WORLD RAPID & BLITZ CH - DOHA 2016

[Alex Holowczak]

He seems to have a permanent place on board 1.

According to the commentary, it is at the request of NRK, the Norwegian TV company broadcasting the event.

That's a bit like Manchester United playing towards the Stretford end at the request of Sky TV. No real harm done, perhaps, but this is supposed to be a serious competition, not an exhibition.

No it isn't, at all.

It's a bit like Andy Murray playing on Centre Court at Wimbledon rather than Court 15, because he's the British number 1, and that's what the fans watching TV want to see, and what the fans attending the event want to sit down and see. You put Ronnie O'Sullivan on the main table at an event like the UK Championship, not table 5-8 in the sports hall next door, because the cameras are in the main arena.

If you want to use a football-based analogy, it's like when two popular Melbourne teams play in the AFL playoffs - even if the Etihad Stadium is the ground of the team that's supposed to play at home, they'll play the game at the MCG because the capacity is higher - even if the away team's home ground is the MCG. This happened last year, when the Western Bulldogs played the Adelaide Crows - OK, not a Melbourne team! - at the MCG, even though the Etihad is the Western Bulldogs' home ground.

VIshy Anand was fixed on board 23 last year at Gibraltar in one of the rounds so that his game was on a live board; he'd dropped off them otherwise. If you have a marquee name, that people are logging on/turning on to watch, you put them on a board where the cameras are. I think that has to be the right approach, but you might do it for other reasons.

We fixed Mark Hebden on a board at the British this year because of the lighting. In the past, I had a situation last year where two players with untidy handwriting playing each other just off a liveboard, but in the same scoregroup as a game on a liveboard. So I bumped them up to play on a liveboard because the games-inputter threatened to go on strike if I didn't.

[Richard Bates]

According to the commentary, it is at the request of NRK, the Norwegian TV company broadcasting the event.

That's a bit like Manchester United playing towards the Stretford end at the request of Sky TV. No real harm done, perhaps, but this is supposed to be a serious competition, not an exhibition.

No it isn't, at all.

It's a bit like Andy Murray playing on Centre Court at Wimbledon rather than Court 15, because he's the British number 1, and that's what the fans watching TV want to see, and what the fans attending the event want to sit down and see. You put Ronnie O'Sullivan on the main table at an event like the UK Championship, not table 5-8 in the sports hall next door, because the cameras are in the main arena.

If you want to use a football-based analogy, it's like when two popular Melbourne teams play in the AFL playoffs - even if the Etihad Stadium is the ground of the team that's supposed to play at home, they'll play the game at the MCG because the capacity is higher - even if the away team's home ground is the MCG. This happened last year, when the Western Bulldogs played the Adelaide Crows - OK, not a Melbourne team! - at the MCG, even though the Etihad is the Western Bulldogs' home ground.

VIshy Anand was fixed on board 23 last year at Gibraltar in one of the rounds so that his game was on a live board; he'd dropped off them otherwise. If you have a marquee name, that people are logging on/turning on to watch, you put them on a board where the cameras are. I think that has to be the right approach, but you might do it for other reasons.

We fixed Mark Hebden on a board at the British this year because of the lighting. In the past, I had a situation last year where two players with untidy handwriting playing each other just off a liveboard, but in the same scoregroup as a game on a liveboard. So I bumped them up to play on a liveboard because the games-inputter threatened to go on strike if I didn't.

[Richard Bates]

Not that it really makes a huge difference, but it could be pointed out that it is possible to change the board numbers allocated to particular boards. Clearly you don't want to change every board in the playing hall to adjust for this circumstance but it would be better if they adjusted, say, the top six. I like to think that the top board match should be, well, the top board.

[IM Jack Rudd]

It's a bit like Andy Murray playing on Centre Court at Wimbledon rather than Court 15, because he's the British number 1, and that's what the fans watching TV want to see, and what the fans attending the event want to sit down and see. You put Ronnie O'Sullivan on the main table at an event like the UK Championship, not table 5-8 in the sports hall next door, because the cameras are in the main arena.

Of course the difference there is that those events are straight knockouts; all games in a knockout are equally relevant to the competition, so you have to use other criteria - such as expected viewing figures - to determine who to put where. The same is not true of a Swiss, where different games can have different competitive relevance.

[John Moore]

David beats Ben Bok (who is another time trouble addict and hence a great pairing for David) to move to 5.5 out of 9 with White to come in the last round of the day.

[John Moore]

It's a bit like Andy Murray playing on Centre Court at Wimbledon rather than Court 15, because he's the British number 1, and that's what the fans watching TV want to see, and what the fans attending the event want to sit down and see. You put Ronnie O'Sullivan on the main table at an event like the UK Championship, not table 5-8 in the sports hall next door, because the cameras are in the main arena.

Of course the difference there is that those events are straight knockouts; all games in a knockout are equally relevant to the competition, so you have to use other criteria - such as expected viewing figures - to determine who to put where. The same is not true of a Swiss, where different games can have different competitive relevance.

Well, exactly.

[John Moore]

David has Jakovenko in the last round of the day.

[Barry Sandercock]

David drew with Jakovenko in the last round of today.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Ivanchuk leading the event on 8/10!

Final five rounds tomorrow.

[Alex Holowczak]

It's a bit like Andy Murray playing on Centre Court at Wimbledon rather than Court 15, because he's the British number 1, and that's what the fans watching TV want to see, and what the fans attending the event want to sit down and see. You put Ronnie O'Sullivan on the main table at an event like the UK Championship, not table 5-8 in the sports hall next door, because the cameras are in the main arena.

Of course the difference there is that those events are straight knockouts; all games in a knockout are equally relevant to the competition, so you have to use other criteria - such as expected viewing figures - to determine who to put where. The same is not true of a Swiss, where different games can have different competitive relevance.

Well, exactly.

Does that depend how you define "competitive relevance"? Magnus could still win the tournament, even when he had 0.5/2. How is it any different from the Tromso Olympiad, where Norway were always fixed to one of the top matches, regardless of their score?

I quoted the AFL as an example because its playoffs are not knockouts; they're a sort of double elimination - so different games have a different competitive relevance until the Preliminary Final. In double elimination, which has the higher competitive relevance - the game where someone is about to get knocked out, or a game between two players yet to lose?

I just don't have a problem with this at all. Why does it matter?

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Maybe the people leading the tournament would actually like the prestige of playing on board 1? One solution would be to have Magnus not on board 1, but on a separate (live and on TV) 'exhibition board'? If Magnus was on board 1, the match would take place on the exhibition board. But then that might make some players jealous of his status... I think Norwegian TV should stump up to do live TV of all the top 10 boards. They do focus on Magnus a bit too much, though it is understandable.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Pairings for the top 5 boards in round 11 (tomorrow):

1 1 GM Carlsen Magnus *) 2906 7 7 GM Korobov Anton 2714 21
2 3 GM Nepomniachtchi Ian 2812 7½ 8 GM Ivanchuk Vassily 2771 10
3 7 GM Anand Viswanathan 2802 7 7½ GM Mamedyarov Shakhriyar 2805 5
4 12 GM Grischuk Alexander 2767 7 7 GM Dominguez Perez Leinier 2803 6
5 51 GM Vidit Santosh Gujrathi 2643 7 7 GM Aronian Levon

David Howell is Black against Daniil Dubov.

[Alex Holowczak]

Maybe the people leading the tournament would actually like the prestige of playing on board 1? One solution would be to have Magnus not on board 1, but on a separate (live and on TV) 'exhibition board'? If Magnus was on board 1, the match would take place on the exhibition board.

That seems to me to be what they have done, but for the sake of convenience, rather than call that board the "exhibition board", they've called that board "1". And if he isn't on the "exhibition board", rather than leave it go to waste, they're putting Magnus's game on it anyway.

I think Norwegian TV should stump up to do live TV of all the top 10 boards. They do focus on Magnus a bit too much, though it is understandable.

How do you think that conversation would go, exactly?

"Thanks NRK for being the only TV company in the world willing to televise our chess tournament and broadcast it in your country. It's much appreciated, but actually, we need you to pay more money so that Magnus isn't fixed to board 1."

NRK has the following options:
(1) Do it, and spend a lot more money to broadcast the event
(2) Don't do it, and hope Magnus stays on 1 for the whole event - very unlikely
(3) Persuade FIDE to pay the extra costs, or the host Federation organising the event
(4) Divert their resources to something else they can televise

If I were a gambling man, I'd put my money on (4) being the option chosen.

[Mike Truran]

Sounds like a First World problem......

[Alex Holowczak]

By the way - think of the comparative size of the markets.

When NRK broadcast the World Championship match, they had a more than 50% share of the TV audience, and about 750,000 viewers. This isn't quite the World Championship, so the audience will not be so great, but still measurable in the hundreds of thousands.

By contrast, about 20,000 viewers watched the online commentary earlier.

So now NRK, who give your product the largest public exposure out of any media platform - possibly even greater than all platforms combined - want you to fix Magnus to board 1 so that they can broadcast the event and his games specifically - even if it means the leader of the tournament is only on board 2.

Would people here seriously turn that request down?!