Magnus Carlsen piece in the Guardian

[IanDavis]

I don't think that is a particularly compelling argument on your part.
If we want to look at misleading historical claims, we might be struck by the earlier statement...
"Finally, in considerably longer than it took Stalin's officers to extract bogus confessions, the tank corps is deployed (to C3), the button on the clock is depressed, and one of the invigilators returns for his go."
The importance I'd attach to the ambiguity of his reference to Short's match is rather less in comparison! Newspaper reporter slightly over-eggs success of local chess player in unofficial world title match. Unsurprising stuff indeed, one might well say.

PS: I wonder how many women were in the audience.

[Jonathan Bryant]

Unsurprising stuff indeed, one might well say.

Well I didn't say I was surprised. As for the example you cite, I don't consider myself qualified to comment. I do about the chess references though. It was poor writing.

We may have to agree to disagree on what's compelling or indeed relevant. I, for example, don't consider it relevant how many women were numbered amongst the spectators.

[Roger de Coverly]

(re Independent piece)

The invigilators metaphor is nice. It's already been commented that the players seem more in motion than usual when not their move. By comparison with the London Classic, they do have more room to walk around without losing sight of the board and their opponent.

There's an interview at http://chess-news.ru/en/node/11452 which discusses some of the aspects of the staging including measures to try to ensure that no accusations of cheating can be made.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"By comparison with the London Classic, they do have more room to walk around without losing sight of the board and their opponent."

But at the Classic, they could go to their backstage retreat for refreshments and still see their positions on the screens (if not the opponent). There is a risk they would collide if more than two of them paced up and down at once!

Newspapers cover chess better than they cover science...

[Jonathan Rogers]

We can certainly agree that this is the sort of mainstream attention of which we want to see a lot more:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/ches ... pions.html

[Christopher Kreuzer]

There's an interview at http://chess-news.ru/en/node/11452 which discusses some of the aspects of the staging including measures to try to ensure that no accusations of cheating can be made.

One bit I noticed there about the Candidates Tournament:

"The closing ceremony will take place in No. 11 Downing St. which is the House of the private residence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, right next door to 10 Dowining Street. The Chancellor of the Exchequer is an avid chess player. We’re going to be gathering together the members of the house of the Lords, the Cabinet, the House of Commons, there will be important representatives of British establishment who play chess, to witness the decision of who is going to be the next challenger of Anand."

If they pull that off, that will be impressive.

[Jonathan Rogers]

I can believe that the Chancellor is giving a drinks' reception at the end, and that is good, but of course the addiction to bullsh&t rather mars the announcement.

[Matt Mackenzie]

Osborne an "avid" chess player? First I have heard of that one - anybody else here know different??

[Leonard Barden]

Nice historical symmetry. In 1983 the Chancellor performed the Candidates opening ceremony at 11 Downing Street.

[LawrenceCooper]

Osborne an "avid" chess player? First I have heard of that one - anybody else here know different??

I believe he brings his kids to the Chess Classic for coaching.

[Roger de Coverly]

There's a very similar interview at chessvibes

http://www.chessvibes.com/reports/andre ... heir-enemy

Re Osborne

He's been a guest at the London Chess Classic most years

see http://en.chessbase.com/home/TabId/211/PostId/4007903 re the December 2011 event

Also, in a private capacity, the Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne returned, although this year the economic crisis prevented him visiting the tournament.

[Jonathan Bryant]

There's a very similar interview at chessvibes

That interview includes the rather 'interesting' claim that the visitor count of around 80 per day is a deliberate policy.


Anyhoo, good for The Vibers for not resorting to fawning and for asking some real questions instead.

[Maria Yurenok]

Anyhoo, good for The Vibers for not resorting to fawning and for asking some real questions instead.

Are you swiping at me, Jonathan? I'm doing chess journalism for fun, not to make a living like Peter Doggers, so I have no intention of impersonating Jeremy Paxman. I wanted my interview to be more like a chat, not like an interrogation, on purpose. Apart from that, Peter is great and has done chess journalism for a long time, while it's my second ever attempt since 3 weeks during the London stage of Grand-Prix back in September.

And, despite getting paid about a tenth of what I would earn doing my professional job, I'm doing 12 hour days during round days and Paulson's interview is only a small tip of the iceberg of my work, which is mostly done in Russian for the Russian-speaking/reading/listening audience. You are welcome to assess the rest of my work as well, but I don't know how good is your Russian.

I don't intend to continue with journalism, by the way; it's just lucky that two major tournaments happened in London, where I live, and I was available. If you think you can do it better, I'm sure the chess-news.ru editor would be interested.

[Jonathan Bryant]

Are you swiping at me, Jonathan?

I'm happy to confirm that I'm not.

I take it from your reply that you did the chess-news.ru interview, but I've not read that.

Also - and I mean no offence by this - although I recognise your name I don't actually know who you are.

[Maria Yurenok]

Thanks, that's good to know. The flow of the thread made me think that. And I don't want to be famous, so glad it's working