How Carlsen Studies Chess with Kasparov

Keep getting called an fart by insisting it's best to
using a chess set rather than a screen to study.

http://www.chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandlerarticle.php?ChandID=5

Now if you put your ear to the keyboard you will hear the sound
of jaws dropping all over RHP.

I don't mind the old fart remarks. Just as long as I'm not talking
to people with closed minds.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Keep getting called an fart by insisting it's best to
using a chess set rather than a screen to study.

http://www.chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandlerarticle.php?ChandID=5

Now if you put your ear to the keyboard you will hear the sound
of jaws dropping all over RHP.

I don't mind the old fart remarks. Just as long as I'm not talking
to people with closed minds.

As fabulous as that is GP34, this type of study for Carlsen is rare, and more often
than not he finds himself behind only a digital mock. Kasparov promised to help
Magnus with the psychological parts of the game; as thats what Kaspy said it would
take to push Magnus to the top.

This article, has Magnus being asked by "TIME" how he likes to study... It may raise
your brow.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1948809,00.html


-GIN

Hi Nowk.

Read it ages ago.

But don't you think a picture is worth more than 1,000 words.

I thought they would be browsing RHP.com, reading the latest thread on bannedDanVM...

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi Nowk.

Read it ages ago.

But don't you think a picture is worth more than 1,000 words.

No, you could take a picture holding hands with a super hot smiling actress girl and people would be like ohhh Greenpawn is a stud. Little do they know she was smiling before you took her hand, and right after the picture she slapped you. 😉

Pictures can be interpreted in 1000 ways.

My interpretation of the picture is :

-Kasparov : Here you go Magnus, take this chess set so we can start studying.

- Carlsen : What is this? Cheese set? Ok but as soon as you leave I'm going on the computer.

- Greenpawn : You shouldn't, you need to get used to the 3D!

- Carlsen : What? I calculate, visualize and evaluate in my head...who cares what the board looks like! Haven't you seen me play blindfolded? The chess set in my head is 5D anyways.

Personally, I think using a chess set to study is a good approach and I use it sometimes, but like most other things in life, everyone is different and has their preferences.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Keep getting called an fart by insisting it's best to
using a chess set rather than a screen to study.

http://www.chessedinburgh.co.uk/chandlerarticle.php?ChandID=5

Now if you put your ear to the keyboard you will hear the sound
of jaws dropping all over RHP.

I don't mind the old fart remarks. Just as long as I'm not talking
to people with closed minds.

Top chess players don't study with actual boards anymore, maybe except for practice games. They just don't. No one can be old enough to accept that 🙂
-------
Carlsen joins chess's élite at a time of unprecedented change. He is one of a generation of players who learned the game from computers. To this day, he's not certain if he has an actual board at home. "I might have one somewhere. I'm not sure," he says.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1950683,00.html
--------
I've read very similar things from Anand and Kramnik's seconds (in "from london to elista" ).

Hi PP

This no chess set myth harks back to Capablanca. He was not meant to have one either.

I'm going to contact MC and tell him his throw away line has got players
tossing their chess sets out of the window.
You can do this WHEN you become as good as Carlsen.

I was sent this, it's taken from the Chessbase report on Corus Rd2)

Quote:

For much of the afternoon, the engines were claiming that the World Champion
was in trouble with white against Short, but Kasparov felt differently.

"Engines!", he snarled.

Perhaps I should have been there. 😉

Ironic, in "London to Elista" they opine that it was because Kasparov trusts chess engines that he was unable to switch away from the Berlin defense in 2000. The computer kept telling him he had a winning advantage but he was unable to prove it over the board.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi PP

This no chess set myth harks back to Capablanca. He was not meant to have one either.

I'm going to contact MC and tell him his throw away line has got players
tossing their chess sets out of the window.
You can do this WHEN you become as good as Carlsen.

I was sent this, it's taken from the Chessbase report on Corus Rd2)

Quote:
...[text shortened]... parov felt differently.

"Engines!", he snarled.

Perhaps I should have been there. 😉

rather interestingly, at least to me, is, that there is a video on youtube, an interview with Kasparov, asking him why he choose to train young Magnus, what he had seen in him. he stated that his openings were not of a sufficient standard to compete at that level.

Originally posted by nimzo5
Ironic, in "London to Elista" they opine that it was because Kasparov trusts chess engines that he was unable to switch away from the Berlin defense in 2000. The computer kept telling him he had a winning advantage but he was unable to prove it over the board.

I've read that as well.

Maybe that was why the snarl.

(nothing to do with Kramnik being a good player of course.)

Originally posted by nimzo5
Ironic, in "London to Elista" they opine that it was because Kasparov trusts chess engines that he was unable to switch away from the Berlin defense in 2000. The computer kept telling him he had a winning advantage but he was unable to prove it over the board.

That's true, it's said that Kramnik's triumph vs Kasparov was the last human victory against computers. But that doesn't mean Kramnik was studying by moving the pieces around on a real board.

Everyone in his team was in different rooms in front of their computers, and when they were studying, they were rarely contacting each other, just sending their analysis when necessary.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi PP

This no chess set myth harks back to Capablanca. He was not meant to have one either.

I'm going to contact MC and tell him his throw away line has got players
tossing their chess sets out of the window.
You can do this WHEN you become as good as Carlsen.

I was sent this, it's taken from the Chessbase report on Corus Rd2)

Quote:
...[text shortened]... parov felt differently.

"Engines!", he snarled.

Perhaps I should have been there. 😉

Well it's not a myth anymore. I can't imagine Kramnik or Carlsen going through their opening preparation by physically moving the pieces.

Of course this doesn't mean studying with a real board isn't useful for us patzers when training for OTB tournaments. Having played only one OTB game in my life, I know I am useless in 3D stuff at the moment, and I will do exactly what you say when I participate in my first OTB tournament one day.

I think kasparov was just showing off a little with that "eh, engines!" remark, as he was the flag carrying leader of engine use when he was active, almost every page in his books literally have several references to fritz, and he knows well enough that today there are strong enough engines that aren't materialistic like in the 90s.

Having said that, I think the two pawn sacrifices by Anand was just fantastic.

Originally posted by greenpawn34
Hi PP

This no chess set myth harks back to Capablanca. He was not meant to have one either.

I'm going to contact MC and tell him his throw away line has got players
tossing their chess sets out of the window.
You can do this WHEN you become as good as Carlsen.

I was sent this, it's taken from the Chessbase report on Corus Rd2)

Quote:
...[text shortened]... parov felt differently.

"Engines!", he snarled.

Perhaps I should have been there. 😉

Regarding Capablanca you are probably correct, in his book of Last Lectures he mentions something along the lines of not having a set in the house.

Just checked - the very first paragraph in the preface (by Olga Capablanca) is:"I believe I must buy myself a set of chessmen," said Capablanca, "I don't think we have one in the house."