first American since Fischer to challenge for the World Chess Championship.

dukkha

Verified User
image

Fabiano Caruana, a US-American and Italian chess grand master, and Grischuk (not pictured), chess grand master of Russia, playing at their boards at the "FIDE World Chess Candidates Tournament" in March 2018
http://time.com/5444715/fabiano-caruana-world-chess-championship-bobby-fischer/

Fabiano Caruana did not start playing chess in Brooklyn, New York when he was five years old because his mom thought he’d be a future grandmaster, or that he’d one day play for the World Chess Championship, just like fellow Brooklynite Bobby Fischer did back in the early 1970s. No, Caruana’s mom thought chess would calm him down and keep him focused in school.

“I was having trouble with concentration,” Caruana, 26, tells TIME, “and the idea was that maybe chess would help with that. It was more of a remedy.” Before long, this cure for little-kid hyperactivity took Caruana much further than his Lego buildings and origamis ever could. Within a year, he was winning tournament games against kids who were in junior high school and older. “His first instructor told us he was trying to teach her chess concepts,” says Caruana’s father, Lou. “We knew he was special.”

Starting on Friday in London, Caruana will become the first American since Fischer, who won the world chess title in 1972 and held it until 1975, to challenge for the World Chess Championship. Caruana faces Norway’s Magnus Carlsen, the world chess champ since 2013, in the 12-game match that will be played over three weeks at The College, a 10,000-square-foot venue in the city. Chess rarely attracts much mainstream attention in the United States. But chess pundits expect that a Caruana victory could spark an explosion in chess interest America hasn’t seen since Fischer’s heyday. “You do like your winners, don’t you?” says Mark Crowther, the U.K.-based founder and editor of The Week In Chess.

In March, Caruana earned the right to face Carlsen by beating out seven other top players to win the Candidates Tournament in Berlin. “Fabiano has the power to be better than Carlsen,” says Crowther. “There have been very, very few players you can say that about. I honestly don’t know who’s going to win this match. It’s a total toss-up.”

Caruana forged a circuitous path to representing the U.S. on chess’ grandest stage. His family decided to take Fabiano out of school and move to Spain when he was 12 in order to compete in more high-level tournaments and train with top instructors. Since his mother is Italian, he could compete for Italy’s chess federation. “It was not an easy decision,” says Caruana’s father Lou of taking his son out of school. “The plan was always to do it for a year or two and see how it works out. Is he loses a year of school, so what? He’s smart and can catch up. We could always correct things if it wasn’t going in the right direction.”

Initially, Caruana didn’t support the plan. “I wasn’t really keen on the idea of going to Europe when my parents suggested it,” he says. “I had friends in Brooklyn; I had a life in Brooklyn. But once I started playing chess pretty much full time, it just became a normal part of life. Me and my dad would just go from tournament to tournament in different countries. I missed out on social things in school and everything, but I was able to see the world as a young kid, which is very rare.”

Lou, a former data processing consultant who also earned income from real estate holdings, says he spent as much $100,000 on chess travel and instruction for his son in those early years in Europe. The investment paid off: Before his 15th birthday, Caruana became the youngest chess grandmaster, at the time, in the history of both Italy and the United States. Caruana admits early success swelled his head a bit. “You don’t think you need the work, which is always a mistake,” Caruana says. “I would take excessive risks and do crazy things to win a game, and commit suicide.”

Caruana overcame his growing pains, however, and started earning a living playing chess. At the same time, he eyed a return to the United States. In 2014, he turned in a dominant performance at the Sinquefield Cup in St. Louis, beating out Carlsen and other elite players to win the tournament. The Sinquefield Cup is named after Rex Sinquefield, a financier who pioneered the first index stock funds back in the 1970s – and has invested north of $50 million over the past decade to building one of the world’s premier chess clubs in St. Louis. With St. Louis now a budding epicenter of global chess, Caruana moved back to America in 2015, and switched federations from Italy to the U.S. Caruana now lives in St. Louis. “For a chess player,” Caruana says, “it’s the best place to be.”

To prepare for his match against Carlsen, Caruana spent some time this summer training at Sinquefield’s country home in Missouri. Besides playing hours of chess with fellow grandmasters, he jogged and shot hoops and played tennis to keep in peak physical shape. “Chess requires a lot of stamina,” says Caruana. “You’re sitting down and you’re playing six, seven hours at a time. You’re burning a lot of calories and you can easily get mentally tired. If your physical form is not good, then you’re likely to crash at some point.” Caruana doesn’t stick to a strict diet, though he does try to avoid excessive sugar, to avoid the high and inevitable come down.

In the weeks leading up to the World Chess Championship, Caruana has trained in Spain, where he’s done yoga and swam in the Mediterranean to keep his head clear. He’s also played games for up to eight hours a day. “The goal is get you thinking about chess 24/7 in preparation for the match,” he says. “It’s playing quick games, slow games, anything that will get you in that mode where you calculate very quickly. Your mind is working in the best possible shape.”

Caruana knows that Americans are blessed with plenty of sports and entertainment options. So why would even casual observers of chess have a stake in his three-week match with Carlsen, never mind those who don’t play the game? “It’s sort of like boxing or MMA,” Caruana says. “It will be a fight that is blow for blow, with each of us trying to get the upper hand, trying to impose our will on the other guy. It’s not a physical sport. But if people are into these one-on-one duels, chess is in a way similar to that.”
 
How many people can watch chess at that level and really understand what is going on? I've watched the guys in Washington Square and I have no idea what they are doing.

I think part of Ficher's fame was due to the environment of the era, we were still in some semblence of the Cold War and he was a brash young American playing the Russian Grandmaster, provided its' own melodrama
 
How many people can watch chess at that level and really understand what is going on? I've watched the guys in Washington Square and I have no idea what they are doing.

I think part of Ficher's fame was due to the environment of the era, we were still in some semblence of the Cold War and he was a brash young American playing the Russian Grandmaster, provided its' own melodrama

You have no idea what's going on in a game of Go Fish or Old Maid.
 
How many people can watch chess at that level and really understand what is going on? I've watched the guys in Washington Square and I have no idea what they are doing.

I think part of Ficher's fame was due to the environment of the era, we were still in some semblence of the Cold War and he was a brash young American playing the Russian Grandmaster, provided its' own melodrama
The board is shown on candidate matches. Granted they play at an extreme high level
sometimes looking 10+ moves ahead, but openings are by rote with various variations til they get to the midgame.

Washington Square is mostly speed chess - a far cry from grandmaster chess in that it involves much more reliance on seeing patterns since time is very limited to count moves ( positions).

Also the games are analyzed afterwards -Kasparov 1 time played a game that relied on 3 consecutive knight moved to post the knight up in opponent territory where it then wreck havoc.
I saw the game but never ever saw that position until he played it..amazing he could see it in real time
 
How many people can watch chess at that level and really understand what is going on? I've watched the guys in Washington Square and I have no idea what they are doing.

I think part of Ficher's fame was due to the environment of the era, we were still in some semblence of the Cold War and he was a brash young American playing the Russian Grandmaster, provided its' own melodrama

No, Fischer was a genuine phenomena who inexplicably....or maybe not so inexplicably went crazy. He's by far not the only Chess Grandmaster or World Champion to have gone crazy.

Fischer's not unique in that respect. Paul Morphy, America's first World Chess Champion was a young prodigy and he went crazy too.

What really made Fischer unique was his wide open attacks that used the whole board. Most great players diagnose an area of weakness in your defensive strategy and concentrate their position to attack that weakness. Fischer's attacks were like, to use a military analogy, an attack by combined forces where multiple armies are coordinated together to attack multiple points of weakness or to create them. This is what Fisher did with his Octopus strategy. It was a dynamic multi-pronged offense attack where Fisher could ebb and flow with his moves and counter moves to rapidly redeploy his pieces where openings occurred. It was also horribly complicated for his opponents to predict where his attacks would occur.

And that's what made Fisher fascinating. As an observer, if you're well read in chess, you can usually pick up on the offensive and defensive strategy in the opening moves and then watch those progress into the mid game where you can ussually spot errors and weaknesses and have a pretty good idea how the endgame will turn out.

Fisher turned that on its head. Often you had no idea what the hell he was up to and that's what made him fun to watch.
 
No, Fischer was a genuine phenomena who inexplicably....or maybe not so inexplicably went crazy. He's by far not the only Chess Grandmaster or World Champion to have gone crazy.

Fischer's not unique in that respect. Paul Morphy, America's first World Chess Champion was a young prodigy and he went crazy too.

What really made Fischer unique was his wide open attacks that used the whole board. Most great players diagnose an area of weakness in your defensive strategy and concentrate their position to attack that weakness. Fischer's attacks were like, to use a military analogy, an attack by combined forces where multiple armies are coordinated together to attack multiple points of weakness or to create them. This is what Fisher did with his Octopus strategy. It was a dynamic multi-pronged offense attack where Fisher could ebb and flow with his moves and counter moves to rapidly redeploy his pieces where openings occurred. It was also horribly complicated for his opponents to predict where his attacks would occur.

And that's what made Fisher fascinating. As an observer, if you're well read in chess, you can usually pick up on the offensive and defensive strategy in the opening moves and then watch those progress into the mid game where you can ussually spot errors and weaknesses and have a pretty good idea how the endgame will turn out.

Fisher turned that on its head. Often you had no idea what the hell he was up to and that's what made him fun to watch.

Sure that is all valid to the chess player, fan, even casual observer, but at the time, the matches weren't shown live on television, and if were would have to believe a limited number of Americans would have been attracted to them. As I noted, I think the good guy vs bad guy, young vs old elements is what made the matches and Fischer famous, that and his own personality
 
Ah chess. I used to be damn good at it myself. Not professional levels by any means, but good nonetheless. I quit awhile back, from lack of people around to play against. Saw some ways to play against people online, but never got into it.
 
Sure that is all valid to the chess player, fan, even casual observer, but at the time, the matches weren't shown live on television, and if were would have to believe a limited number of Americans would have been attracted to them. As I noted, I think the good guy vs bad guy, young vs old elements is what made the matches and Fischer famous, that and his own personality
Oh no doubt. Cold War politics were part of the draw.
 
Ah chess. I used to be damn good at it myself. Not professional levels by any means, but good nonetheless. I quit awhile back, from lack of people around to play against. Saw some ways to play against people online, but never got into it.
Yea I agree. Chess is the ultimate strategy game but if it was all strategy it wouldn’t be that much fun. It’s the strategy combined with the psychology of chess that makes it fun. If you’ve ever been in a match where your opponent is one move away from mating them and you mate them on your next move, you’ll know what I mean. Or watching the despair on an opponents face when you make a move and they calculate that you will check mate them in three more moves and they can’t stop you and resign. To me forcing a player to resign is like the ultimate win. You don’t get that psychological thrill or despair online to the degree you do facing an opponent in person.

BTW what was your USCF rating? I was up to 1200 when I burned out.
 
No, Fischer was a genuine phenomena who inexplicably....or maybe not so inexplicably went crazy. He's by far not the only Chess Grandmaster or World Champion to have gone crazy.

Fischer's not unique in that respect. Paul Morphy, America's first World Chess Champion was a young prodigy and he went crazy too.

What really made Fischer unique was his wide open attacks that used the whole board. Most great players diagnose an area of weakness in your defensive strategy and concentrate their position to attack that weakness. Fischer's attacks were like, to use a military analogy, an attack by combined forces where multiple armies are coordinated together to attack multiple points of weakness or to create them. This is what Fisher did with his Octopus strategy. It was a dynamic multi-pronged offense attack where Fisher could ebb and flow with his moves and counter moves to rapidly redeploy his pieces where openings occurred. It was also horribly complicated for his opponents to predict where his attacks would occur.

And that's what made Fisher fascinating. As an observer, if you're well read in chess, you can usually pick up on the offensive and defensive strategy in the opening moves and then watch those progress into the mid game where you can ussually spot errors and weaknesses and have a pretty good idea how the endgame will turn out.

Fisher turned that on its head. Often you had no idea what the hell he was up to and that's what made him fun to watch.

all masters and grandmaster use /see the whole board. No one can play any real game of chess without doing so.
That is chess strategy.

I think what you mean though is a GM can see a tactical weakness
( like a piece supporting too many defenses of other pieces that is exchanged to turn that tactical weakness into a piece loss).

I have never heard of an octopus strategy
 
Yea I agree. Chess is the ultimate strategy game but if it was all strategy it wouldn’t be that much fun. It’s the strategy combined with the psychology of chess that makes it fun. If you’ve ever been in a match where your opponent is one move away from mating them and you mate them on your next move, you’ll know what I mean. Or watching the despair on an opponents face when you make a move and they calculate that you will check mate them in three more moves and they can’t stop you and resign. To me forcing a player to resign is like the ultimate win. You don’t get that psychological thrill or despair online to the degree you do facing an opponent in person.

BTW what was your USCF rating? I was up to 1200 when I burned out.

I never had any rating, I just played casually from since I was maybe 8ish. I never actually got into much competition in my life. By the time I got into High School, and could have gotten into more, life events gave me other things I had to do. That's kind of personal tragedy stuff, that would take half a page to explain though.
 
all masters and grandmaster use /see the whole board. No one can play any real game of chess without doing so.
That is chess strategy.

I think what you mean though is a GM can see a tactical weakness
( like a piece supporting too many defenses of other pieces that is exchanged to turn that tactical weakness into a piece loss).

I have never heard of an octopus strategy

This might help explain.


 
This might help explain.


that is an example of an "outpost knight". you can see the reach - it's absolutely deadly in close quarters and when posted in the opponents ranks / but that is not a "strategy" or even tactics. it's just a piece's power
 
How many people can watch chess at that level and really understand what is going on? I've watched the guys in Washington Square and I have no idea what they are doing.

I think part of Ficher's fame was due to the environment of the era, we were still in some semblence of the Cold War and he was a brash young American playing the Russian Grandmaster, provided its' own melodrama

I watch those guys in Washington Square Park often...and have no idea of what they are doing. One of my golfing partners is chess teacher...with lots of points...ranked #235 in the US. He's tried to explain some of the stuff...but I cannot master it. We used to have a chess club in one of the places I worked...and got decent at the game (playing several matches every month)...but that's what it takes...lots of games.
 
that is an example of an "outpost knight". you can see the reach - it's absolutely deadly in close quarters and when posted in the opponents ranks / but that is not a "strategy" or even tactics. it's just a piece's power

It didn't just get there on its own though, Fischer needed a powerful strategy to deceive his opponent.
 
It didn't just get there on its own though, Fischer needed a powerful strategy to deceive his opponent.
Absolutely. Great players use their pieces in concert.
The great strategists look if they can invade territory; generally the more space you control the better yourposition
A piece like a queen, rook, knight down there can pig out. In fact rooks on the opponents 7th rank is called a pig!

Wiki: " rooks are sometimes colloquially referred to as 'pigs on the seventh', because they often threaten
to "eat" the opponent's pieces or pawns."

Rooks on the Seventh, Revisited
https://www.chess.com/article/view/rooks-on-the-seventh-revisited
Despite his irritable personality and somewhat dogmatic assertions, Aron Nimzowitsch (1886-1935) is the undisputed patriarch of modern positional thought.

In his magnum opus My System (1925), Nimzowitsch formulated and verbalized a litany of strategic concepts (prophylaxis, overprotection, and blockade, just to name a few) that we now take for granted.

Although many of his principal contentions are now regarded as self-evident, I believe that there is one notion in particular that chess players still routinely misunderstand: the power of two rooks on the seventh (second) rank.
 
Last edited:
World Chess Championship Round 1: Caruana Struggles But Holds Draw Against Carlse
https://www.chess.com/news/view/wor...uana-struggles-but-holds-draw-against-carlsen
It wasn't his longest world championship game ever, but to Magnus Carlsen, it felt like it. After 115 moves in the opening round of his fourth title match, he couldn't break through against challenger Fabiano Caruana. The two drew their opening game at the 2018 world chess championship, but this is one case where the result masks the tension of the battle.

phpRDbvkW.jpeg

Fabiano Caruana and Magnus Carlsen:
 
World Chess Championship starts with Harrelson blunder

World Chess Championship officials might rethink the role of ceremonial starter after Hollywood actor Woody Harrelson knocked over a king and moved the wrong pawn in a comical start to the 2018 event in London on Friday.

Norwegian title holder Magnus Carlsen and Fabiano Caruana were bemused onlookers as the U.S. actor began their eagerly anticipated match-up by knocking over the American challenger’s king, the move that traditionally signals a concession.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...p-starts-with-harrelson-blunder-idUSKCN1NE295

2018-11-09T181915Z_1_LYNXNPEEA81I0-OUSSP_RTROPTP_3_SPORTS-US-CHESS-WORLD.JPG


Caruana had asked the “Hunger Games” and “Cheers” actor to move his pawn to start the game, only for Harrelson to hit the king and moved a different piece.

A bewildered Caruana initially appeared to accept the mistake before officials allowed the pawn to be returned. A grinning Harrelson then moved the correct pawn before quickly exiting the stage.
 
Back
Top