Champions Showdown Live
11/12/2017 – Day 4 featured impressive comebacks from both Caruana and So, who won their respective matches. Meanwhile Nakamura had locked up his $60,000 winner's prize already with nine games to spare! Carlsen put the the screws to Ding in the Game 20 portion of their match and has a sizeable lead. Three matches are in the books but the fourth continues Monday and Tuesday in Saint Louis, USA. Games begin at 20:00 CET (1 pm in Saint Louis) Monday, and at 18:00 CET (11 am in Saint Louis) on Tuesday.
The "Mega" is the database every serious chessplayer needs. The database contains 7.1 million games from 1500 to 2017, in highest quality standard, full of top level analyses and completely classified.
Carlsen vs. Ding Rapid G / 10
The Saint Louis Chess Club hosts a series of four matches, the Champions Showdown, November 9th to14. In an exciting twist, the three top American players and current World Champion, Magnus Carlsen, face their opponents in 10 games of rapid and 20 games of blitz.
The matches
- Hikaru Nakamura vs. Veselin Topalov
- Fabiano Caruana vs. Alexander Grischuk
- Wesley So vs. Leinier Dominguez
- Magnus Carlsen vs. Ding Liren (begins November 11)
Schedule
Thursday Nov. 9th — G/30 Rounds 1 - 4 (except for Carlsen vs. Ding)Friday Nov. 10th — G/20 Rounds 1 - 6Saturday Nov. 11th 1 - 5:30 PM G/10 Rounds 1 - 8 & Carlsen vs. Ding G/30 Rounds 1 - 4Sunday Nov. 12th — G/5 Rounds 1 - 12 & Carlsen vs. Ding Liren G/20 Rounds 1 - 6- Monday Nov. 13th — Magnus Carlsen vs. Ding Liren G/10 Rounds 1 - 8
- Tuesday Nov. 14th — Magnus Carlsen vs. Ding Liren G/5 Rounds 1-12
No delay or increment will be used. Wins are weighted depending on the time control. Game 30 wins are worth 5 points with draws worth 2½ points. Game 20 wins are worth 4 points, with draws adding 2 points. In Game 10, a draw nets 1½ and a win 3 points.
Day 5 commentary
Commentary by GM Yasser Seirawan, WGM Jennifer Shahade and GM Maurice Ashley
Carlsen vs. Ding
All games
The "Mega" is the database every serious chessplayer needs. The database contains 7.1 million games from 1500 to 2017, in highest quality standard, full of top level analyses and completely classified.
It was an exciting fourth day of #chess at the #ChampionsShowdown. Read more about today's results from @GMLittlePeasant. https://t.co/lHi77ix8Y6 pic.twitter.com/zya0GtYjMP
— SaintLouis ChessClub (@STLChessClub) November 13, 2017
On-demand playlist
Illustrating the effect of no increment time control, last week GM commentators Alejandro Ramirez and Christian Chrila played a trio of bullet games.
You can also find each days complete commentary in the playlist menu (click or tap the icon in the upper left of the video player).
2017 Champions Showdown playlist | Source: CCSCSL on YouTube
A lot of commenters here seem to have forgotten one thing. The winner of each of these matches is taking home 60000 USD for four days work. Choosing not to play is an option, but your beliefs need to be near absolute. Obviously these players were willing to provide themselves as fodder for a format test for just compensation.
Augusta2022 your point would made sense if number of moves in any chess game was fixed.
increment should become a standard in any official tournument, at any time control, at any level.
forcing 2700+ rated players to play bullet is an insult, both to the players and chess in general.
forcing 2700+ rated players to play bullet is an insult, both to the players and chess in general.
@Augusta2022 I prefer a contest which measures playing ability, not time management. The Fischer clock gives clearly better chess for almost no cost (a few extra minutes might need to be built in the schedule, but nothing more), so why not do it?
@Peter B,
I really don't get your point. Treat time as any other resource on the board like space, material, bishops whatever.
If you're winning on the board but is left with 10 seconds vs 60, then to bad for you, you spend your time in a bad way a loses the game.
I really don't get your point. Treat time as any other resource on the board like space, material, bishops whatever.
If you're winning on the board but is left with 10 seconds vs 60, then to bad for you, you spend your time in a bad way a loses the game.
@turok - the problem isn't no increment per se, but no increment for an infinite number of moves. You're right that in the olden days many great games were played without increment, but at the top level there was always a fixed number of moves and then you got extra time. The problem I've seen time and time again is when there is no limit on the number of moves, so the player with 60 seconds left shuffles their pieces and wins on time against the player with 10 seconds left.
In basketball I hated the 3 point shot when it was implemented. I had to live with it but before the 3 point shot basketball thrived. Same with chess-before increments many a world titles were won and many a greaat games ever were played. I had no issue with no increments and playing now as I am mid fifty is ok to. Good games are played by players not clocks-poor reshevsky thought sure had time troubles hahaha
Another vote against no-increment. I played many weekenders in the times before Fischer clocks, and they really were the "Dark Ages" in terms of fair results. Many times I saw games decided by who could shuffle their pieces quickest instead of who could play good moves. For just a small cost in time (3 second increment only adds 1 minute to the schedule for every 20 endgame moves), there is much better chess when increments are used,
Nothing beats good old-fashioned Axe Chess. Blitz and speed chess is not about the quality of the games anyway - who wants to analyze a blitz game? - it is about the contestants having fun. Myself, I prefer the James Bond time limit, 0:07 and nothing to the rescue.
whos idea was no increment? really dumb
I too have played chess for a long time, 30+ years, and found the digital delay clock to be a wonderful invention.
No need to go back to the old ways, sacrificing the quality of the games even further.
And, no need for anyone to "demonstrate" how no increment/delay "sudden-death" games are played, other than to have everyone once gain reminded of how inferior this format really is.
No need to go back to the old ways, sacrificing the quality of the games even further.
And, no need for anyone to "demonstrate" how no increment/delay "sudden-death" games are played, other than to have everyone once gain reminded of how inferior this format really is.
@turok "Ah for me, I'm tired of seeing Real, Bayern, Barcelona, Juve, PSG in the champions League each year."
@PeterFrost Strangely enough, "Dark Age Chess" is the preferred format for Modern Age blitz players, and this is the type of chess played by most amateurs and anyone with a mechanical clock. If the last seconds aren't good chess, the rest of each game certainly is.
Every interesting and exciting development in chess is happening in St Louis. I think it's refreshing that a prominent tournament organiser is willing to experiment with differing formats each year. If this year's is so objectionable to you, look away for a year.
Every interesting and exciting development in chess is happening in St Louis. I think it's refreshing that a prominent tournament organiser is willing to experiment with differing formats each year. If this year's is so objectionable to you, look away for a year.
Speaking from the dark ages for the uninitiated and senseless who have only been playing tournament chess for over 30 years this is just hilarious. Its not like Chessbase is doing the reports in descriptive! There was chess before digital and there was great chess played and great players playing it. I for one LOVE it! The chessboard is no place for safe spaces and being comfortable. It is a beautiful battlefield.
This entire event is absolutely ridiculous. The finish of the games under such a ludicrous time control is not chess, it's merely a crude form of entertainment for the uninitiated. Chess is demeaned by such an event. I am also puzzled as to what is the competitive point of it all...it's just four separate matches, and that's it? What a disappointing waste of getting eight world class players together with the world's best commentary team. I am becoming more and more concerned with the direction in which chess in the US is heading. If we are not careful, we will wind up watching live chess in between grabbing a hot dog and being roused into excitement by an organist on the stage moving progressively up the musical scale as Carlsen's pawns advance on his opponent's king.
ah for me I am tired of seeing these same groups of players just swapping points with each other
Can only agree, Masquer, for who with their senses intact wants to watch this worthless spectacle?
they are just encouraging immoral flagging in chess. what happens when both players are in a dead drawn endgame but one of them has 20 seconds on the clock? his opponent will flag him. and this time control adds no excitement since players can become conservative and just avoid taking risks when they are low on clock.
not a fan of no increment or delay. i am not sure what they are trying to accomplish here.
Terrible - no delay or increment means we're back in the dark ages before electronic clocks. The quality of chess will be the first casualty.
1
