So far it seems like the Mainz Classic website is as shuffled as the pieces. Has anyone found any coherent results yet? There are myriad game viewers from which you can try to piece together the various events and their scores, but not much else. Terrible. It's only "Chess960" so far but I hope things improve once the Anand-Radjabov match (today) and the Ordix Open start (Saturday).
The German version of the site is doing a little better. In the U20 Chess960 match Naiditsch took a 3.5-0.5 lead over Harikrishna on the first day only to see the Indian whomp him 4-0 on day two to win. Hort beat Portisch in a blitz playoff after they tied their Chess960 match 4-4. I think Kosteniuk beat Paetz 5.5-2.5 in their shuffle match. Can we play chess now? I tried my best, but I really have a hard time generating any interest in these shuffle games. I find myself observing it like a science experiment and not a chess game. Is it me? I'll try harder to focus during the Aronian-Svidler Chess960 match that starts today.
It's definitely just you not liking Chess960 - I love it! There are so many new ideas! It's like playing chess again for the first time and experiencing the wonder of learning those clever opening traps and deep strategic ideas, except this time you have enough experience with tactics and strategy from normal chess that you can think of some of them yourself.
What is the difference between move 10 in a Chess960 game and move 30 in a Morozewich game...
"What is the difference between move 10 in a Chess960 game and move 30 in a Morozewich game..."
That's easy.
20 moves!
;o)) right, but if that is all that's different...
yeah, I find shuffle chess a huge yawn, never yet played through a complete game. I was planning to start when Kasparov played one, but luckily its going to be blitz instead, i.e. Chess.
As for the Mainz site, its a joke. I often wonder how its possible to get a site sooo wrong.
http://chesstigers.de/ccm6_index_news.php?id=803&rubrik=6&lang=0&kat=0 has an ordered list of all the game links
Amazing games today.
Radjabov changes queens two pawns down just to win this endgame! That guy really shows no respect!
I don't know what's not to like about Fischer Random games. They are fun!
I think it's a breath of fresh air when a GM doesn't have to squeeze out a novelty on the 20th move to get any kind of play.
I think that the apparent increase of interest in chess variants has more to do with the dire state of FIDE and the non existent WCC cycle than any inherent properties of the variants themselves.
Frustrated by the problems in the chess world, I think some people are displacing their anxiety by developing an interest in variants.
Chess doesn't need fixing - it's not broken. Capablanca's feared draw death never happened. What needs to be fixed is the organisational structure of professional chess and the WCC in particular. Variants like Fischerrandom are a distraction at best and a corrosive division at worst.
With time, Fischerrandom will develop its own body of opening literature. Novelties will always occur much earlier in the game, but there will still be general piece patterns that will lend classifiable structure to the positions.
With only 960 opening positions it will not be long before there are GM tested opening variations in all of them.
Aside from the general disorganization of the pieces what must really hurt for GMs is that they have to turn their brains on at move 1. And the path to an easy draw is just not at all clear.
I saw the games in the official page (very confusing the list of links, could be simpler) and I think Anand blundered badly in the second game by playing 28..Ng4?? (I haven't checked in a computer, but I believed was a bad move ... it loses automatically one pawn). Honestly, I believed Anand would win, I don't know if he tried to press Radjabov with time.
And Aronian won his first game (in fact he won both games today) after a nice knight sacrifice in move 18, product of his deep opening preparation. This theoretical novelty was useful, especially because of the time control who makes hard to refute it.
Heck, I couldn't even find the first games when I went to the site this afternoon. I didn't even know the result of the first games until a few minutes ago. Where does one find the first Aronian-Svidler game? Even Playchess doesn't list them.
Ah, found the individual replay pages, as opposed to their main live page that only has the most recent games.
Here are the Aronian-Svidler and Anand-Radjabov game one:
http://chesstigers.de/partien/ccm6/04_duel_champions/01_20060817/live.htm
I've never found the dreaded "theory curse" of chess to be much of an issue. I was 2200 FIDE prior to retiring from tourney play, but even so I held my own vs. international players knowing just a moderate amount of theory.
I'm sure theory is much more of an issue at the 2700+ level, but how many people play at that level? I've said it many times: the supposed theoretical explosion is way oversold, probably because we've all read too many interviews with 2700+ players.
I have little interest in Fischerrandom. Part of why I like chess is the continuity -- the endless exploration of different themes arising from the same position, and learning ever-more about the starting position. There just isn't enough strategic continuity in FR for my tastes.
in chess 960, the statement that studying endgames are most important is much truer... unfortunately... but i would still much rather play a rated chess 960 tournament than a normal one if i had a choice...
Its my feeling that you would probably enjoy chess 960 more if you have a flexible repertoire and good understanding of chess openings in normal chess... as it would allow a better chance to get something like at one of your normal structures..