Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

The very latest International round up of English news.
Ian Thompson
Posts: 2127
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
Location: Awbridge, Hampshire

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by Ian Thompson » Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:27 pm

Roger de Coverly wrote:
Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:13 am
[Perhaps if a G/120 format became popular, a new time control could be devised where the flow of the game was not interrupted by a claim and arbiter intervention, but a delay or increment was automatically applied when one of the players hit their last two minutes.
USCF rules allow the arbiter to introduce a delay (when there wasn't one before) following a draw claim. One source describes it thus - "in an insufficient losing chances claim [one option] is to place a time delay clock on the board, with the claimant having 1/2 his/her remaining time up to 1 minute (read maximum - 1 minute) with a 5 second delay and the opponent having all his/her time plus the delay. Assuming the game is really a draw, with a 5 second delay, it can be proven on the board."

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 5047
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by LawrenceCooper » Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:21 pm

Round 1 saw five draws and five armageddon games with white winning four of them.

David Robertson
Posts: 2155
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by David Robertson » Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:57 pm

LawrenceCooper wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:21 pm
Round 1 saw five draws and five armageddon games with white winning four of them.
My verdict (fwiw)?
Farce

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 8907
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by Alex Holowczak » Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:01 pm

David Robertson wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:57 pm
LawrenceCooper wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:21 pm
Round 1 saw five draws and five armageddon games with white winning four of them.
My verdict (fwiw)?
Farce
It's not clear to me what the Armageddon game is there to do. Is it an incentive designed to reduce the number of draws in the long game? Are they some excitement after the drawn games?

At least with the KO format as per the Grand Prix, I can explain why there's a need for the quicker time-limit playoffs afterwards.

David Robertson
Posts: 2155
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by David Robertson » Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:16 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:01 pm
It's not clear to me what the Armageddon game is there to do
It incentivises quick draws, or risk-free 'suck-it-and-see' play by White in the certain knowledge that you get a second bite in the slap-up of the Armageddon. Just rubbish. Typical bureaucratic, arbiter-nexus, admin non-chess-player solution

NickFaulks
Posts: 5080
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by NickFaulks » Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:30 pm

David Robertson wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:16 pm
It incentivises quick draws
Given the scoring system, that is one thing it certainly does not do.

David Robertson
Posts: 2155
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by David Robertson » Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:38 pm

NickFaulks wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:30 pm
David Robertson wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:16 pm
It incentivises quick draws
Given the scoring system, that is one thing it certainly does not do.
Yes, it does. Chess is an exercise in risk-aversion

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 8907
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by Alex Holowczak » Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:17 pm

David Robertson wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:16 pm
Alex Holowczak wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 9:01 pm
It's not clear to me what the Armageddon game is there to do
It incentivises quick draws, or risk-free 'suck-it-and-see' play by White in the certain knowledge that you get a second bite in the slap-up of the Armageddon. Just rubbish. Typical bureaucratic, arbiter-nexus, admin non-chess-player solution
Actually, I think it is probably nothing to do with the arbiters, who probably aren't involved at all in the format of the event. They will just turn up to administer it.

I suspect it may be more to do with the organisers and broadcasters.

David Robertson
Posts: 2155
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by David Robertson » Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:37 pm

Alex Holowczak wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:17 pm
I suspect it may be more to do with the organisers and broadcasters
Please don't mollify my rants

LawrenceCooper
Posts: 5047
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:13 am

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by LawrenceCooper » Wed Jun 05, 2019 7:51 am

David Robertson wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:57 pm
LawrenceCooper wrote:
Tue Jun 04, 2019 8:21 pm
Round 1 saw five draws and five armageddon games with white winning four of them.
My verdict (fwiw)?
Farce
The sight of Aronian's and Grischuk's pieces rolling around the board in their final seconds (around 4 hours into the video https://en.chessbase.com/post/altibox-norway-chess-live) did indeed match your description.

Mick Norris
Posts: 7491
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:12 am
Location: Bolton, Greater Manchester
Contact:

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by Mick Norris » Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:07 am

I see MVL won the blitz and is now number 1 ahead of Carlsen (2947.8 v 2919.6 on the live ratings)

Pete Doggers report on the blitz

TWIC

Round 1 report from Chess Mind
Any postings on here represent my personal views and should not be taken as representative of the Manchester Chess Federation www.manchesterchess.co.uk

Richard Bates
Posts: 2901
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:27 pm

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by Richard Bates » Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:36 am

If the point of the Armageddon is to influence the chess in the main tournament *in a positive way* then they’ve got it back to front. What they should have done is have the Armageddon only after games with a decisive result, a second opportunity for any defeated player, if you like. Eg. Players draw 0.5-0.5. Player A wins game and Armageddon 1-0. Player A wins game, B wins Armageddon 1-0.5

In general the evidence for alternative formats being able to change the playing approach of players seems sketchy at best (at least in a positive direction - plenty of examples of formats pushing players towards risk averse approaches, tiebreaks on draws being one of the most obvious culprits). Maybe the format of this tournament will prove a slow burner by creating “artificial” gaps in the standings, but i’m sceptical. Most players have a playing style and are loathe to change it, except in the circumstances of individual “must win” games.

Best way for organisers to generate “exciting” tournaments is in player selection - a range of different player styles and/or a mix of playing strengths. And generally increasing the number of players helps.

Alex Holowczak
Posts: 8907
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 5:18 pm
Location: Oldbury, Worcestershire
Contact:

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by Alex Holowczak » Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:57 am

Maybe the idea of the Armageddon is to make it so farcical that people take more risks in the main game to avoid it? :?

David Robertson
Posts: 2155
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by David Robertson » Wed Jun 05, 2019 11:50 am

Richard Bates wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:36 am
Best way for organisers to generate “exciting” tournaments is in player selection
Exactly so (though not, exactly, So)

Adam Ashton
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:37 pm

Re: Altibox Norway 2019 - the future of chess?

Post by Adam Ashton » Wed Jun 05, 2019 1:35 pm

Richard Bates wrote:
Wed Jun 05, 2019 8:36 am
If the point of the Armageddon is to influence the chess in the main tournament *in a positive way* then they’ve got it back to front. What they should have done is have the Armageddon only after games with a decisive result, a second opportunity for any defeated player, if you like. Eg. Players draw 0.5-0.5. Player A wins game and Armageddon 1-0. Player A wins game, B wins Armageddon 1-0.5

In general the evidence for alternative formats being able to change the playing approach of players seems sketchy at best (at least in a positive direction - plenty of examples of formats pushing players towards risk averse approaches, tiebreaks on draws being one of the most obvious culprits). Maybe the format of this tournament will prove a slow burner by creating “artificial” gaps in the standings, but i’m sceptical. Most players have a playing style and are loathe to change it, except in the circumstances of individual “must win” games.

Best way for organisers to generate “exciting” tournaments is in player selection - a range of different player styles and/or a mix of playing strengths. And generally increasing the number of players helps.
I agree. Using rapid and blitz to affect classical standings always leaves a bad taste imho. Therefore you need a system which encourages players to win normal classical games. Presumably for the elite players this would be a limited swiss. Of course more players = more expense and if I was organising I can see the appeal of a straightforward RR. In which case, choose interesting players.

Post Reply