World Chess Championship Match 2018

You’ll like these two anecdotes:

  • Checkmate (ending the game by inevitable King capture) probably comes from the Persian* ‘Shah mat’, which means ‘the King is dead’

  • the Rook is probably named after the Persian ‘Rukh’, which means ‘chariot’ (they both move in straight lines)

*now Iran

Yes indeed.
It shows how complex chess is that computers haven’t analysed the whole thing out (although there are databases that have analysed every possible position with 6 pieces and 7 piece endings will soon be complete…)

Game 3 drawn.

Carlsen was Black and reached a better ending, but Caruana held on.
This is a tribute to Carlsen’s opening preparation, since games between grandmasters show a small but distinct advantage to White (about 55%.)

To be clear, is that “white wins 55% of games”, or “white wins 55% of non-drawn games”? Draws are common enough that the two are quite different.

As an aside, laymen are sometimes puzzled by the fact that chess matches have an even number of games. It’s both because draws are so common that there’s no particular advantage to having an odd number, and because the white advantage means you want the same number with each side as white.

It’s “white gets 55% of the available points”. The percentages are in the neighborhood of 35% white wins, 40% draws, 25% black wins; the exact numbers depend on which set of games you look at.

I knew the first one but not the second, I love a little nugget of new trivia now and again.

Carlsen himself was critical of his opening after the game, saying that white would have had a large advantage by trading rooks before bringing out his bishop, instead of playing Bd2 immediately. Caruana seemed to agree. The commentators agreed, but weren’t sure how much of an advantage was really there.

But of course, it’s worth considering match tactics, as the players may be trying to misinform each other.

Indeed, the psychology of chess is not to be neglected. That was one of Kasparov’s greatest strengths, which put him under a slight handicap in the well-publicized matches vs. IBM.

Another draw in game 4 today, in quite a short game. The commentators expressed some confusion with a couple of the moves chosen, but these seemed to be minor details (above my level, at least), and the game was pretty equal throughout.

One thing to be aware of is that the colour pattern is reversed at the midway point of the match, so Caruana has white in game 5, and then Magnus gets two whites in a row.

It’s also notable that all of these draws actually favor Carlsen. He’s known as a particular master of the rapid and (especially) blitz chess, while Fabi’s strength lies in normal chess. Another American Grandmaster (in a sport that is noted for its nationalism,) Hikaru Nakumura, actually said he hoped Carlsen kept his title because he didn’t feel the world champion should be someone with shortcomings in the faster formats.

Don’t assume a draw necessitating the speed chess resolution. There is still a long way to go, and someone may have a trick up his sleeve yet.

Besides, if Carlsen really has a definitive advantage in that format, his challenger may feel forced to play wide open, risky chess before reaching that point. That could very well produce a winning game for someone.

Who’d have thought that chess of all things would go the shootout route to break ties like soccer and hockey.

At least the rapid variations of chess are considered part of the game, unlike the shootouts you mention which are specifically exhibition events only used for tiebreaks.

Now, if they did Bughouse, or Chess960, that would be a bit more like a shootout.

The move for shorter championship matches may have started in the mid-80s - specifically the Karpov v Kasparov match in 1984.
It’s one of the first big chess matches that I remember following closely; I was in my last years of high school at the time.
It was a very long match, lots of draws. Karpov actually led early on, only to get worn down by Kasparov, and then was controversially halted with no winner declared.
I have a book about it, autographed by Kasparov (Garry Kasparov on Modern Chess, Part 2: Kasparov vs Karpov 1975-1985).

Almost forgot to post that the most exciting news today was of Caruana’s training notes being accidentally revealed.

“Accidentally”? If they say so … :rolleyes:

Oh, does that remind me of the days of accusations of things hidden in chair arms… :smiley:

See post 17! :wink:

Game 5: draw. Carlsen gets white in games 6 and 7.

This is essentially what happened in the Anand-Topalov championship match. Topalov overpressed in the last classical game, trying to avoid Anand’s strength in the rapid games, and got himself beaten immediately instead.

Another draw in game 6. Caruana seemed to have a consensus winning position at one point, but Carlsen defended successfully.

So does that mean that the position wasn’t winning after all, or just that Carlsen managed to hold out long enough for Caruana to screw up?