What follows is my post
, following spacecowboy of CTS
's suggestiong to use this message board site:post i
It used to be that in the old days, much longer matches took place. With twelve games for this unification match, who is kidding whom? We are going to have a world chess champion after just twelve games? Or settle it with tie breaks in rapids? Super size it or drive up fast food window? What has become of classic chess?
Think of Karpov-Kasparov, Capablanca-Alekhine, Bottvinnik-Tal? How long were many of our top matches? We all already know the answer to that. What does this say about us?
Is this a practical adaption to a results hungary world, or have we all just gotten soft and this is but of a reflection of our own selfs?post ii
quote by Rincewind: "But I think the world has moved too far from those days"...
Dear Rincewind, I got on line today not sure if there would be zero or a dozen replies, sincerely with no expectations. To me this is a valid question that I have asked, since we have instant noodles, instant communication, instant lab results... we want our results, and we want them fast. Your reply that I can see is the only one that responds to what is being said, as aside from two friends chatting or grandstanding publically so see who can...
If we go back to Petersburg, New York, London or any of the big tournements, we had truly epic contest of minds. Of course, in tournements, all play all is the big test, if not all play all white and black. Then not only do the leaders go toe to toe, but we get to see who has the best score against the lagging players. And so in the old Soviet Chess Championships, we had gigantic battles. Recently, to be very honest, I was truly shocked to see Dortmundt over so fast... I had been busy in a new relationship, and despite being a good student of the game, failed to see how abbreviated was the contest. Kramnik wins, was the headline. This short tournement tested to see who was the best for that span? Excuse me?
Now Topy and Kramn. Twelve games. Compare that to some other WCC matches, let me go grab my Gelo, Chess Championships, All the Games, All the Diagrams, 1834-1998
compendium (to those who don't know of it, it has all the game of all the matches, in one handsome volume, McFarland, 1999 2nd Edition): I open randomly and cite figures to some major matches:
Alekine-Euwe 1935, 30
Botvinnik-Smyslov 1954, 24
Tal-Botvinnik, 1960, 21
Spassky-Petrosian, 1969, 23
Kasparov-Karpov, 1987, 24
this does not even mention Steinitz or Capablanca, etc.
Of course, now we have big sponsers, luxury resorts, the press, television, the internet, publicity and marketing and coaches, and seconds, and families, the whole works, the entorage that follows....
I respect T and K both. Both are great artists who will furnish beauty for sure. But despite being a unification match, sadly feel that something is wrong, and percieve that T and K are both 'cashing in' (or Kashing in!) while the going is getting good.And one short note on recent CTS activity
And one short note on recent CTS activity:
Today I reached 84.65%
for 19,831 tries, 1500.4 ELO with 91.6% tonight, 93% last night, 90.6% Friday night, 92.6% Thursday. My sense of what I accept as accurate is changing, and I am not pleased with any result <90.0%, and, like my good friend likeforests, am seeking far higher accuracy, consistently.
I also took my good friend samuraichess mention of his embracing CT-Art 3.0, so resumed Practice level III and am now up to problem #442, and despite fear and terror of getting both bogged down and exhausted, all at once, am resolved to chip away at it, day after day.
david in seattle