Now it's the Dubov vs Niemann controversy.
If you saw Magnus's interview with Levy Rozman (Gotham Chess) he stated that he agreed in principle to there being a dress code so players did not go in shoddily, for the "image" of chess, and he felt that although he was wearing jeans, they were smart enough and in modern dress style they should have been permitted, or it wasn't clear to him anyway he was breaking a dress code, so they should have been more lenient and he'd agreed to change for the next day.
In any case, I enjoyed the world rapid and he wasn't really in contention anyway. The world blitz was spoiled by Dubov not turning up for his game against Hans and then a series of quick draws at the end by the top players. As it is, Dubov ended up one of those tied for first with 9.5 and possibly eliminated through tie-breaks (which I think is totally wrong anyway) and had he just drawn with Hans Niemann he'd have been a clear leader on 10 with Hans only on 9 (albeit Hans would have fought for a win in the last 2 rounds instead of taking quick draws, and Dubov might have gone for a quick draw himself on the last round).
Maybe instead of just 8 going into a knockout it could have worked like the Champions League - the top 8 go into the last 16, the next 8 play a match against the 8 below them so all the top 24 still in contention.
Failing that, given that 10 players are tied for first place, use tie-breaks only to push the top 6 automatically into the quarter-final and have an extra match 7th vs 10th and 8th vs 9th for the last two places.
I personally think tiebreaks are unfair as you can only win your own games against the opponents you are paired against, and you can't help how they do in their other games, and you can only beat the players you are paired against.
BTW. in the real OTB rapid event where I finished 5th overall and top of my rating section tied on points but ahead on tiebreak with the player who was officially 6th, I never consider I finished anything other than equal with that player, with whom I shared the prize money. We also agreed a draw on our final match, not a stupid quick one, but we got to a rook and pawn endgame which was technically drawn then decided not to bother to play it out. That opponent was 10 years old and I guess the share of the top prize meant more to him than it did to me. (After doing well in that event my FIDE rating also went up and the next tournament I had to play in the top section which now was separate and I scored 1/5. Yeah the standard was higher but hey, I did manage to beat one of them).
In any case, I enjoyed the world rapid and he wasn't really in contention anyway. The world blitz was spoiled by Dubov not turning up for his game against Hans and then a series of quick draws at the end by the top players. As it is, Dubov ended up one of those tied for first with 9.5 and possibly eliminated through tie-breaks (which I think is totally wrong anyway) and had he just drawn with Hans Niemann he'd have been a clear leader on 10 with Hans only on 9 (albeit Hans would have fought for a win in the last 2 rounds instead of taking quick draws, and Dubov might have gone for a quick draw himself on the last round).
Maybe instead of just 8 going into a knockout it could have worked like the Champions League - the top 8 go into the last 16, the next 8 play a match against the 8 below them so all the top 24 still in contention.
Failing that, given that 10 players are tied for first place, use tie-breaks only to push the top 6 automatically into the quarter-final and have an extra match 7th vs 10th and 8th vs 9th for the last two places.
I personally think tiebreaks are unfair as you can only win your own games against the opponents you are paired against, and you can't help how they do in their other games, and you can only beat the players you are paired against.
BTW. in the real OTB rapid event where I finished 5th overall and top of my rating section tied on points but ahead on tiebreak with the player who was officially 6th, I never consider I finished anything other than equal with that player, with whom I shared the prize money. We also agreed a draw on our final match, not a stupid quick one, but we got to a rook and pawn endgame which was technically drawn then decided not to bother to play it out. That opponent was 10 years old and I guess the share of the top prize meant more to him than it did to me. (After doing well in that event my FIDE rating also went up and the next tournament I had to play in the top section which now was separate and I scored 1/5. Yeah the standard was higher but hey, I did manage to beat one of them).
@dstne @Nihongo-san I don't need any AI detector to know that it's AI. The paragraphs are clearly titled in ChatGPT-style (and written also). It's literally common sense. And I care 0% about the quality of the content when I see that someone pretends to make a great post just by copypasting ChatGPT. This is just a very cheap thing to do and it deserves all the rejection it gets.
And the final of the tournament right on new year's eve? So sadistic by FIDE...
@Cedur216 said in #33:
> @dstne @Nihongo-san I don't need any AI detector to know that it's AI. The paragraphs are clearly titled in ChatGPT-style (and written also). It's literally common sense. And I care 0% about the quality of the content when I see that someone pretends to make a great post just by copypasting ChatGPT. This is just a very cheap thing to do and it deserves all the rejection it gets.
You are right. And when I comment , people are still throwing dislikes at me. They enjoy this AI content.
Those who think I am rude, just imagine that
Your boss removed you. You asked why? he said "I can use AI for my job and i don't even have to pay it. It makes no mistake"
Now love that #1 post
> @dstne @Nihongo-san I don't need any AI detector to know that it's AI. The paragraphs are clearly titled in ChatGPT-style (and written also). It's literally common sense. And I care 0% about the quality of the content when I see that someone pretends to make a great post just by copypasting ChatGPT. This is just a very cheap thing to do and it deserves all the rejection it gets.
You are right. And when I comment , people are still throwing dislikes at me. They enjoy this AI content.
Those who think I am rude, just imagine that
Your boss removed you. You asked why? he said "I can use AI for my job and i don't even have to pay it. It makes no mistake"
Now love that #1 post
I do wonder about this: see black's 25th move.
lichess.org/broadcast/fide-world-rapid--blitz-championships-2024--blitz-open-knockout/final-game-3/OQHCOYeD/5Pz04qYK
Game 3 in the final and Magnus is cruising 2-0 and just needs a draw and he leaves the rook on e8 hanging. What is going through his mind? Is he trying to make it more interesting?
lichess.org/broadcast/fide-world-rapid--blitz-championships-2024--blitz-open-knockout/final-game-3/OQHCOYeD/5Pz04qYK
Game 3 in the final and Magnus is cruising 2-0 and just needs a draw and he leaves the rook on e8 hanging. What is going through his mind? Is he trying to make it more interesting?
@earlpurple said in #36:
> Game 3 in the final and Magnus is cruising 2-0 and just needs a draw and he leaves the rook on e8 hanging. What is going through his mind? Is he trying to make it more interesting?
See, Magnus is not as talented and flawless as yourself. Be kind when you judging inferior players. Maybe challenge him to match and bet much money on your victory. Easy money for you!
> Game 3 in the final and Magnus is cruising 2-0 and just needs a draw and he leaves the rook on e8 hanging. What is going through his mind? Is he trying to make it more interesting?
See, Magnus is not as talented and flawless as yourself. Be kind when you judging inferior players. Maybe challenge him to match and bet much money on your victory. Easy money for you!
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.