26 ( +1 | -1 ) ChessnessFor all the hardcore chess players on this site...Would you rather watch a match between Fischer and Morphy or watch a different sport such as football...and do you thing $4000 is too much money for a lifesized chess board?...im thinking of getting one.
51 ( +1 | -1 ) I would be happy watching either one.Although, a match between Fischer and Morphy would be pretty special so I would pick that.
I just received a USCF catalog. They are selling a chess set with large pieces. The pieces are 10 inches in diameter and the king is two feet high. The board is a set of 64 plastic mats that lock together. The mats are 10 inches long on each side making the board 9 feet 4 inches on each side. The pieces and board thogether cost $850. The USCF web site is www.uschess.org.
69 ( +1 | -1 ) Chess is not a spectator sport. You got to have a screw loose if you want to sit and watch two guys think for five or six hours (classical time limits). However, there is a certain fascination about a 60 yr. old Fischer playing a 160 yr. old Morphy. Hey, that gives me an idea for a chess horror movie. One hundred and sixty year old Morphy is brought back to life by a mad scientist and all through the movie Morphy is crushing skulls... The climax is when Edmaster (who turns into a wolf at night, along with 20 million other guys) drives a stake through the crumbling flesh of Morphy and lives a life of luxury after striking oil in his basement. Man, I can see the money rolling in at the box office.
23 ( +1 | -1 ) Chess IS a spectator sport if you're a chessplayer... but it has to be well organized. For example, with demonstration boards in the lobby of the hotel where tournament is played, with GMs explaining moves. If on TV, it would have to be at least 5 boards in order to be watchable - but again, who would pay for this???
34 ( +1 | -1 ) Well...Over here in France in a tournament in Corsica recently (which Karpov won in the end.....) they had little Infra-red head sets for everyone in the audience, and the novelty was that you had two stations which analysed the games by two sets of Grandmasters, and you could flick back and forth between the two to see how they compared......and it as very interesting..and great fun
54 ( +1 | -1 ) lorddreyfusLet me get this straight. Your'e going to pay good money to see two GM's play chess. but instead of watching them play, you wander out to the lobby to hear people talking about the game that is taking place inside? Perhaps viewing the participants on tv screens?
You're right---Who would pay for this.
mettlesome Infra-red head sets? Did everyone have to bring their own chess set to follow the analysis? Surely you couldn't see a tv screen. Don't tell me these people could follow the analysis in their heads. Wait---I got it! TV goggles!
99 ( +1 | -1 ) TonlesuLet me clarify...
Suppose that there is a big Berger with, for example, 10 top GMs. Now, if you had the demonstration boards with comentators in the same room with the players, it would be a little awkward, wouldn't it?
So, inside audience can watch the games while trying to understand/guess GM moves(demonstration boards).
Outside, organisers can have, for example, demonstration boards WITH strong players as comentators. And yes, I would probably be very interested to hear what strong GMs have to say about the games that are being played inside! Apparently late Eduard Gufeld was very popular comentator on events of this kind...
Now, I never actually went on such events, but from what I've read it seems that this system has been used before... One of my friends (he is almost 60) had the opportunity to see this and had a great time.
Now, on TV direct transmission of chess matches would be difficult simply because the program time is far too expensive.
I hope this cleared it for you, kid...
61 ( +1 | -1 ) lorddreyfussLet me clarify...
I attended the candidates match between Karpov and Hiartason (Seattle-late 80's). It's a little trying to sit and watch two guys think for hours on end. So I wonderd over to the communications shack. There masters were analysing the game, and yes, the late Gufeld was there taking questions from the audience (he even took one from me). He was actually part of karpov's russian assemblage. Now this was a lot better than the actual playing hall. But the question kept spinning around in my brain. I've driven a long way and paid good money to watch Karpov on tv? Is this not strange?
Now we're getting somewhere... Let's be relistic - all of us (that have Internet) can see the games of important events/matches immediately after they are finished, or even during. This is not the point.
I guess I would drive a long way (I can't say about the "good money") to be on, for example, Chess Olimpic event. Actually, I always wanted to, but never had the time (or money) to do it - yet! Why? For the atmosphere and the chance to learn something.
What I did do is participate on large open tournaments (including one Open Championship of Croatia and 2 of Czech Republic), where you can see quite a few GM games. I can tell you that I learned a lot about how GMs approach the game, and possibly a little about their mind process during the game. I concentrate at watching positional players and trying to understand their ideas and way of playing. Also, it is very interesting for me to hear what strong players analyze - this is a great way to learn.
But back to the Berger - if you're watching 5 games at the time, especially after 1 hour or so when they start to develop, maybe it wouldn't be so "trying"? :)
82 ( +1 | -1 ) watching chessI enjoy watching live chess games on the internet accompanied by GM commentary. It is thrilling watch the game unfold in real time. You can root for your favorite to win--just like in other sports. And it's not wasting time because you can practice your own chess skills by predicting what moves will be played next. If there are any long periods without moves, and your tired, you can surf the web while you wait, or talk on the phone. You can also watch football on TV at the same time! Internet spectator chess is a wonderful thing for devoted players. It's the only way to get any suspense from the tournaments. I watched the Kramnik-Kasparov London 2000 World Championship Tournament live on the internet, and it was the most enjoyable event I've ever watched on screen. Full of tense moments.
89 ( +1 | -1 ) Sorry....Sorry, I wasn't very clear....in fact you get to see the players on a stage (so you see all the ticks, the squirming...etc) AND above them on screens they can't see you have two big demonstration boards where two different GM teams analyse the games (moving the pieces, drawing with vitual marker pens, going back to show what players missed..etc). So yes, you are in the same room as them, watching, but hearing other GMs talk about the game!
I said infra-red because aparently the headsets work on some strange short range frequency and over here they call it 'Infra-red (sounds reasonable to me...).
There are two 'channels with different analysis going on at the same time and it's great fun to flick back and forth to see what they see in the position(s).
Watching games on internet doesn't carry the 'human' element at all (Kasparov's famous putting his watch back on!!)