Levy Reacts to Magnus Carlsen’s “Controversial” Comments
22.02.2024
➡️ Get My Chess Courses:
➡️ Get my best-selling chess book:
➡️ My book in the UK and Europe:
➡️ Mein Buch auf Deutsch:
➡️ Mi libro en Español:
➡️ Start Playing Chess FOR FREE:
➡️ Enjoy my videos? Donate Here :
Email me your games: [email protected]
Sponsors, Business, Media: [email protected] – [DO NOT SEND GAMES HERE]
⭐️ Follow Me If You Are Amazing:
➡️ CAMEO:
➡️ FACEBOOK:
➡️ SNAP:
➡️ INSTAGRAM:
➡️ TWITCH:
➡️ TIKTOK:
➡️ TWITTER:
➡️ GOTHAM DISCORD:
➡️ THUMBNAILS BY:
The part about quitting before college hit home for me. I started late at the age of 10, but got to FIDE 1800 at 14. I beat my first few masters and was going strong. But my parents shed the reality, how the top 50 players are the only ones who can make a decent living out of chess, and they put double the effort than going into college for a lesser salary. To be a grandmaster you have to put more effort and take more risks for less money and less stability than being a surgeon or an engineer, or software, who would be making double with benefits. And now players are competing against children who started professional training at the age of 3, and are practicing for hours in a day. There is no hope for people who started playing at even 7 or 8 now unless they can pick it up insanely fast. And with all this cheating stuff and the technology, will chess survive the next decade is put into question.
I like the solutions mentioned in th is video. Similar problem is with cricket. The Test (5 day format) and ODI (1 day format) has lost its viewers in majority last decade. The solution could to Mix Up Rapid and Blitz And bullet Thoroughly in a year( 1 tournament only in a month) and then and then once in 6 months we can have Freestyle Goat Challenge and The original Chess960 Championship in longer time control. Bullet are fun to watch as they are very quick and people think it's cool to play fast. For broadcasting longer games, we can have players and experts analysing their games.
Another good analogy would be wrestling. Wrestling has freestyle, Greco-Roman, and folk style. In a single tournament, they hold multiple styles of wrestling in which a competitor can compete in a single style or all of them. Maybe chess could hold events where they have multiple styles in which they compete. Since there are now multiple formats of chess (Fischer random, rapid & blitz, and classical), maybe they should break it up like wrestling does. Wrestling also has plenty of tournaments that are not invitationals, therefore standings can not be tampered with. They also hold tournaments dedicated to creating teams for the Olympics or even for world championships.
Magnus, the guy who got famous from GothamChess yt channel.
Loved the Global chess league. The format made for an amazing experience
Levy never fails to point out that he loves chess.
Levi was eating dirty beaver in North Carolina !
What was so complex abt the format of the global chess league?
This video is an ode to capitalism.
He’s completely correct. The chess world needs to be reformed.
However: the video is made because he wants to be an ESPN-style announcer (much more money).
Honestly, I feel like Fide should run in a similar style to the Capcom Cup.
First, adapt a seasonal approach where players earn ‘points’ that will reset each season (assume 2-year long seasons).
Group the countries by region, and have results from local, country & regional tournaments contribute to their points that scale on the level of the event & time controls/variations.
Take the top however many players from each region with the most points & let them be the the participants of the chess world cup where you’ll have group stages where players play round-robin against everyone in their group.
Take the top 2 – 4 players of each group & place them into a double elimination bracket accordingly.
The actual matches themselves should be a mixture of different time controls & variations like the SCC (excluding classical from group stages, but maybe include it for the top 8 or so)
Winner will be crowned the new Chess World Champion & the season will reset after, kicking off a new cycle.
I feel like this would allow unknown/young players the chance to fight their way up to the top, giving them chances to showcase what they can do if they reach the highest level.
I think cricket is a good sport to look at with Test (classical), Rapid (odi) and Blitz (T20)… I think all 3 format’s deserve a place. But T20 is where the commercial viability is and therefore most of the money. People still play Test cricket because of the traditions. I would like to see all 3 formats continue to flourish. I understand Magnus might not want to play classical anymore. But maybe that’s ok… The cricket world accept that not all the best players play all 3 formats.
Freestyle chess was the most exciting tournament I've watched, I'd love to see more freestyle chess and for chess in general to become more mainstream and sponsor-able
there is a format in cricket called T-20 format (means each team get 20 overs) that also took 3-4 hours
I agree with what Bobby Fisher said – that computers and development of chess engines have ruined chess as a sport game. There is no more place for creativity or finesse in chess, it's just calculations and memorizing opening which matters.
I agree that the world championship cycle makes no sense and that the games should be quicker but I really disagree that there is too many tournaments what is think is that they should be more spread out and more clear and consistent.
Yes Mr. Gotham, I Agree With Your Tennis Style Grand Slams of Chess. I Would Add , a World Football aka Soccer Style Point System To Chess. 3 Points For a Win, 1 Point For a Draw. That Will Make The Players Have a Reason To Take Chances and Make The Games Faster. Make The Players Play To Checkmate or Stalemate…NO MORE RESIGNATIONS…No Checkmate is Like Making Homeruns, Goals, Slam Dunks, or Touchdowns illegal…
You missed the most important championship off the list… POG Champs
You are trying very hard to turn chess into a sport. It is a hobby and there are clubs formed around this hobby. Let’s not do Cold War era superiority and all its geopolitics.
A few thoughts:
– tennis is a good analogy and would also solve the invitation only problem by having qualifying tournaments to "major" events -ie reserve some of the spots at the majors for winners of qualifying events.
– tennis also has a team event, the Davis Cup – which is organised into tiers or leagues. You could have quota type rules like only one GM, one IM, at least one female player, at least one player under 18 years old per team to encourage diversity and participation.
– the world championship needs a reboot. Seeing multiple draws in a row is a bit depressing. It also only really decides who is the best at classical chess. The best chess player in the world should be good across multiple formats, just like the top tennis players have to be able to play on different surfaces (grass, clay, hard court etc).
– by all means keep a classical world championship in some shape or form, alongside rapid and blitz, but probably make it a bit like Tata, top x players in the world in a round robin format.
– if you really want to know the best player across multiple formats, maybe it is a combination of those other events, or maybe top x players qualified by winning or runner up at the majors go into a seeded tournament of matches made up classical, rapid and blitz.
– could even make classical time control faster – 60 + an increment.
Why has no one considered a format where the first 20 moves of the game, the players are given total 10 minutes, and then starting from move 21, 1 minute of extra time is added per move? or something to that effect. it would definitely make shorter games more interesting!
I can honestly say I didn't really like the fischer random tournament I can see how its appealing to top players cause they essentially are tired of tedious memorisation,,, but the amount of general chess understanding you need to play it well is like 2000 elo otherwise take 2 1200s and make them play Fischer random with each other it's just going to be a game of who was lucky enough to get a free piece,,sidenote( I couldn't also understand castling fully.
As a relatively new regular player and very new to watching tournaments, I am relieved to hear you say that the events are hard to follow. It is NOT easy to do.
I used to play a lot of tennis and love your suggestion for determining the world champion. Using Elo rating to determine the best player in the game at any point in time is much better than a once every 2 years tournament. What’s happening with Ding right now is a perfect example – no one would say he’s the world champion of chess right now. This system can’t work without the events collaborating into some kind of circuit and common rules about how Elo will work for this – you don’t want someone to be able to work the system by playing a psychotic number of events, for example. Of course everyone has to be eligible to qualify for the circuit events, which segues to your invitational point.
Nit picky feedback – all big tennis tournaments do have some “Wild Card” invitations that the tournament organizers can give to anyone. They’re typically used for a top player returning from a long injury (as their ranking fell to low to automatically qualify) and young up and comers in the country where the tournament is held.
Great arguments!
I know it doesn't make sense, but it doesn't need to… and why should it?
I love the tennis analogy…but for different reasons
Singles, Doubles, Mixed Doubles all have a successful circuit.
You rarely get players who compete in multiple disciplines.
All remain valid sporting contests in their own right.
Sprinters don't do marathons and vice versa.
Chess now has similar options.
Classic, Blitz, Armegeddon, Freestyle, 4x player..all valid
Just needs organising better
Oh, and 3 points for a win. Draw after 4 games? Armegeddon
I agree so much with what you’re saying. The Goat challenge with chess 360 was really interesting and fun, but it was just a coincidence that i stumbled over it (I think it was day 2 or 3). The only event I know by heart is the rapid and blitz tournament during Christmas, and that’s because it’s become a Christmas tradition here in Norway (a ton of commercials beforehand). The rest of the year, I have no clue, and it’s difficult to find a good overview.
I think we could keep most of the tournaments, but they need to be organised well, so that everyone knows what happens during which month.
what makes chess (any format) popular to a wider audience is not the format but people like you. who watch these games live vs watch the replay? you probably contributed more to Magnus' net worth than you may realize.
Can I get the pin of shame cause I didn't see any cringe comments today?
I agree with the "opening preparation" topic. In Fisher Random even GMs can lose the game in 10 moves, you need to think since the first move. Also, i'm sure there's a lot of good players who are lower rated mostly because they don't have as much opening preparation.
Also T20 Cricket is a blast and runs normal length. Even Cricket modernized.
No respect for tradition
To some degree but isn’t he into golf now? I mean golf is slow chess to say hockey being blitz chess. People actually watch golf although I’ve never understood watching golf especially on tv. There does need to be some modernization brought to chess in my mind but I’m not the expert. I’m the fan.
Ok i put some information on chat gpt and here's what i get,
Here's how the tournaments will be organized:
Grand Master Tournament:
– Criteria: Players with ratings of 2550+
– Tournaments: Classical Chess, Speed Chess, Freestyle Chess
– Top1-50 players based on performance in each category will be ranked accordingly
International Master Tournament:
– Criteria: Players with ratings between 2350-2550
– Tournaments: Classical Chess, Speed Chess, Freestyle Chess
– Top 1-100 players based on performance in each category will be ranked accordingly
Candidate Master Tournament:
– Criteria: Players with ratings between 2150-2350
– Tournaments: Classical Chess, Speed Chess, Freestyle Chess
– Top 1-200 players based on performance in each category will be ranked accordingly
This structure will allow for a fair and competitive environment for players of different skill levels to showcase their abilities and compete against others within their rating range.
7:18 Levy sounded like Jordan Peterson
I think You have a problem… And his name is Magnus, not playing the world champ. Is just arrogant, I'm sorry, but not playing the crown made the crown irrelevant… It wasn't
Classical chess would be a shame to lose. Some of the most beautiful examples of the game result from the fact the players have the time to think the position through. The drawback of the time factor for the games to be played makes broadcasting the games as they are being played might require a different approach. A "chess broadcast" of classical tournaments might have to take the format of broadcasting after the games are completed, but then the games can be presented with some well worked out commentary, explaining various ideas and options, highlighting critical points, pointing out where a novelty occurs, and so forth. The success of this format is demonstrated by the very fact that streamers like yourself who recap and explain games after they've been played shows that people enjoy classical chess being presented this way. The faster time controls, of course, can be broadcasted live. Invitational tournaments should become a thing of the past. Open tournaments, perhaps requiring a minimum rating to qualify for entry, should become standard practice. The world could also be divided into regions, where players compete in their region over a series of regularly scheduled regional tournaments (which would be open, but have a high ELO entry requirement), and players earn points based upon their performance over those tournaments. The top player from each region (a regional champion) then qualifies for the world championship tournament, which would be held at regular intervals (might be a 2, 3, or 4 year cycle, depending upon how long would be required for the determination of the regional champions). The right to play in the world championship tournament does not automatically go to the reigning world champion, and they too would have compete in the regionals if they wish to qualify for the next world championship. Just like any other sport, where last year's winner does not automatically get to play in the finals to "defend" their past victory. Such a "cycle" could be set up for each of the time control systems, classical, rapid, blitz, and 960. If one went with a 4 year cycle, then each time control could have it's "world championship tournament" in different years, so each year there is a WC tournament, but for a different format. Maybe something like that would work?
Chess cannot compare to sports like Football, Basketball, Tennis, Baseball etcetera. I believe that whatever we do chess will not be as popular as these. Now, 8 year olds can beat a Grandmaster and it may seem that this will peek interest in chess, I believe not really. People, now will realize that chess is not that hard because even 8 year olds (it is becoming more common) can beat a professional. Plus not even the best player in the world can beat a computer. So, the myth of chess being such a big deal is beginning to end. Chess is a great game but it is really just a game.
Maybe make a time control where both players have the same clock like the game will be 2 hours from 1 to 3 for example
I thought fischer random chess was more interesting than normal chess to watch
I really like chess960. I feel like it rewards intuition and critical thinking straight from the start of the game which is so unique.
Funny thing about mentioning cricket- T20 cricket is rapidly becoming the commercial format with big leagues in India, Australia, South Africa and now even one recently founded in the USA. Game length? 3-4 hours.
It'd be interesting if the players just got thrown into an opening position 15+ moves in, kind of like how chess bots face each other.
I think if they want to do TV they should do like Masterchef have players explain their move with commentary after the game
Totally agreed. Have tried to follow top level chess tournaments, way to confusing. Love the grand slam idea, along with Chess960/Freestyle.
Unlike most people, I prefer the normal chess as opposed to freestyle chess. I don't like that players can be lost after 3 or 4 moves (or even from 0 moves) in freestyle chess, when they have made no visible mistake.
Controversiallypsychological
I find that for chess 960 (freestyle chess), openings can seem quite forced and the positions are much more tactical early on, resulting in extremely strong chess players such as Ding Liren struggle.
tournaments
I agree that classical chess is not a spectator sport. I love to watch rapid. Speed chess I also find hard to watch. I want time to do my own analysis.
“You’re right…”
“No, I am just joking.”
😂
Anyways I agree with Levy over here
Would be interesting to see new time format where players are given short time for openings. E.g.5 minutes for first 20 moves, then 30 minutes for next 20, and then 20 minutes for rest of the game.
UFC type. Based on how many fights you had won lately against the top players you get a shot to the division title. Or some kind of tournament with literally every elo in, like DBZ 😂
I love watching the top players play chess because they can do things I could never dream of…just like watching MLB players play the same game as I played when I was 6…but with chess I have no idea what they are doing or why, so I need commentary from people who do know.
Games are definitely too long, and some start at 2:00am where I live, so watching them in real time is never an option. What would be consumable would be a 6 hour game edited down to 60 minutes that starts at the same time every day or week like a show on Network Prime time. The commentary could be in real time, it down to the most important parts, or better yet, the commentators could comment on the 60 minute episode AFTER they already know how the game ends so they could build up the outcome.
That’s watchable and something sponsors might get behind.
Less bitching about chess, more chess games