| Which way would you like to see major chess events covered? | |
When the Norwegian / Tromsø organizers asked me to be an Ambassador for the 2014 Chess Olympiad, as well as to help promote the 2013 World Cup and the 2014 Olympiad, I told them of my vision of how an event should be covered and promoted.
As a huge fan of chess, and as someone who follow most major events, I sometimes get frustrated with the slow and stale way of how some of these events are covered. I think it is possible to make chess fun, informative, educational, and exciting for the fans at home following on the Internet.
That is why I proposed, and in fact implemented, the new way of LIVE commentary (more lively with personal interaction), tweets, photo updates, and much more, just as you saw at the Tromsø Chess World Cup.
However, the chess world is divided. While I got a substantial positive and enthusiastic support for the change, there are still quite a few people who think social media, personal interaction, and focusing more on the casual players is the wrong way to go. In fact, I was even severely criticized by some prominent people in the chess world for the new system. They think that my idea would cheapen the royal game.
So I ask you to be the judge. Please offer your feedback and please vote. I am truly interested in how you feel about this. I also think that your input can impact the way how future major events are covered.
Thank you!
Susan
I like boring. Chess is boring.
Stick to your guns. This new way is the future. It involves the public, which in turn brings on better sponsorship which in turn exposes the game as something accessible. Something perhaps some higher rated (people and their secrets) Don’t like. It doesn’t cheapen it at all. Take a walk over to the Chessbomb site and all that scrolls down in terms of comment is a ridiculous stream of nonsense and trolling. I think you presented the games quite well and the format makes it a fun experience. Not to say I minded the old way at all but this charges the atmosphere. If someone likes the old way…”Turn the channel!” Nobody is forcing them to watch..they can watch the moves listen to nothing and look at computer evals. I’d never want to take away someones right to be boring. Keep up the good work Susan. Ignore the trolls.
I don’t think Chess is boring. It can be very exciting when you learn something about the game.
In the U.S. it seems the game is anonymous unless you are involved.
The questions from an Amateur: Why do the players choose the openings or defense that they use? In a drawn game: What did they see that caused the draw that an amateur would not see?
At last count, the vote is 181 to 31 in favor of the new way. On the other hand, it’s not exactly fair, because those who prefer the new way are likely to visit chess blogs, whereas those who prefer the old way are likely to play shuffleboard in their retirement communities.
The Tromso coverage with Susan and Lawrence Trent was excellent, not forgetting the live pictures of the game being talked about. The only improvement I would suggest is to put up a board position for the game being looked at by the cameras during the breaks.
I thought the interview with Kramnik was great. He talked about all of the challenges of being a chess professional etc. Sometimes what goes on off the board is just as important as what happens on it. I thought Kramnik was crazy to go fishing the day before the final round especially since he had a losing score against Andreikin before this tournament.
Also, keep in mind that history is on your side. Almost everything that comes up about the Fischer Spassky match is about what happened around the games. It is great to see brilliancies on the board but they will never be enough to broaden the game, increase sponsorship, viewership and interest in the game.
Knowing about the players states of mind before and after the games explains a lot about what happened. Lagrave cracked under the pressure, Korobov felt tortured playing Kramnik, etc. In the 2000 WC Match Kramnik chose the Berlin Defense because he knew the psychological impact it would have on Kasparov.
I would say, keep up the good work and continue to pioneer the new reporting formats! The will always be some negative reactions to the new.
Susan’s comments (about some worried about ‘cheapening’ the game) confirm my suspicion that some in the chess community don’t WANT chess to become more popular and have a higher profile. They want to keep it as an elitist activity only for the ‘cognoscenti’. Too bad.
I have not liked any the new formats at all, starting with the Fischer match on PBS. I think chess was better when all of the commentaries were done in Russian language with game note in Cyrillic script. Also no one can best Botvinnik in the game analysis or Machgielis Euwe as FIDE President. Only when chess goes back to the roots will it be great again.
definitely, live commentary with interactive tweets from all us online spectators. and no computer suggestions! it was enjoyable to hear nigel short’s analyses which were then affirmed or refuted by inviting the participants after the games to discuss what they actually were thinking at the time.
brief , simple, commentary situating the various opening strategies being employed among possible responses would be helpful. but please no tutorials.
I loved ur xcellent commentary susan u xplained analysis deep in position hope I can c more of ur commentary enen with trent lol he was awesome so here to u well done
I wish there was a little more information on the website for visitors on site Tromsø. Like are there tickets (free entry), where to go to see the games, where are the opening/closing ceremonies and are they open for public etc. And certainly a little pitch beforehand if it is worth coming on-site vs watching over internet.
I also would vote for rules prohibiting or discouraging 14-move agreed draws.
The problem with chess commentary is that chess players are at many levels, and it is extremely difficult for a single commentary ‘stream’ to satisfy them all. Why does it have to be either/or?
Honestly, I think the ‘best’ answer is to have separate audio tracks on the video feed (like choosing a subtitle on a movie) aimed at: 1) beginners & novices 2) seasoned ‘patzers’ 3) Experienced club players and beyond. 2 & 3 might be combined.
With current technology, the audio streams are tiny compared to the video stream and take up little bandwidth. Can’t something like this be done?
That said, I enjoyed a lot of your Tromso coverage 🙂
Ms. Polar,
As one of the few people in the Chess community that really understands how to promote Chess, you should do what you think is best. Many of us old folks are not particularly technology savvy, but we’ll follow you as best we can.
I think both methods can be useful. I love it when groups like the Saint Louis Chess center have live commentary from GMs. But I’m usually at work when they happen, so I have to watch the highlights in the evening. I like to play through the games, then look at what the players say about the game afterwards. I think methods like that which accommodate those of us who work are best. It would also be nice to have a summary of the games from an experienced commentator such as yourself. The live comments (e.g. those from Yasser Seirawan, who I like very much) are fun when I’m able to watch them (e.g., on a weekend), but are a bit long to watch when I want to go over the game in the evening, because they jump from game to game, and ramble a bit.