had to look at earning money first, and then as usual, earning my living took importance over many other things.
Finally Anand won! Looks like the psychological factors worked for him instead of Topalov.
.
Yea I could live with that definition.
I've been playing and enjoying online chess again. I renewed my ICC membership. Sometimes there aren't enough human players on the game seek chart that are looking for the kind of slow game that I like to play so I end up playing one of their computers but I enjoy it just the same. I find that when I'm playing a human there is a different feel to game for me.
I was curious about what Gary Kasparov is doing now. I did some internet reading on him and found his official website and this article that is posted on his site and written by him. I thought it was pretty good. The Chess Master and the Computer
Quote:
The number of legal chess positions is 10 to the 40, the number of different possible games, 10 to the 120. Authors have attempted various ways to convey this immensity, usually based on one of the few fields to regularly employ such exponents, astronomy. In his book Chess Metaphors, Diego Rasskin-Gutman points out that a player looking eight moves ahead is already presented with as many possible games as there are stars in the galaxy. Another staple, a variation of which is also used by Rasskin-Gutman, is to say there are more possible chess games than the number of atoms in the universe. All of these comparisons impress upon the casual observer why brute-force computer calculation can’t solve this ancient board game. They are also handy, and I am not above doing this myself, for impressing people with how complicated chess is, if only in a largely irrelevant mathematical way.
Anand got $ 1.5 million for winning the World Championship and Topalov only got a mere $ 1 million. I really feel sorry for him.
Why sorry? He won 1 million even after he lost. So you should be happy Chess rewards even the losers (meant as someone who loses, not the regular meaning of the term 'loser').Quote:
Originally Posted by EntityX
On the subject of the permutations and combinations, my personal belief is there's something beyond mere numerical calculation of moves. This is why Kasparov was able to beat Deep Fritz / Blue. Also I don't think a chess player analyzes the numerical possibilities. He probably visualizes a situation after four moves of a variation, decides it is desirable or not, and accordingly chooses the variation to play. I heard once Karpov visualizes a situation that he is comfortable with (and also probably gives him an edge) and then strives on the board to arrive at this situation. A great weapon to employ in the end games.
.
News for US Chess. Hikaru Nakamura the US's # 1 player is doing quite well in a top tournament. He's right at the top with Anand after 8 rounds in a tournament that has the strongest players on the planet.
http://www.tatasteelchess.com/tourna...ndings/group/1
Here's Nakamura's wikipedia page :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hikaru_Nakamura
You mean today's strongest, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by EntityX
Ain't it wonderful to see a Japanese playing for the US? I remember the book The World Is Flat.
.
Take a look at the first link I posted in post # 54 and then take a look at the live ratings list
http://chess.liverating.org/
The four highest rated players on the planet today are in that tournament along with some lesser rated but still in the top 30 players. Nakamura was born in Japan but moved to the US when he was 2 years old. He's # 8 on the live rating list and # 10 on the present FIDE list which is only updated once every 3 months. I think it's 3 months if I'm not mistaken. The live rating list takes into account recent games played.
His mother was American and his father was Japanese. That makes him a mutt like most of the rest of us. Some have just been here longer than others.
Well, the list doesn't feature Karpov and Kasparov, two of the best players of recent times. And there are many others.Quote:
Originally Posted by EntityX
By the way, any news further on Deep Fritz and its ancestors?
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mendhak
:eek2:You mean there was a time when you did not have the wonderful witty
sense of humour we have all come to know and love. There is hope for me yet.
Kasparov is no longer competing professionally in chess now. He stopped about 3 or 4 years ago. Karpov is presently rated 2619 on the fide list and has a world ranking of 167. He does still compete but isn't as strong as he used to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by honeybee
The live rating list has all the players that are currently rated 2700 and above thus Karpov and many of the former great players aren't on the list.
Nakamura just won that tournament finishing a half point ahead of the present world champion Viswanathan Anand who took sole possession of 2nd place. A very impressive victory for him. He's now # 7 on the live rating list. Carlsen and Aronian tied for third place.