Absolutely phenomenal game with lots of depth and ideas, and oh man Jerry you went so far in depth on those variations. This was such a great video and you should be proud. You mentioned in a video forever ago if I recall correctly that your Dad got you into chess, damn did he bring such a blessing to my life at least.
It is like a tradition to watch a recap with Jerry. There are exists other analyses as well, but I really like focusing on the most important details with a clear board. I really appreciate it! :)
This was so great Jerry! I wonder, since the number of inaccuracies are so low in each of these games, could we include a quick revision at the end of where the computer thinks each player messed up?
Great Analysis Jerry as usual. Thanks for these videos. When I wake up in the morning, I will check whether you uploaded the previous night's game analysis and watch it over morning tea :)
You make chess accessable for someone who played and learned with his grandpa as a child, but then didn't really touch it again for years and years. Greatly appreciated 👍 Thanks for your work and knowledge!
At the end of the day, boring is safe and smart. They are playing very tight chess because they know that one misstep, and many moves later in a line they did not calculate correctly or deep enough, they could lose. This is not a one minute bullet match on your hider account. It's the World Chess Championship. (Great analysis once again Jerr Bear thank you)
Very interesting to watch you explaining the games(I am only a 1500; naybe for more advanced it's too slow, but no, you have the correct pace and a new follower. Keep it up
Thank you Jerry for these superior quality videos. I feel like it is early Christmas gifts with so many analysis videos from you. I can tell my wife not to get anything for me. 😃
Thanks Jerry. I think it would help appreciation, especially for these players and this Match, if you could let us know when a “new move” (in professional chess) is played. Great calculation by both players.
I feel good about these games. Even though they end up in draws, they show such good decisions, neither one cracking under pressure, it's like a good tv show that you don't want it to end.
What an amazing game. Incredible defense by Ian, but Magnus found a way. Everyone who was crying about how engines have ruined chess because games 1-5 being drawn, apologize now.
Thank you so much, Jerry for this excellent, clear analysis! I'm sharing this with my nephews so we can get a glimpse of the calculations 🧮 at the highest level.
Well-explained, as usual. I think this was the most exciting game since Game 2, and I love how in both games Magnus utilised his knight so well. The fortress he built in this match was awesome too. Looking forward to the Friday night resumption!
Maybe you do it without calling it out, but I think it would be cool to analyze the move stockfish labels as an "inaccuracy" after looking at the tape, and compare how the computer is calculating vs the players
The stats on the 'tape' at the end claims there is 1 inaccuracy for Ian. I think you should have commented on that, so we could focus on what the engine claims was inaccurate.
Note that the analysis at the end is automatic analysis by lichess (fishnet), and only goes up to a certain number of nodes. So I wouldn't trust it too much for showing where innacuracies were made. Don't get me wrong, the general evaluation it gives is still useful, but maybe not super precise.
@@WannesMalfait - That all sounds very plausible, but I'd like to hear Jerry's take on it. Maybe he could go to that (supposed) inaccuracy and analyse it to see what he thinks. Like if Jerry is gonna use that metric, then when something notable in that metric crops up I think it is worth mentioning! Even if the end result is to dismiss it (as you are doing), I think it would be good to actually have it actively dismissed and see why, rather than to neglect to mention it.
Magnus will breakthrough, Nepo has took zero risk so far which is why all the games have been lackluster from him point, but i doubt Nepo will play all 14 games this way, he will come out of his shell sooner or later and with Magnus getting close to finding something even with Nepo in full draw mode, once Nepo does come to play, Magnus will find the breakthrough.
yep, the players do not even try to unbalance the position at any point really either. I mean like iqp or big space or kingside vs queenside or bishop vs knight. Literally all of the engine work is about neutralizing the other player. It's the mentality. The engine for sure could be used to unbalance the position too, Im sure and then take it from there. The other player will try to neutralize it, you can count on that at which point you can use that to further unbalance the position and trow him off the tracks. Yea it's dangerous, but at the end of the day it's two humans playing, you must put the pressure to win or outswindle him out of his ways into your own ways and you have to love to do that and embrace it. But yea, these two guys are just stomping onto any posibility of imbalance...
@@NDakovic they must have played in that way and they did. Modern day chess forces top tiers to think and play like computers- so bunch of engine-like unnatural looking moves. Any slight diverge and you are in a lost position. And, as a consequence, this has side effects as we are rarely seeing any sacrifices, imbalances and more importantly the players own identity (playing style).
@@acyphium i know man, but were talking about ruy Lopez, petroff here. D4 game was a lot better. Who's to say they cant play c4, or fianchetto opening etc. E4 is so dead at this point at top level its hard to believe its this bad
@@NDakovic being able to play virtually every opening and position is the first and foremost "problem" today. I mean it's the thing taking away the uniqueness of a certain player. We can't see nowadays 60s Tal mainly playing Benoni against 1.d4 ie.
This had draw written all over it from very early and once they quickly exchanged queens, a bishop and a rook, you could bet the farm on it. I checked out at that point.
10:52 I was actually able to tune in to the game live right as Carlsen was having the think before playing Qe8. Later I remember seeing the final position of this game live and being quite disappointed to see that c pawn still on c3. I feel as though in the world championships of yesteryear we would have seen a c4 advance at the moment I timestamped - even with an eventual drawn result, Nepo would have definitely proven himself to be world champion material if he had gone down that path I think. Clearly Carlsen was concerned about something, but so far all that's been proven is that the two are evenly matched. I suppose the fact that a position like that could even have appeared in the game says something to Nepo's favor. It's just a same to see these games all just peter out when something more dynamic could have been pursued.
Out of interest what chess level are you, sorry if that’s not the correct wording I’m not to knowledgeable on chess terminology, still like your videos a lot despite that
Jerry is a national master out of USA. The "levels" of chess are National Master (NM) Candidate Master (CM) FIDE master (FM) International master (IM) Grandmaster (GM)
Thanks Jerry once again Look"s Like that in this game was a real intempting to win the game by white, but remain,s a feeling that two championship ago Carlsen manage 's to figure things out by rapid games That would be sad that the championship would end in blitz. Already exist the blitz championship.
I believe 100 centipawns is equal to 1 pawn (it's like cents to dollars) of material, so these guys are playing so good that they don't even lose more than 0.06 pawns of material in a positional sense.
1 centipawn is worth 1/100 a pawn. The average centipawn loss is the average difference between the evaluation of the engine top move and the move made in a game.
...Do you not come to the WorldChessChampionship to see the highest level of human chess? Just because a game ends in a draw doesnt mean it was a bad/boring game right?, as long as the moves and positions were interesting l dont really see much to complain about.
Jerry, the best and most pleasant voice for chess online. Question: why are we not seeing world champ or the challenger outplay their opponent this round or the last one in 2018? Draw after draw is disappointing. I grew up watching some real interesting world championships starting with the games in 1972. Chess hasn’t been the same since Bobby Fischer. Thanks for posting and analyzing this game.
With the advances in technology top-level players have been able to get extremely close to "optimal play" over the last few decennia, and playing practically flawless inevitably leads to a higher likelihood of drawing. l think Chess nowadays is in a very good state, Carlsen and his opponents being able to play so close to theoretical perfection for multiple games on end is magnificent to watch :]
@@Sponsie1000 I agree with you on the advances in technology but what happened to creativity and a will to go farther? Chess is virtually limitless in what a high level player can do on the board. We’ve seen that in the past but it’s absence is painfully obvious in this world championship and the last one.
@@angoor101 l think the crux is in that you are right in that a top level player can do virtually limitless things on the board, but l think Two top level players are ironically relatively restricted in their options... There's not really any room for bluffing/going for a random chance in chess right, so if the best move and the "most fancy/flashy/creative" move are two different moves, Carlsen en co simply cannot afford to not go for the best move, because doing too many non-optimal moves might very well lose them the game when they're playing against an opponent who is going strictly for the best moves. It's kinda like a prisoner's dilemma in that regard,, neither player wants to be the first/only one to not play optimally so they end up both having to play optimally (although l think they also quite like playing optimally regardless, but thats just my opinion).
l think the main difference with those far-past championships is a combination of both 1) knowing what move is optimal when for alllll the possible scenarios was way harder to know for sure before all the fancy engines of nowadays, and because of that: 2) The differences in skill/knowledge between even top-level players were (in my opinion) wayy greater then compared to now. So basically, because it was way harder to know what the optimal response was to a creative back then, those creative moves were way more viable. Nowadays Carlsen and co have been studying chess with the support of engines for most of their careers,, so they are simply more adept in knowing what is optimal in any situation, causing them to play optimally (extremely low centipawn losses), causing draws to be more likely :]
Either the knight controls that square or it has that square available to occupy - usually in reference to a good outpost for the knight. If you post the timestamp, I can be more accurate.
Do these guys load up their games vs stockfish right away? Seems like they looked at all the engine moves already and are trying to follow them. It’s like the 3rd time they’ve played the same opening in a span of 5 games. Maybe there should be a electronics restriction for these types of matches. It’ll make the matches way more dynamic. Engines are too good nowadays.
you could play this in rapid games but its a high risk to fall back a piece when there is no straight plan to end the game from that position in classical chess.
3 points piece for 2 pawns with a change of structure could be good but there is nothing attacking the black king after that the pawns have been taken so Black can follow up by exchanging piece, stopping the pawns with the king and finishing the endgame with a knight with pawns against only pawns.
you would think with the world title on the line, they'd consider their moves even more carefully, and try even harder than usual to make only the most accurate moves. idk, l'd think it'd be anti-climactic if Carlsen blundered a piece and lost a game because of that,, why even bother with deciding a world champion if they're gonna casually blunder like a beginner anyways
yep. classical chess is solved enough by computers that humans can memorize the moves until by the time they actually start playing, the game can be easily (for them) drawn
@@kylestanfield4903 Reminds me of people who don't like baseball wanting to change baseball... to make it so that people who don't like baseball might like baseball... no.
@@danielhanafin9885 at least in a physical sport it is easy to see the human labour involved. Whereas in top chess it is theory learned from a computer then a few moves made then a draw made by perpetual. Hence my recommendation for 960…
well I'm patiently waiting and trying to avoid to see any analysis video of today's win before the one from Jerry... and it's almost hour after midnight ;)
I honestly believe that the World Chess Championships of today are totally unimaginative and lacking creative flare compared to the WCCs of the past. I mean no disrespect at all to Carlsen, Nepo and the other top players of today, but they play much too rigidly and rely too much on chess engines for me to ever consider them to be "creative" players. I'd rather see chess players try to imitate pioneers of yesteryear like Paul Morphy, Wilhelm Steinitz, and yes, Bobby Fischer. I dare say that chess engines have helped ruin the game of chess itself. The current state of classical chess today makes me appreciate chess variants all the more.
That argument makes no sense since you are ignoring all the other time controls and other tournaments they play. Specifically this tournament they have a long time to prepare for one opponent with a large team so of course they'll have a lot of engine prep. It also hasn't ruined chess in general, it's only really true for very high level classical chess, not even all GMs.
You have ignored the entire premise of a tournament - WINNING. Creativity is only possible when there’s nothing left from theory - which in this day and age is diminishing
@@DanKop2 even the other classical games such as tata steel had some creative games, so i don't think you have to go to faster time controls. Just lower the stakes.
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
2021 FIDE World Chess Championship playlist:
ruclips.net/p/PLQsLDm9Rq9bEu31nvBO2zxWTY67hdGJYi
I watched it live and I knew we would wait longer for this recap ;)
Thank you Jerry for all your work covering the world chess championship over the years!
You have the best reviews of these games. Thanks.
this is analysis i can follow. super clear, the alternate lines really help with understanding. thank you Jerry!
You are so appreciated, Jerry. Take care of your voice over the course of the tournament. Stay hydrated!
Absolutely phenomenal game with lots of depth and ideas, and oh man Jerry you went so far in depth on those variations. This was such a great video and you should be proud. You mentioned in a video forever ago if I recall correctly that your Dad got you into chess, damn did he bring such a blessing to my life at least.
You know what I actually went and found it, it's actually in the Chessnetwork channel "About" page, but still yeah thank you so much and keep it up.
It is like a tradition to watch a recap with Jerry. There are exists other analyses as well, but I really like focusing on the most important details with a clear board. I really appreciate it! :)
very nice commentary show different variations but not overdoing it :) Best channel to cover these games
Thank you for the compliment Isak.
Jerry’s coverage is the best. Thanks Again .
thank you! you describe the games, so that they feel like real battles, if not wars, explaining the role of each participant on the battlefield
Best chess analyst ❤️❤️❤️all love from Lebanon 🇱🇧🇱🇧
This was so great Jerry! I wonder, since the number of inaccuracies are so low in each of these games, could we include a quick revision at the end of where the computer thinks each player messed up?
Great Analysis Jerry as usual. Thanks for these videos. When I wake up in the morning, I will check whether you uploaded the previous night's game analysis and watch it over morning tea :)
You make chess accessable for someone who played and learned with his grandpa as a child, but then didn't really touch it again for years and years. Greatly appreciated 👍
Thanks for your work and knowledge!
I was waiting for this video and no other. Tnak you so much!
This daily video thing is awesome.
Thank you for helping us mere mortals understand this level of play.
Always love your analysis.
I really like your analysis - how you break down the moves, the strategies, the options...super clear.
At the end of the day, boring is safe and smart. They are playing very tight chess because they know that one misstep, and many moves later in a line they did not calculate correctly or deep enough, they could lose. This is not a one minute bullet match on your hider account. It's the World Chess Championship.
(Great analysis once again Jerr Bear thank you)
Minefield chess. 😬
Very interesting to watch you explaining the games(I am only a 1500; naybe for more advanced it's too slow, but no, you have the correct pace and a new follower. Keep it up
Thank you Nino
Thank you Jerry for these superior quality videos. I feel like it is early Christmas gifts with so many analysis videos from you. I can tell my wife not to get anything for me. 😃
👍🏼
Thanks Jerry, you are doing really a great job!
Thanks Jerry. I think it would help appreciation, especially for these players and this Match, if you could let us know when a “new move” (in professional chess) is played. Great calculation by both players.
I feel good about these games. Even though they end up in draws, they show such good decisions, neither one cracking under pressure, it's like a good tv show that you don't want it to end.
Jerry is a gift to the chess world.
What an amazing game. Incredible defense by Ian, but Magnus found a way.
Everyone who was crying about how engines have ruined chess because games 1-5 being drawn, apologize now.
Great analysis thanks Jerry.
Thank you Ryan. 👍🏼
I loved those tactical variations... connecting the entire board :)
Thank you, yet again
Keep going with your serene voice.
yeah right! His voice is one of the reasons why I love watching these videos and the analysis without any rush.
Thank you so much, Jerry for this excellent, clear analysis! I'm sharing this with my nephews so we can get a glimpse of the calculations 🧮 at the highest level.
Well-explained, as usual. I think this was the most exciting game since Game 2, and I love how in both games Magnus utilised his knight so well. The fortress he built in this match was awesome too. Looking forward to the Friday night resumption!
Maybe you do it without calling it out, but I think it would be cool to analyze the move stockfish labels as an "inaccuracy" after looking at the tape, and compare how the computer is calculating vs the players
Honestly couldnt care about watching another draw between these two but if Jerry is commentating and depicting the play I am all for it :D
The stats on the 'tape' at the end claims there is 1 inaccuracy for Ian. I think you should have commented on that, so we could focus on what the engine claims was inaccurate.
Note that the analysis at the end is automatic analysis by lichess (fishnet), and only goes up to a certain number of nodes. So I wouldn't trust it too much for showing where innacuracies were made. Don't get me wrong, the general evaluation it gives is still useful, but maybe not super precise.
@@WannesMalfait - That all sounds very plausible, but I'd like to hear Jerry's take on it.
Maybe he could go to that (supposed) inaccuracy and analyse it to see what he thinks.
Like if Jerry is gonna use that metric, then when something notable in that metric crops up I think it is worth mentioning!
Even if the end result is to dismiss it (as you are doing), I think it would be good to actually have it actively dismissed and see why, rather than to neglect to mention it.
Great video Jerry! Do you think we will have 14 draws or someone will break through. If so, whom?
Magnus will breakthrough, Nepo has took zero risk so far which is why all the games have been lackluster from him point, but i doubt Nepo will play all 14 games this way, he will come out of his shell sooner or later and with Magnus getting close to finding something even with Nepo in full draw mode, once Nepo does come to play, Magnus will find the breakthrough.
Ty Jerry u da best
What move was the inaccuracy ?
5:32 He doesn't has no squares. He doesn't have a square to spare.
What we were watching was two engines playing each other. Computer era has taken the soul of chess. BTW thank you Jerry for great analysis as always
yep, the players do not even try to unbalance the position at any point really either. I mean like iqp or big space or kingside vs queenside or bishop vs knight. Literally all of the engine work is about neutralizing the other player. It's the mentality. The engine for sure could be used to unbalance the position too, Im sure and then take it from there. The other player will try to neutralize it, you can count on that at which point you can use that to further unbalance the position and trow him off the tracks. Yea it's dangerous, but at the end of the day it's two humans playing, you must put the pressure to win or outswindle him out of his ways into your own ways and you have to love to do that and embrace it. But yea, these two guys are just stomping onto any posibility of imbalance...
@@NDakovic they must have played in that way and they did. Modern day chess forces top tiers to think and play like computers- so bunch of engine-like unnatural looking moves. Any slight diverge and you are in a lost position. And, as a consequence, this has side effects as we are rarely seeing any sacrifices, imbalances and more importantly the players own identity (playing style).
@@acyphium i know man, but were talking about ruy Lopez, petroff here. D4 game was a lot better. Who's to say they cant play c4, or fianchetto opening etc. E4 is so dead at this point at top level its hard to believe its this bad
@@NDakovic being able to play virtually every opening and position is the first and foremost "problem" today. I mean it's the thing taking away the uniqueness of a certain player. We can't see nowadays 60s Tal mainly playing Benoni against 1.d4 ie.
@@NDakovic Bobby Fischer told you that many years ago.....but you folks never learn
That was the most beautiful knight I’ve ever seen. Carlsen was beasting with it.
Thanks, Jerry!
Nice recap Jerry!
This had draw written all over it from very early and once they quickly exchanged queens, a bishop and a rook, you could bet the farm on it. I checked out at that point.
0:04 WHY is c4 being played for Ian??
Looks like the hosts having fun with photo ops.
10:52 I was actually able to tune in to the game live right as Carlsen was having the think before playing Qe8. Later I remember seeing the final position of this game live and being quite disappointed to see that c pawn still on c3. I feel as though in the world championships of yesteryear we would have seen a c4 advance at the moment I timestamped - even with an eventual drawn result, Nepo would have definitely proven himself to be world champion material if he had gone down that path I think. Clearly Carlsen was concerned about something, but so far all that's been proven is that the two are evenly matched.
I suppose the fact that a position like that could even have appeared in the game says something to Nepo's favor. It's just a same to see these games all just peter out when something more dynamic could have been pursued.
Great analysis
Thanks Jerry. Hope we get a sicilian this match :)
Great analysis but even more presented in a calm even rhythm!
Do u have opening repertoire videos?
Thanks
Thank you. No opening rep videos. Some may find the Beginner to Chess Master playlist helpful:
ruclips.net/p/PLQsLDm9Rq9bHKEBnElquF8GuWkI1EJ8Zp
Out of interest what chess level are you, sorry if that’s not the correct wording I’m not to knowledgeable on chess terminology, still like your videos a lot despite that
Jerry is a national master out of USA. The "levels" of chess are
National Master (NM)
Candidate Master (CM)
FIDE master (FM)
International master (IM)
Grandmaster (GM)
Your channels been hiding in my subscriptions since the tourney start, idek that you were doing recaps.... I woulda been here from the start
Chessnetwork also livestreams/live-commentates all the games over on twitch, if you're interested in that as well :]
Thanks Jerry!
Thanks Jerry once again
Look"s Like that in this game was a real intempting to win the game by white, but remain,s a feeling that two championship ago Carlsen manage 's to figure things out by rapid games
That would be sad that the championship would end in blitz. Already exist the blitz championship.
Wait, what was White's inaccuracy?
20. Red1 instead of c4.
@@Morphior I am so good at chess literature that I saw a colour instead of rook e to d1
@@thrylos32 same dude, same
It takes a man with 2 balls to move the C3->C4 @8:40
Beautiful defence by Carlsen, Ian couldn't find an opening and had to make a draw. Great analysis!
31. f3 f6
Somewhere Ben Finegold fell out of his chair
:D
NEVER!
What does "average centipawn loss" mean???
The computer gives evaluations in centipawns. The loss is the difference between your move and the computers move. Or something like that....
I believe 100 centipawns is equal to 1 pawn (it's like cents to dollars) of material, so these guys are playing so good that they don't even lose more than 0.06 pawns of material in a positional sense.
1 centipawn is worth 1/100 a pawn. The average centipawn loss is the average difference between the evaluation of the engine top move and the move made in a game.
I’ll check back in once tiebreaks begin. They should just decrease the time bank from now on to avoid 12 straight draws every two years.
...Do you not come to the WorldChessChampionship to see the highest level of human chess? Just because a game ends in a draw doesnt mean it was a bad/boring game right?, as long as the moves and positions were interesting l dont really see much to complain about.
It's not about who wins or who loses, it's about the every single moves that chess lovers watch
Wow, I bet you feel awfully silly now! What a stupid comment!
Jerry, the best and most pleasant voice for chess online. Question: why are we not seeing world champ or the challenger outplay their opponent this round or the last one in 2018? Draw after draw is disappointing. I grew up watching some real interesting world championships starting with the games in 1972. Chess hasn’t been the same since Bobby Fischer. Thanks for posting and analyzing this game.
@Francesco
I played in tournaments in middle school and a player in my high school chess team. I learned chess at 6. That was 54 years ago.
With the advances in technology top-level players have been able to get extremely close to "optimal play" over the last few decennia, and playing practically flawless inevitably leads to a higher likelihood of drawing. l think Chess nowadays is in a very good state, Carlsen and his opponents being able to play so close to theoretical perfection for multiple games on end is magnificent to watch :]
@@Sponsie1000
I agree with you on the advances in technology but what happened to creativity and a will to go farther?
Chess is virtually limitless in what a high level player can do on the board. We’ve seen that in the past but it’s absence is painfully obvious in this world championship and the last one.
@@angoor101 l think the crux is in that you are right in that a top level player can do virtually limitless things on the board, but l think Two top level players are ironically relatively restricted in their options...
There's not really any room for bluffing/going for a random chance in chess right, so if the best move and the "most fancy/flashy/creative" move are two different moves, Carlsen en co simply cannot afford to not go for the best move, because doing too many non-optimal moves might very well lose them the game when they're playing against an opponent who is going strictly for the best moves.
It's kinda like a prisoner's dilemma in that regard,, neither player wants to be the first/only one to not play optimally so they end up both having to play optimally (although l think they also quite like playing optimally regardless, but thats just my opinion).
l think the main difference with those far-past championships is a combination of both 1) knowing what move is optimal when for alllll the possible scenarios was way harder to know for sure before all the fancy engines of nowadays, and because of that: 2) The differences in skill/knowledge between even top-level players were (in my opinion) wayy greater then compared to now.
So basically, because it was way harder to know what the optimal response was to a creative back then, those creative moves were way more viable. Nowadays Carlsen and co have been studying chess with the support of engines for most of their careers,, so they are simply more adept in knowing what is optimal in any situation, causing them to play optimally (extremely low centipawn losses), causing draws to be more likely :]
what do you mean when you say the knight has a square
Either the knight controls that square or it has that square available to occupy - usually in reference to a good outpost for the knight.
If you post the timestamp, I can be more accurate.
Nice defensive skill
Do these guys load up their games vs stockfish right away? Seems like they looked at all the engine moves already and are trying to follow them. It’s like the 3rd time they’ve played the same opening in a span of 5 games. Maybe there should be a electronics restriction for these types of matches. It’ll make the matches way more dynamic. Engines are too good nowadays.
16 min...how about white sacs the bishop for h6..wins 2 pawns..busts open Black king defences ?
you could play this in rapid games but its a high risk to fall back a piece when there is no straight plan to end the game from that position in classical chess.
@@earl3204 too risky ?...but no risk means boring draws...
@@DrBroncanuus ya but there is not even a big threat coming from this i mean after king f8 you are just behind a piece without a serious attack
@@earl3204 so Nepo, was right to ignore me, I would have marched my pawns down the board....
3 points piece for 2 pawns with a change of structure could be good but there is nothing attacking the black king after that the pawns have been taken so Black can follow up by exchanging piece, stopping the pawns with the king and finishing the endgame with a knight with pawns against only pawns.
♟ thanks Jerry
he needs to get his queen out early and trick him to a 4 or 5 move checkmate
Carlsen wouldn't have had to play against the scholar mate in a long time, maybe he would fall for it :)))
👏🏼
Magnus is steel
Thanks pal
The moderator has a nice fit 💧
Nepomniachiy:)
This is anticlimactic 😔 you would think with the world title on the line, these games would be hectic. I guess I'll wait for rapids 🙏
Well it’s exactly because the title is on the line that the games aren’t hectic;) nobody wants to be the one who messes up
you would think with the world title on the line, they'd consider their moves even more carefully, and try even harder than usual to make only the most accurate moves. idk, l'd think it'd be anti-climactic if Carlsen blundered a piece and lost a game because of that,, why even bother with deciding a world champion if they're gonna casually blunder like a beginner anyways
17 consecutive draws woohooooooo
If Ian wants to be WC, he will have to take risks. Magnus can just chill and draw to keep his title. There is no point in Magnus taking risks.
I hate this tournament, would rather see a 960 tournament
yep. classical chess is solved enough by computers that humans can memorize the moves until by the time they actually start playing, the game can be easily (for them) drawn
No one is forcing you to watch classical chess…
@@kylestanfield4903I agree with Kyle. Think about it... all these draws are building up to a dramatic eventual decisive game.
@@kylestanfield4903 Reminds me of people who don't like baseball wanting to change baseball... to make it so that people who don't like baseball might like baseball...
no.
@@danielhanafin9885 at least in a physical sport it is easy to see the human labour involved. Whereas in top chess it is theory learned from a computer then a few moves made then a draw made by perpetual. Hence my recommendation for 960…
:)
❤
First
consider uploading earlier i cant wait till midnight for this beautiful content :((
Where do you live? Greece?
@@beanless4410 yep
well I'm patiently waiting and trying to avoid to see any analysis video of today's win before the one from Jerry... and it's almost hour after midnight ;)
Now, I understand why chess commentators exist. Total charisma bypass.
I recommend playing this guy's videos at 1.25 speed.
watch out for anxiety ... not a good thing in chess
More like x2
what a boring game
a no hitter
I honestly believe that the World Chess Championships of today are totally unimaginative and lacking creative flare compared to the WCCs of the past. I mean no disrespect at all to Carlsen, Nepo and the other top players of today, but they play much too rigidly and rely too much on chess engines for me to ever consider them to be "creative" players. I'd rather see chess players try to imitate pioneers of yesteryear like Paul Morphy, Wilhelm Steinitz, and yes, Bobby Fischer. I dare say that chess engines have helped ruin the game of chess itself.
The current state of classical chess today makes me appreciate chess variants all the more.
DAE Bobby Fischer ??
That argument makes no sense since you are ignoring all the other time controls and other tournaments they play. Specifically this tournament they have a long time to prepare for one opponent with a large team so of course they'll have a lot of engine prep. It also hasn't ruined chess in general, it's only really true for very high level classical chess, not even all GMs.
Then don't watch it, speed chess still exists. The stakes are too high for them to go on wild attacks their opponent will surely be prepared for.
You have ignored the entire premise of a tournament - WINNING.
Creativity is only possible when there’s nothing left from theory - which in this day and age is diminishing
@@DanKop2 even the other classical games such as tata steel had some creative games, so i don't think you have to go to faster time controls. Just lower the stakes.
A little enthusiasm, would help,, IMO
Nah, I love the cold dead hard hitting, emotionless chess breakdowns whispered into my ear. It's soothing, like a cup of coffee in the early morning.
@@Synky me: reading this comment in the morning with a cup of specialty coffee in my hands 😂😂 ♟☕
Just do the game dude
First