Back in August 2013, I approached the organizers of the Chess World Cup in Tromsø (Norway) about my idea of a new interactive fan friendly style of LIVE commentary. They agreed and my co-commentator Lawrence Trent and I immediately implemented it.
I also approached the organizers of the World Championship in Chennai about this idea. They also consented. My co-commentators here (GM Ramesh RB, IM Lawrence Trent, IM Tania Sachdev) also agreed to this concept. Therefore, this new style was carried on to Chennai.
The idea is to provide fun and informative commentary aimed at the mainstream viewers and players of all levels/ages, instead of the tradition detailed analysis for more advanced players only. In addition, social media is actively used to engage the fans.
Even though the responses have been overwhelming positive, and the viewership numbers have shattered all past records, many in the chess establishment are still working hard to bring the old way back for the elite players only.
Please vote and let us know what you think. Do you prefer the new style of interactive commentary or do you want the old traditional way of straight detailed analysis?
(Please understand that this poll has nothing to do with the technical aspect as I have no control of any of it. I simply ask about the more interactive / friendly style vs detailed computer like analysis.)
Thank you for voting.
| Did you enjoy the Anand-Carlsen WC new style of LIVE commentary? |
|
This is not good. Chess needs to go back to nerdy old men smoking pipes and stale boring analysis.
A single question on whether we liked it or not is difficult to answer.
Good point:
Got to listen and see what options each player had and how to analyse moves. Also, how the game could progress depending on what moves are made was useful
Troublesome aspects:
Initially, without the current position of the board visible always, the changes being done by commentators meant that we really didnt know for most of the time, what the real position was.
The commentary was excellent in many ways, but something was missing. It would be better if you can combine both methods. Since an average match goes on for around 3 hours, i think you might have the time to do some detailed analysis as well as answer some normal questions
I really like the new concept
The lively one of interactive type is good. But it can be better with commentators who are professional in their approach and also bold like susan polgar.
The question is not the right question.
Did I enjoy the commentarty: yes.
Would I have got more enjoyment from an elite player providing detailed analysis/insights: yes.
Actually the ideal for me is a balance of the two, a more fun commentator combined with an elite player doing some detailed analysis or provide a few key insights (I remember seeing Kramnik doing this for a short time on some other match/tournament and he was superb).
Perhaps there should even be two official channels for commentary – lite or full sugar.
FIDE should take this issue seriously as it could provide a good revenue stream through advertsiing.
Polgar brilliant confining comments to actual positional play, and answering viewers comments with humour, humility and great sense. Trent not good, much too technical and often confusing me with long winded analyses which were over complex and often wrong. But concept excellent, let’s see more.
Hi Susan Polgar,
Susan,its nice to see(Over youtube),”You & Tania” in Indian costume [ Saree worn in south Indian style ],For Tania may be used to it but how did you feel wearing the saree,does it sound to you,that you are vacuumed – lol [ Just on the lighter side for fun – Cool ].
Now coming to the Tournament – At the outset,I congratulate Carlsen for winning the World Chess Championship tournament.
Both are legends [ Anand and Carlsen]in the chess game.
As a fan of Anand,I am disappointed with Anand’s temperament. Skill vise both the players equal but unique in their own way. Anand must had played right from game 1 ,as he had played from game 7 to game 10,then there would had been vibrant exhibition of great skills & tactics display by both the great players.
Once again,I congratulate Carlsen and to Anand – Nothing to worry about,he has wisdom to decide about his career future.
Ever Friendly
Venkatesapalani Thangavelu [ In short “Venky” India – Chennai ]
I watched the commentaries of the games and in general I enjoyed them, but – to be honest – I didn’t like the fact that two teams of commentators alternated every hour. As for the commentary contents, I enjoy both technical comments and more generic ones. Too basic comments bored me, but I understand that they could possibly be useful to catch the interest of unexperienced listeners. I find that answering questions from the Internet audience was great. So in the end I think that technical and funny/lighter comments should be combined.
One last thought: the choice of commenting without relying on chess engines was absolutely great. Explaining plans, problems, strengths and weaknesses of both sides is by far the most useful commentary an amateur chess player can get.
I thought the commentary was excellent, especially the digressions and general talk about chess, it’s elements, history, etc. If I need tons of detailed analysis, that’s what my chess engine is for.
In fact, I liked it so much that I’ve been busy searching the internet for more video of chess commentary, and would appreciate suggestions if anybody knows where it may be found.
Cheers,
Dave (2100)