
Magnus Carlsen Repeats at World Chess Championship - sethbannon
http://blogs.wsj.com/dailyfix/2014/11/23/magnus-carlsen-repeats-at-world-chess-championship/
======
dmourati
Carlsen came to play an exhibition at my previous company. He played against 8
players simultaneously. Two had been chess-club players and competitively
ranked. One employee played Carlsen to a draw. This earned several gasps from
his handlers who had never seen such a thing. They asked what she was ranked
and she said she wasn't with a wry smile. Truly something special to behold.

~~~
glomph
Only tangentially related but hey:

There is an interesting trick that was common for a time and still gets
referenced by magicians where even the worst chess player can guarantee that
they will win at least half of n chess games where n is any even number. They
will also be able to appear to need very little time when they get to each
table.

The trick of course is just to play each player against another. The magician
acts as a proxy and makes the moves of one player against another. Of course
it takes a little practice at memorisation but magicians are often practised
at mnemonics anyway.

~~~
tbrake
Derren Brown pulled this off but with 9 boards, scoring 4W 3L 2D. The
strongest players he played "against" each other and was able to beat the
weakest (relatively speaking) player there. Quite impressive.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evZmpsl3jI0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evZmpsl3jI0)

~~~
zeroonetwothree
I doubt he actually had to "beat" anyone. Magicians don't like to do tricks
that might not work :).

~~~
Osmium
> Magicians don't like to do tricks that might not work :)

I actually don't think this is true. As I understand it, a given routine will
have a number of high-risk tricks that may work, say, only 1-in-3 times. If
they do work, they're highly effective, precisely because they're so
implausible, and if they don't work you can just pretend it's a bluff and move
onto plan B. It's all about effective showmanship and managing expectations.

(Disclaimer: not a magician!)

~~~
gyom
That's kind of a cool approach. As long as you can "salvage" the trick, then
nobody needs to know about the failed portion.

One of my friends had a card trick that involved me selecting a card. Before
starting the trick, he jokingly picked a card at random from the deck, and
asked me if that was my card. He had 1/52 chances of being right, but it would
have been an insane trick if it had worked.

He guessed wrong (naturally), shrugged and went on with the actual trick as
though the first attempt was just a joke, to be forgotten because an actual
trick was about to take place.

~~~
glomph
He may also have been practising a risky method of forcing a card on you. It
is standard advice to do this often as it is the only real way of getting good
at it.

------
sethbannon
For those that weren't following closely, this rematch was nothing like the
last world championship between Carlsen and Anand, when Carlsen won in a
blowout. Carlsen didn't seem to be in top form this time, and Anand clearly
came better prepared than the last match. Two games stood out as being
particularly fascinating for me:

Game 3, which Anand won: [http://en.chessbase.com/post/sochi-wch-g3-the-tiger-
roars](http://en.chessbase.com/post/sochi-wch-g3-the-tiger-roars)

And game 11, in which Carlsen clinched the title:
[http://en.chessbase.com/post/sochi-g11-in-dramatic-finale-
ca...](http://en.chessbase.com/post/sochi-g11-in-dramatic-finale-carlsen-
retains-title)

~~~
tzs
I wouldn't call 2013 a blowout, considering that it ended at the most likely
final score based on their ratings at the time. Carlsen was 95 points higher
than Anand, and 50 points higher than Anand's best ever.

Assuming a 70% draw chance, there was a 22.6% chance of the match ending
3-0-7. 17.9% chance of 2-0-9, 13.6% chance of 4-0-5. There was only about a
15-18% chance Anand would win a game.

I think people overestimated Anand's chances last year because he had a
positive score against Carlsen going into the match, and that underestimated
Carlsen because it included games long before Carlsen reached his present
level. Or they thought wrongly that Carlsen would not perform as well in match
play as he does in tournament play.

~~~
dillonforrest
The word choice "blowout" is arguably strong, but I do agree that this year's
match was much less one-sided than last year's. This one was even until the
very last game, while Carlsen had a good lead after only Game 6 last year.

~~~
pk2200
It wasn't even going into today's game - Carlsen had been one point ahead
since game 6. That's why Anand rolled the dice with that risky exchange
sacrifice - with only 2 games left, he was running out of time to catch up.

------
pk2200
Game 6 was the turning point of the match. Carlsen made a horrific blunder,
and if Anand had noticed it, he very likely would have won and taken a 1-game
lead in the match. Instead he lost, giving Carlsen a 1-game lead.

[http://en.chessbase.com/post/sochi-g6-carlsen-won-anand-
miss...](http://en.chessbase.com/post/sochi-g6-carlsen-won-anand-missed-big-
chance)

------
ramkalari
Anand doesn't like playing long games. Carlsen doesn't give an inch even when
he is down. Regardless of rating differences, Anand's game was in bad shape in
2013 and it just continued in the world championship. He is playing much
better these days. It is just that his game doesn't match up very well to
Carlsen's relentless style. That said, he had his chances this time like how
he predicted before the match. He just couldn't take them. I'm always reminded
of Federer-Nadal rivalry when I watch these two play.

------
mbell
I found it interesting that there was a stream on twitch.tv that had over
10,000 viewers for this. It's how I found it, not being much a chess follower
but still finding the game interesting. I was a very surprised to see so many
viewers.

~~~
ixwt
Jerry (ChessNetwork) will stream sometimes (typically once a month) and will
normally get 3-4k viewers. He normally plays speed chess, vocalizing his
thoughts as he plays. Sometimes he will play several timed games at once.

He's an interesting personality. I enjoy watching him. He did the same thing
during the last grandmaster match of Carlsen v. Anand.

~~~
kazagistar
For a 1-man show, the production quality was pretty good. Discussion of
possibilities, consulting with both chess databases and computer algorithms
for potential moves, and a constant stream of high level analysis of
possibilities and positions that allows even a novice like me to at least get
a taste of what goes through the minds the these grandmasters.

I hope he keeps it up; it certainly has rekindled my appreciation for chess.

------
cheepin
_OMG SPOILERS_

But seriously, I was following this like a TV show, kind of hoping Anand would
win for the extra drama it would create.

Congrats to Carlsen, clearly an amazing player but...

#Caruana2016

~~~
asdfologist
Why not 2015? WCC is held every year.

~~~
blaabjerg
2013/2014 was an exception. WCC has been held every other year for the last
few years, and it will return to that now. Honestly I'm not quite sure why
they decided to arrange the 2013 WCC in the first place.

Every other year makes a lot of sense for different reasons, though. It allows
the champion to be more active outside of the championship (not just prepare
for the next one all the time), it allows for a proper candidates cycle, it
makes it easier to find venues/sponsors, etc.

------
sharkweek
It's been a real treat watching Carlsen play these past few years in his rise
to fame - He has a fundamental understanding of endgame far above anyone else
playing at his level. It's fun watching the latest generation of players add
to the skill of the game, with Carlsen atop that list.

------
Jakeimo
Here's a link to the games:
[http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=84885&crosstable...](http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chess.pl?tid=84885&crosstable=1)

------
mhartl
It's fascinating to read about the blunders both competitors made. One of the
many strengths of computer chess programs is that they are virtually
guaranteed never to make such mistakes.

~~~
tzs
> One of the many strengths of computer chess programs is that they are
> virtually guaranteed never to make such mistakes

Sometimes, though, you WANT computers to make mistakes. For instance, when a
mere mortal wants to play a game of chess with a computer.

It's no fun to get repeatedly crushed, so chess computer developers try to
provide a way to set the playing strength of the computer.

So far, this has generally not been satisfactory. Here's how games often go
when you are not a grandmaster and you set a computer to play at your level.
It starts out totally kicking your ass. Then it makes a completely idiotic
move that even a beginner can see is bad, turning the game around so you are
theoretically winning. Then it plays perfectly for a while, brutally punishing
every mistake you make, and it ends up winning again. Then it makes another
idiotic move, and so on.

It's kind of funny. We've basically solved the problem of how to make a
computer play like a person with a 3100 rating, but how to make a computer
play like a 1500 is still largely unsolved.

~~~
n09n
Wanting that is just evidence that chess is no longer a worthwhile game.

~~~
bluecalm
Computer programs are way stronger than humans but competition between them is
still fierce and there is still long way to go until perfection. Current most
known computer chess tournament:
[http://tcec.chessdom.com/live.php](http://tcec.chessdom.com/live.php)

You can browse through the games... a lot is happening, maybe more than in
human chess :)

------
linuxfan
Anand's play improved vastly during this WCC. In retrospect, he should've
drawn the 11th game and pressed Carlsen with white pieces in game 12. Magnus
played well but it appeared that he wasn't as prepared as Vishy for this
match. Every champion eventually gets dethroned by a youngster. The new
generation of players including Caruana, Karjakin, Nakumara etc. will pose a
bigger threat to Calrsen than old-timers such as Vishy, Gelfand and Kramnik.

------
KedarMhaswade
This is a great achievement. Though I am a Vishy Anand fan and I really liked
the way the contest was fought, I do think that Carlsen deserved to win. World
chess championships, with their rich history are our treasure!

------
known
Bell Curve for Anand.

Anand should gracefully retire from chess and passon the batton to younger
generation.

~~~
gokhan
Haha. Younger gen should first beat him in candidates, no? Do you want
Barcelona or Real Madrid to retire because they didn't win the trophy last
year?

Nerves aside, Anand is still great and was almost there in this match. Don't
underestimate him so easily.

