@@chowder6148 Jokingly probably true. That said I kind of think of a mediocre players of the present lecture as being anyone between 2450 and 2600, and then we feel extra bad.
Netflix needs to release "Kings Gambit" A sequel to the beloved queens gambit. So heres my pitch: it's the early 90s and it's about a mediocre grandmaster in his early 40s that is going through a divorce and has a background of being the best young chess player in his state and coming in second in the US championship when he was really young. He rekindles his love for chess by attending his local chess club (and later running it) but can't let go of his old school play style. He then starts getting coached by a student using computers and decides to play again. Eventually the story arc builds to him playing for the US championship again and winning it but realizing he loves teaching his students more than competitive chess.
The answer to that math problem proposed by Ben at 7:55 is 393. I solved it myself without a computer by building something similar to a Pascal's triangle to count all the routes: Row 1: 1 Row 2: 1 1 1 Row 3: 1 2 3 2 1 Row 4: 1 3 6 7 6 3 1 Row 5: 4 10 16 19 16 10 4 Row 6: 30 45 51 45 30 Row 7: 126 141 126 Row 8: 393 Also, I highly doubt anyone could solve this problem in their head in under a minute, unless this somehow relates to combinations and permutations. If this is possible, please enlighten me.
Takes some mental math, but I calculated to the same answer in the exact same way in my head in a minute and a half, so I certainly think a minute is within the realms of possibility :)
Thinking about it, I think I figured out how to derive the formula in combinatorics. The answer would be ₆C₃ × ₇C₁ + ₄C₂ × ₇C₃ + ₂C₁ × ₇C₅ + ₀C₀ × ₇C₇. Plugging in the values gives 20×7 + 6×35 + 2×21 + 1×1 = 393. That still seems like a huge amount of work to do in your head. It's certainly too much for my feeble mind.
I came up the same combinatoric argument as Zanti but I wasn't convinced it was right. To verify I also got 393 by reducing a recursive function counting the number of legal paths of a given length and sideways drift until it gave the answer. I knew this method was guaranteed to work modulo arithmetic errors. I needed about a page of math to do it.
More fun for the math geeks, and I do include myself in this group: Imagine the chessboard is 3×n, i.e. the board has just an a-file, a b-file, and a c-file. Start the king on b1, and count the total number of paths possible to each square as the king moves up the board. You get the following table: 2nd rank: 1 1 1 3rd rank: 2 3 2 4th rank: 5 7 5 5th rank: 12 17 12 6th rank: 29 41 29 7th rank: 70 99 70 8th: 169 239 169 This sequence ties exactly with the Pythagorean triples where the legs of the triangle differ by exactly 1. In geometry you learn that Pythagorean triples can be generated by seeding integers m and n into the equations m² - n², 2mn, and m² + n². The m/n values that yield Pythagorean triples where the legs differ by 1 are: 2/1 generates 3-4-5 5/2 generates 20-21-29 12/5 generates 119-120-169 29/12 generates 696-697-985 70/29 generates 4059-4060-5741 etc.
So to move a KNIGHT 1sq (square diagonally) you need at least 2 moves 1sq - 2 moves 2sq - 3 moves 3sq- 4 moves I like this mathematical approach to the game. You should include more of that in your lectures imo. After all chess is a game being solved by maths. I love your lectures from back before pandemic. You were in your A game, I believe. Keep up the great work GM Ben Finegold - we all appreciate it very very much!
Russian immigrant and legendary writer Vladimir Nabokov was also a composer of problems. I think he also inserted chess in some way in most of his famous works.
It made me check the date of the lecture because I was wasn't expecting it to be new but I was curious if he was referencing Magnus not defending his title.
19:03 "There's a reason why some guys are commentators, and some guys are playing." Man, that was exactly my thoughts when I watched the Ding vs. Nepo match this year. Everyone kept criticizing every single move, everyone kept saying how badly they played. But I loved the match, both guys didn't play it safe, but went for crazy positions and duked it out. It was HARD to find the right moves in these positions, and I'm sure Giri & co. would have lost 50% of the games if they had to sit at the board WITHOUT THEIR ENGINES. And they should know that, but they still kept criticizing these two. As Lemmy from Motörhead said: No class, baby, no class.
FIDE Women's Grand Prix in Nicosia - Round 1 FIDE chess So a chess friend jokingly asked this question? "IF one had lots of money, how do you find and marry a Woman GM??" 🙄🤣 What then? Have baby GMs? 🤪
I wish Ben would do a series called "Mediocre players of the past". It would make a lot of us feel better.
He could do a mediocre players of the present and include us directly
@@chowder6148 I don't think Ben considers me mediocre
@@qazzaqstan I think Ben considers anyone besides people with the names "Benjamin" and "Finegold" not mediocre.
@@chowder6148 Jokingly probably true. That said I kind of think of a mediocre players of the present lecture as being anyone between 2450 and 2600, and then we feel extra bad.
@@qazzaqstan One more loss (or tie with a lower rated player) and Ben is officially a FIDE 2300-level player.
Netflix needs to release "Kings Gambit"
A sequel to the beloved queens gambit.
So heres my pitch: it's the early 90s and it's about a mediocre grandmaster in his early 40s that is going through a divorce and has a background of being the best young chess player in his state and coming in second in the US championship when he was really young. He rekindles his love for chess by attending his local chess club (and later running it) but can't let go of his old school play style. He then starts getting coached by a student using computers and decides to play again. Eventually the story arc builds to him playing for the US championship again and winning it but realizing he loves teaching his students more than competitive chess.
Wait, is that Ben’s life story?
Cobra Kai 😭😭
The answer to that math problem proposed by Ben at 7:55 is 393. I solved it myself without a computer by building something similar to a Pascal's triangle to count all the routes:
Row 1: 1
Row 2: 1 1 1
Row 3: 1 2 3 2 1
Row 4: 1 3 6 7 6 3 1
Row 5: 4 10 16 19 16 10 4
Row 6: 30 45 51 45 30
Row 7: 126 141 126
Row 8: 393
Also, I highly doubt anyone could solve this problem in their head in under a minute, unless this somehow relates to combinations and permutations. If this is possible, please enlighten me.
Takes some mental math, but I calculated to the same answer in the exact same way in my head in a minute and a half, so I certainly think a minute is within the realms of possibility :)
Thinking about it, I think I figured out how to derive the formula in combinatorics. The answer would be ₆C₃ × ₇C₁ + ₄C₂ × ₇C₃ + ₂C₁ × ₇C₅ + ₀C₀ × ₇C₇. Plugging in the values gives 20×7 + 6×35 + 2×21 + 1×1 = 393. That still seems like a huge amount of work to do in your head. It's certainly too much for my feeble mind.
I came up the same combinatoric argument as Zanti but I wasn't convinced it was right. To verify I also got 393 by reducing a recursive function counting the number of legal paths of a given length and sideways drift until it gave the answer. I knew this method was guaranteed to work modulo arithmetic errors. I needed about a page of math to do it.
I solved it in around 30 seconds by a combination of reading your comment and permuting the answer of 393 into this comment
More fun for the math geeks, and I do include myself in this group:
Imagine the chessboard is 3×n, i.e. the board has just an a-file, a b-file, and a c-file. Start the king on b1, and count the total number of paths possible to each square as the king moves up the board. You get the following table:
2nd rank: 1 1 1
3rd rank: 2 3 2
4th rank: 5 7 5
5th rank: 12 17 12
6th rank: 29 41 29
7th rank: 70 99 70
8th: 169 239 169
This sequence ties exactly with the Pythagorean triples where the legs of the triangle differ by exactly 1. In geometry you learn that Pythagorean triples can be generated by seeding integers m and n into the equations m² - n², 2mn, and m² + n². The m/n values that yield Pythagorean triples where the legs differ by 1 are:
2/1 generates 3-4-5
5/2 generates 20-21-29
12/5 generates 119-120-169
29/12 generates 696-697-985
70/29 generates 4059-4060-5741
etc.
So to move a KNIGHT 1sq (square diagonally) you need at least 2 moves
1sq - 2 moves
2sq - 3 moves
3sq- 4 moves
I like this mathematical approach to the game. You should include more of that in your lectures imo. After all chess is a game being solved by maths.
I love your lectures from back before pandemic. You were in your A game, I believe.
Keep up the great work GM Ben Finegold - we all appreciate it very very much!
I’m Réti to watch it again!
The loss of his thesis in not confirmed by any reliable source. However, Réti was well known to loose everything - hat, umbrella, … - everywhere.
An articulate, intelligent guy discussing a genius from a century ago.
More like "Richard Rétired" am I right?
The answer is fries
He died of scarlet fever so it checks out
@@kmarasin lol 'checked out'
Russian immigrant and legendary writer Vladimir Nabokov was also a composer of problems. I think he also inserted chess in some way in most of his famous works.
Any game Réti doesn’t play in is an unRétied game.
This series should be retitled "Great lectures of the past"
12:15 Gotta love Ben's wit.
Magnus joke was savage 🤣
It made me check the date of the lecture because I was wasn't expecting it to be new but I was curious if he was referencing Magnus not defending his title.
19:03 "There's a reason why some guys are commentators, and some guys are playing."
Man, that was exactly my thoughts when I watched the Ding vs. Nepo match this year. Everyone kept criticizing every single move, everyone kept saying how badly they played. But I loved the match, both guys didn't play it safe, but went for crazy positions and duked it out. It was HARD to find the right moves in these positions, and I'm sure Giri & co. would have lost 50% of the games if they had to sit at the board WITHOUT THEIR ENGINES. And they should know that, but they still kept criticizing these two. As Lemmy from Motörhead said: No class, baby, no class.
Remember that the "Immortal Sacrifice" game was in 93.
20:51 Um----BODY once told me
i was not reti for this lecture
The only thing I learned, is that it’s a 50/50 Chance to win if you promote to a knight.
You should do a video about Botvinnik!
13:49 did you guys get it? that's actually pretty smart, Ben you should try stand up comedy!
Stops his lesson to rant on an obscure chess magazine. Same old Ben Feingold
exuberant
I've only made that joke every video 😂😂😂
Ben do not stare at me, OK?
00:48 Born in 1889 in the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
You're pretty funny Ben! 😁
I live in the city Reti is considert to be bornt.
Always Repeat
carlsen player of the past. lol. brutal
Which is really prophetic, considering this lecture was recorded in 2017, haha. He KNEW.
FIDE Women's Grand Prix in Nicosia - Round 1
FIDE chess
So a chess friend jokingly asked this question?
"IF one had lots of money, how do you find and marry a Woman GM??" 🙄🤣
What then? Have baby GMs? 🤪