Re: Draw appreciation at Corus 2008
- From: Larry Tapper <larry_tapper@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:35:37 -0800 (PST)
On Jan 28, 12:46 am, "David Kane" <davidek...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The recently concluded Corus 2008 is one of the chess world's premier events.
One of its features is the 250 Euro "Public Prize" awarded for "the most elegant
or most interesting game" in the GM sections (A, B, or C). These are voted-on by
all chess lovers via the Internet. .
According to the Corus website, drawn games received votes in just 3 rounds. The
percentage totals were 21, 30, and 13. If one assumes an equal number of votes
per round, then drawn games received just 4.9% of the votes, compared to
95.1% for decisive games.
The actual draw percentages were 67%, 52%, and 33% for Corus A, B, and
C, for an overall average of 51%. This means that decisive games were 20 times
as likely to receive votes as draws. (This ratio would be twice as high if
we considered that most of the votes were for games in the "A" section.)
These statistics are very similar to those of Corus 2007, where the same
analysis led to the conclusion that decisive games were 22 times as likely
to receive votes as draws.
In short, the oft claimed appreciation that "real" chessplayers have for
draws apparently doesn't translate into "elegant or interesting". Or maybe
people interested enough in chess to follow the tournament via the internet
and vote for the public prize still don't qualify as "real" chessplayers?
I continue to be unmoved by this argument, which David Kane has made
several times before.
Suppose that the NBA championship were broadcast over the Internet and
fans were invited to vote on their favorite play of each game. Not
just ordinary fans, really dedicated and knowledgeable basketball
fans, only those who had played competitively themselves, if you like.
Would we see many votes for a player positioning himself perfectly to
defend against a high-scoring guard? Or sinking a pair of clutch free
throws? Or fighting for a key rebound? I don't think so. The slam
dunks, the spectacular passes, etc. will get most of the votes,
naturally. Does this mean there's a problem with the less spectacular
aspects of basketball skill? That the rules need to be changed so that
every NBA game looks more like the All-Star game, fast-paced and high-
scoring? Of course not.
Consider Kramnik's victory against Aronian in Round 6, the one with
the Nc3 innovation against Radjabov's piece sacrifice in the Slav.
This game garnered 37% of the vote, just short of Carlsen's 41%, which
took the public prize for the day.
http://www.coruschess.com/public_prize.php
In the Kramnik game, Aronian defended stubbornly and ended up on the
short side of the notoriously difficult rook + f pawn + h pawn vs.
rook endgame. The position reached was objectively drawn, according to
commentator Jon Speelman, but Aronian eventually faltered close to the
final time control. Would this game have been somehow less noteworthy
if Aronian had held the draw? On the contrary, it seems to me it would
have been even more so.
I'm sure that if we looked closely at several other games in
contention for the Corus public prize, we'd find several other
instances in which the eventual loser missed chances to put up better
resistance. What do we learn from this? The obvious, which is that the
heads of chess fans, like those of any other fans, are more easily
turned by successful offense than by successful defense. So?
LT
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Draw appreciation at Corus 2008
- From: David Kane
- Re: Draw appreciation at Corus 2008
- References:
- Draw appreciation at Corus 2008
- From: David Kane
- Draw appreciation at Corus 2008
- Prev by Date: Kra vs Anand and Top vs Gata ,what two will play the most exciting
- Next by Date: Re: Worst/Best Display of Sportsmanship at a Tournament by Opponent
- Previous by thread: Draw appreciation at Corus 2008
- Next by thread: Re: Draw appreciation at Corus 2008
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
