Hacker News Reader

Comment by rozim | Hacker News Reader

When one GM does it, yes, amusing.

But when both repeat to perform a Grandmaster draw they're kind of destroying the value to spectators, as in any other sport the fans would revolt if both teams were so willing to not put up a struggle.

Some tournaments have had restrictions and incentives against this at least e.g. you won't get invited back if you have too many GM draws, or the game has to have a reasonable length and the arbiter won't allow such a draw, or they reset the pieces and make you start over if you draw too soon...

View on HN

I highly doubt we see this happen again, at least among top players. There are a lot of factors that made this situation possible at this exact moment and situation. You can argue the spectators were robbed of a good game, but since both players were ok with a draw because of the tourney format, I would argue they saw an event in chess that is interesting and unique... way more interesting than another 20 move snoozefest where both players setup defensively, trade down then draw.

I completely agree with this. Chess is all about rational decision making, within this tournament format drawing this game was rational. If anything, this shows that both Magnus and Hikaru are slightly more courageous to act rationally as opposed to romantically, compared to other players.

If Hikaru and Magnus played just another game, we wouldn’t be talking about it. Doing something unusual, funny, unique, draws attention and helps chess develop an audience. This was a low risk, higher profile situation to do it in.

I guess my lament is with wish that ultimately it would never be rational to perform a short GM draw -- i.e. there would be some short-term incentive they lose out on, and they would have long term reputation damage e.g. who wants to support a GM known for short boring draws?

GMs resign at times, even when one might think there's a microscopic chance of the winning side making a mistake later.

In some universes there could be American football leagues, say, where teams might resign in the 3rd quarter when they are behind far enough, and want to avoid injuries - but I don't think the concept exists now, no football team has ever voluntarily resigned before the end of the game.

I feel like it was actually rational for Magnus because it's literally his tournament. Even if the game actually mattered (it didn't), it might make sense to earn a lower individual result in exchange for making a lot more people aware that the tournament exists.

My understanding is that early draws were generally condoned in this specific case bc this tournament format was especially long-winded (15 games before playoffs started). And, this was the final round of games.

Just create a format where every win is rewarded if you dont like (quick) draws. Why would a spectator care about a game that has nothing on the line?

Just play every game Armageddon style. White gets some extra time, but draws are a win for black.

If you want to add an additional meta-game element, allow the players to bid for how much less time they're willing to take to play as black.

Well, it was the Carlson Invitational.

>as in any other sport the fans would revolt if both teams were so willing to not put up a struggle

People still watch the NFL Pro Bowl for some reason, as well as preseason/exhibition games in many sports, so this may not be universally true.

In most sports, when there is time remaining to play but the end result is already known, the lead players stop playing completely to protect their health.

ok but in any other sports most is played over 1 or two matches. here it can be 8 / 10 matches against the SAME player to know the winner

And unlike other sports, in chess you're always at risk of losing your points even when you're a world famous GM

Any other?

NBA, NHL, and MLB all play 7 game playoff series.

Well, Magnus was the host of the tournament IIRC...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com