Garry Kasparov launches a community-first chess platform(techcrunch.com)
techcrunch.com
Garry Kasparov launches a community-first chess platform
https://techcrunch.com/2021/04/15/garry-kasparov-launches-a-community-first-chess-platform/
82 comments
The community first chess platform is lichess, which doesn't even get a mention because it is non-profit.
This thing sounds like some botched together platform with Kasparov's name attached to add legitimacy.
It will 100% fail.
100%. Lichess is an astounding achievement of FOSS and I wish it got more love in general. I can't think of any other open-source website with as much traffic and with as much complex functionality.
And with multiple paid employees, funded _only_ by small donations. No ads, no corporate sponsors, no investors etc.
I'll vouch for that. I hadn't even heard of lichess, just went looking for an Android chess game to play to pass the time. The app is stellar, and not full of garbage like the others.
My only complaint is how it's pronounced. Can't help but think of leeches.
My only complaint is how it's pronounced. Can't help but think of leeches.
I defaulted to “lie-chess”, and that’s where I’m staying.
That's how I pronounced it initially, and I'm sticking to it also.
The website is very lightweight and fully responsive on mobile, and usually has some extra features than the apps.
> Can't help but think of leeches.
Too much fantasy here and “lichess” makes me think of a female lich.
Too much fantasy here and “lichess” makes me think of a female lich.
Also quality.
Lichess has by far the best interface and smoothest experience.
Well financed commercial players like chess.com, chess24, chessbase were never able to replicate it. Lichess which was a one man show for a long time has beaten them all in engineering department and not by a small margin. The difference is just night and day, like driving 30 years old car and modern one.
It's one of the examples of how you can't pay your way to good software. There was a discussion about Discord lately and how it's about userbase only and how you could recreate it spending a fraction of what its valuation is. I don't think you could. I mean apparently you can't even pay your way to get somewhat playable chess site.
Btw, check the git log (or run one if those punch card scripts on the repo). The main programmer is a machine. It's humbling what kind of output a great programmer with great work ethics can achieve.
Well financed commercial players like chess.com, chess24, chessbase were never able to replicate it. Lichess which was a one man show for a long time has beaten them all in engineering department and not by a small margin. The difference is just night and day, like driving 30 years old car and modern one.
It's one of the examples of how you can't pay your way to good software. There was a discussion about Discord lately and how it's about userbase only and how you could recreate it spending a fraction of what its valuation is. I don't think you could. I mean apparently you can't even pay your way to get somewhat playable chess site.
Btw, check the git log (or run one if those punch card scripts on the repo). The main programmer is a machine. It's humbling what kind of output a great programmer with great work ethics can achieve.
True. Bullet is unplayable for me on chess.com because of latency but works really well on lichess.
chess24 needs to work on page load performance, but I find watching tournaments more pleasant on chess24 than on lichess.
chess24's default chess board is easier on the eyes than the flat design lichess one.
lichess is amazing for playing though.
chess24's default chess board is easier on the eyes than the flat design lichess one.
lichess is amazing for playing though.
to dogpile more -- the lichess open source library is amazing and the site itself is a joy to use.
I also clicked through simply to say lichess is amazing.
Presentation from the original author about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZgyVadkgmI
Yes, lichess is by far the best platform and a great example of an open source project. The founder had an AMA on reddit a few days ago, it was a very wholesome read - https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/mpasyl/i_started_lic...
I love the founder's friendly attitude and the idea of an open platform with a strong community.
It reminds me of Dwarf Fortress. Admittedly, DF is not open source, but it's free with a wonderful community and a very transparent development process supported by donations.
It reminds me of Dwarf Fortress. Admittedly, DF is not open source, but it's free with a wonderful community and a very transparent development process supported by donations.
I loved everything about this thread. Thank you for sharing.
I've always just used the chess.com app, and have never thought to look for alternatives. Apart from using Open Source, is there any other reason for me to consider switching to lichess?
It's just better made all around. The site is sleek. The game renders well, doesn't lag at all even on very old and underpowered devices. The analysis on lichess with wasm stockfish was stolen by chess.com -- there are no premium features and no ads. There is simply no good reason to use any other site.
No ads, no tracking, all features free forever for everyone.
Free unlimited analysis of your games. Free unlimited puzzles. Basically any reason you might pay for chess.com, lichess has it for free.
Free unlimited puzzles? Oh ok... that’s why I pay the highest subscription level on chess.com. Wow, that’s cool
Seriously. Lichess is solid, featureful, has a huge userbase, and enjoys buy-in at the highest levels: Magnus Carlsen plays there under the alias DrNykterstein. https://lichess.org/@/DrNykterstein
Lots of love here for lichess, and it's well deserved. My son got into chess over a year ago, but when lockdown came I signed him up to Chess Kids, which is pretty good for children who are learning. However, he quickly migrated to lichess, and we've not looked back. It's been an absolute lifesaver during lockdown for my 8 year old son, he learnt an incredible amount from the site. Great tutorials, great puzzles, plus he gets to see some of his chess heroes like Carlson play live. It's a fantastic community. Plus, my son was able to learn pretty much everything, including how to write his own tutorials and how to analyse games, on his own without my assistance, which just demonstrates how good and intuitive the UI is.
I have to add to the commendations of Lichess here. It's amazing. You don't need an account to just jump in and play with people. Amazing stuff.
I have nothing against Kasparov’s efforts, and I’m sure there’s plenty of valuable content on his new site.
But I have to agree that Lichess is an absolute jewel of the chess community, and I’m a happy supporter of it. We don’t need another chess matchmaking site, but it doesn’t sound like Kasparov is trying to compete in that space.
But I have to agree that Lichess is an absolute jewel of the chess community, and I’m a happy supporter of it. We don’t need another chess matchmaking site, but it doesn’t sound like Kasparov is trying to compete in that space.
Lichess is one of the best experiences on the web. I build web apps and this one is polished to perfection. It is an example of what is possible when you combine good intentions, great taste, excellent skill and sincere love for the beauty and fun of chess.
The UX is just perfect.
It is an inspiration for me.
The UX is just perfect.
It is an inspiration for me.
Every time I think about lichess, I realize how untrue the generic 'we cannot have good things' platitude is. Everything about lichess just strikes pure joy to me --- open source, no tracking/ ads, feature complete and everything totally free for everyone!
I never knew Lichess is open source and donation supported. I feel so grateful now.
Very Kasparov. No doubt very half-baked, and very self-promotional
lichess has very big problems with the chat, so I won't call it "community first", it's nice if you are just there to play chess, but playing chess with your actual friends its a problem, the chat is heavily censured so having any casual conversation while playing it's hard. To give some examples they ban chat messages that look "similar" to the previous one, so lets say you type a2, and then you type a3 (... a chess position) the last message won't be displayed which is very annoying. This "solution" solves nothing and causes problems, because anyone trying to say something will just try till the message goes through(if you ever noticed that what you typed didnt reach the chat...). Did you make a typo on your phone number/birthdate/address? you can't fix it if it's just the fix to the number, they seem to have been trying to solve with the computer social issues that cant really be solved that way. Besides, there's a very lengthy list of censured words that you can't type, even if you are playing with your actual friends, with people that you may even know in real life, it's insane. I maintain sites frequented by teens and their language is not the best but thats the way teens talk, lichess doesn't welcome the young by doing what its doing now. They are dictating what you can say and not. The funny thing is that I believe the chat is logged forever on their server and there's no indication on the screen of that actually happening, I really wish for my chat history to be deleted, specially because I was not informed about it. Don't get me wrong, I love lichess, but I have pretty much stopped playing when I discovered these things.
When I play chess (on lichess) with my friends, I am typically in the same physical/Discord room with them. We do not need another way to chat.
With everyone else, I'm very happy to be limited to "GL", "HF", "Thanks", "Bye" (localized to their language of choice).
I'm also not trying to make friends/community on lichess, its not like WoW or Dota where teams matter to the actual game. Historically, chess teams existed because of geographical boundaries. People needed other chess players of a similar level to: 1. get better at chess, 2. amortize the costs of traveling to a tournament, 3. try to estimate their global ranking to satisfy ego.
Players on the same chess teams happened to become very good friends because of the time commitment to the game and therefore each other. Eventually the friendships were the more important commitment. However, with lichess (or just the internet in general), I can satisfy all 3 benefits of having a chess team by playing alone on lichess and have really great friends orthogonal of chess (especially since travel isn't part of my chess hobby's time commitment).
With everyone else, I'm very happy to be limited to "GL", "HF", "Thanks", "Bye" (localized to their language of choice).
I'm also not trying to make friends/community on lichess, its not like WoW or Dota where teams matter to the actual game. Historically, chess teams existed because of geographical boundaries. People needed other chess players of a similar level to: 1. get better at chess, 2. amortize the costs of traveling to a tournament, 3. try to estimate their global ranking to satisfy ego.
Players on the same chess teams happened to become very good friends because of the time commitment to the game and therefore each other. Eventually the friendships were the more important commitment. However, with lichess (or just the internet in general), I can satisfy all 3 benefits of having a chess team by playing alone on lichess and have really great friends orthogonal of chess (especially since travel isn't part of my chess hobby's time commitment).
Whatever they're doing, it's kind of nice to have far fewer homophobic slurs hurled in the lichess chat in comparison to other chess servers.
Current landscape of chess platform as I understand it:
lichess: non-profit, free and open source, community oriented, high quality tech, growing userbase, amazing founder ornicar, much loved by its users and supporters including me. Regular online competitions well attended but doesn't organise major events. Doesn't really do things like video lessons or partnership with streamers as far as I know, probably due to non-profit status and community focus.
chess.com: for-profit, the largest user base, led by IM Danny Rensch. Tech is not as good as lichess but still okay-ish. Organises major events with GM commentators. Has partnerships with major streamers, such as the most successful (but controversial) US number 2 GM Hikaru Nakamura. I used to support them before lichess got big.
chess24: for-profit, led by GM Jan Gustaffson, much smaller than chess.com and lichess, supported by current world champion GM Magnus Carlsen. Tech is worse than both lichess and chess.com. Also organises important events, and also produces high quality content such as video lessons. I'm considering supporting them too as I watch a lot of their content but I just enjoy playing on lichess too much.
One fascinating thing is how both for-profit chess.com and chess24 have much worse tech than non-profit lichess despite presumably large budgets. For example chess24 platform has been under development for years and has become a running joke even for its employees. You'd think a chess website would be fairly simple tech in the grand scheme of things but clearly it's still hard to do it right. A testament to how impressive lichess founder and community is.
lichess: non-profit, free and open source, community oriented, high quality tech, growing userbase, amazing founder ornicar, much loved by its users and supporters including me. Regular online competitions well attended but doesn't organise major events. Doesn't really do things like video lessons or partnership with streamers as far as I know, probably due to non-profit status and community focus.
chess.com: for-profit, the largest user base, led by IM Danny Rensch. Tech is not as good as lichess but still okay-ish. Organises major events with GM commentators. Has partnerships with major streamers, such as the most successful (but controversial) US number 2 GM Hikaru Nakamura. I used to support them before lichess got big.
chess24: for-profit, led by GM Jan Gustaffson, much smaller than chess.com and lichess, supported by current world champion GM Magnus Carlsen. Tech is worse than both lichess and chess.com. Also organises important events, and also produces high quality content such as video lessons. I'm considering supporting them too as I watch a lot of their content but I just enjoy playing on lichess too much.
One fascinating thing is how both for-profit chess.com and chess24 have much worse tech than non-profit lichess despite presumably large budgets. For example chess24 platform has been under development for years and has become a running joke even for its employees. You'd think a chess website would be fairly simple tech in the grand scheme of things but clearly it's still hard to do it right. A testament to how impressive lichess founder and community is.
I follow chess quite a lot but I still don’t know how chessable, which has major GM support, relates to chess24.
My understanding is that chessable was founded by streamer IM John Bartholomew as an educational platform, and like chess24 got acquired by Magnus Carlsen's group.
I believe they are trying to create some synergies between chess24 and chessable but they still operate fairly separately.
Chess.com is not lead by IM Danny Rensch alone. He has a C-title (chief chess officer). I did a double take there because that would be an amazing fact. Danny Rensch is one of the best things with chess.com overall.
Wikipedia can tell you about which the leaders of chess.com are https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess.com
Wikipedia can tell you about which the leaders of chess.com are https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess.com
Also - lichess has largest presence of cheaters.
Do note that Magnus Carlsen and other GMs ( who don’t have a exclusive contract with chess.com ) regularly play on Lichess as well
I love lichess but it is hard to argue tech is better than chess.com. Chess.com analysis board is better(although for free membership it is lot worse), they have more number of puzzles, they organize CCC, their anti cheating detection is the most advanced and this all is without coming to UI part in which most feel it to be better or at least more customizable.
Lichess has a snappy chess board, it's a feel you can't help but notice and it is one of the most important technologies for a chess site.
Basically lichess > chess.com > chess24 in the playing surface
Basically lichess > chess.com > chess24 in the playing surface
I had a "Gary Kasparov" "computer" chess board when I was a kid, maybe 1995. On one hand it was cool in that you hard pressed your move into the board with the piece, and it would tell you where to move it's piece. On the other hand it had 64 difficulty levels which were all either extremely easy or impossible to defeat.
He's been putting his name on stuff for years.
He's been putting his name on stuff for years.
Chess.com not only ran forums but held community events like collaborative games vs master players early on. This just seems to be copying the community aspect of MOOCs and incorporating that into a chess course promoted by a strong brand (Garry Kasparov). It's pretty derivative.
Chess.com and lichess have done wonders for chess, and its revival can mostly be attributed to Chess.com's collective smart decisions and hard work. If it weren't for that, Kasparov's copycat wouldn't catch the slightest bit of traction.
Isn't the revival attributed mostly to The Queen's Gambit being released on Netflix?
Not just that. Chess.com also saw a huge surge when Covid began.
Since the Lichess database is open, you can see the effect of both covid and QG on the number of games played. But the growth has been exponential for years. Check out the first two plots on this page (notice the log scale):
https://github.com/Paul566/chessOpeningStats
https://github.com/Paul566/chessOpeningStats
Definitely not. I remember watching chess games on Twitch when the pandemic started last spring and being surprised how popular chess had gotten.
It's chess streaming becoming mature at the same time a global pandemic forced people indoors, combined with TQG.
Not really. The revival for me was due to agadmator on youtube but obviously I only started seeing his videos once they were popular and I dont know the cause of that (other than the quality of the channel of course!)
But Queens Gambit did push chess to be even more popular.
But Queens Gambit did push chess to be even more popular.
With the top player in the world being a hunk, chess became a lot more palatable hobby. :)
Chess is the poster boy of the Lindy effect.
Queen's Gambit only got funded because the Netflix folks saw the boom happening in chess streaming before it. Pogchamps was probably the biggest single factor if you want to go looking for that. It's almost certainly why Netflix wrote the check. For anyone unfamiliar, Pogchamps is a tournament organized by chess.com that paired famous streamers with chess pros as coaches. It's genuinely some pretty fantastic content.
There's also pretty substantial evidence the later parts of the boom were fed by COVID.
There's also pretty substantial evidence the later parts of the boom were fed by COVID.
I hate to burst your Twitch bubble but production started way before chess streaming took off:
"On March 19, 2019, Netflix gave the production a series order consisting of six episodes"
"On March 19, 2019, Netflix gave the production a series order consisting of six episodes"
Chess streaming had gained critical mass before that, and as the sibling comment points out, there were a lot of conversations happening in relation to how chess was clearly gaining momentum, particularly on twitch, before the first actual pogchamps. I was more using Pogchamps as a placeholder term for referring to the overall boom of chess on twitch. That is definitely why Netflix funded it. I've been told this somewhat directly but can't elaborate further than that.
From these charts that that just isn't very convincing anymore:
https://socialblade.com/twitch/user/gmhikaru/monthly https://socialblade.com/twitch/user/chessbrah/monthly
And I say that as someone who was watching Hiarku on twitch in 2018 and even wrote long post on this site about why Chess is the fastest growing esport" in 2019. [ I seem to have lost which account I posted that under however, I maintain separate work accounts and suspect I posted that one one company time (oops!) ]
But looking back, I was over-optimistic, not about Chess' prospects as an esport, but about how much it had really grown given what happened when we saw a real boom from the pandemic, from xQc and pogchamps, and from the Queen's Gambit.
https://socialblade.com/twitch/user/gmhikaru/monthly https://socialblade.com/twitch/user/chessbrah/monthly
And I say that as someone who was watching Hiarku on twitch in 2018 and even wrote long post on this site about why Chess is the fastest growing esport" in 2019. [ I seem to have lost which account I posted that under however, I maintain separate work accounts and suspect I posted that one one company time (oops!) ]
But looking back, I was over-optimistic, not about Chess' prospects as an esport, but about how much it had really grown given what happened when we saw a real boom from the pandemic, from xQc and pogchamps, and from the Queen's Gambit.
Pohchamps was in the making since 2018.
Do you have a source for that? Googling literally returns your own post here as the top result.
[deleted]
> "I was so happy because it was the first time where we could see chess as a positive factor," he said. "We had so many years with chess being seen as potential destruction and something that could push kids to the dark area of psychological instability."
This surprises me, could someone expand a bit on this? I've only ever heard chess referred to positively in popular culture. I would assume most non chess players' understanding of chess is based on idioms like "thinking N moves ahead" and "playing 4D chess."
(I'm not sure I'd consider Beth Harmon a shining example of psychological stability either...)
This surprises me, could someone expand a bit on this? I've only ever heard chess referred to positively in popular culture. I would assume most non chess players' understanding of chess is based on idioms like "thinking N moves ahead" and "playing 4D chess."
(I'm not sure I'd consider Beth Harmon a shining example of psychological stability either...)
This is something that has been over-hyped for the sake of dramatization. Paul Morphy[1] and Bobby Fischer[2] are great examples of people who most likely were already psychologically 'at risk', and 'went over the edge' because of their obsessive chess playing. Certain potentially self destructive traits, largely obsessiveness and paranoia, can be of great use when playing chess if they are moderated.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Morphy#Abandonment_of_che...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Fischer#Speculation_on_p...
In the west, at least, Bobby Fischer went down what some might consider a pretty dark path. Fugitive status from the US for violating cold war sanctions, choice words about 9/11, and remaining on the run from the US for the rest of his life in Iceland.
That said, I grew up as a chess nerd and although I knew vaguely that Bobby Fischer was a tragic figure (largely thanks to "In Search of Bobby Fischer", despite the movie having almost nothing to do with the titular character), I'd never heard of that association with chess in general.
That said, I grew up as a chess nerd and although I knew vaguely that Bobby Fischer was a tragic figure (largely thanks to "In Search of Bobby Fischer", despite the movie having almost nothing to do with the titular character), I'd never heard of that association with chess in general.
His anti-semitism was pretty ugly as well.
> Fugitive status from the US for violating cold war sanctions
All in all, I think that was a pretty silly charge. His violation was wanting to play chess in Yugoslavia. The only tragedy there is US foreign policy, not some "crime" that he committed.
All in all, I think that was a pretty silly charge. His violation was wanting to play chess in Yugoslavia. The only tragedy there is US foreign policy, not some "crime" that he committed.
The idea of a domain-specific Udemy with appropiate instructor filtering has been done 100 times already.
Which doesn't mean it's going to fail. It just means that there's nothing new about it. It's all about good execution and management, and nothing about innovation, like I feel this article tries to paint it.
Which doesn't mean it's going to fail. It just means that there's nothing new about it. It's all about good execution and management, and nothing about innovation, like I feel this article tries to paint it.
Yes, and while Kasparov has branding potential, any of the top 5 current Super GMs do too, and they're already present in Lichess, chess.com, Twitch, Youtube, etc.
A bit off topic but I found MasterClass classes to lack depth. Most of what I watched (mainly cooking related) seemed more like entertainment vs actually learning anything.
I read about this man and his chess stuff religiously when I was a kid. Loved it and it’s pet of what got me into chess.
I’m pretty happy he is making a platform like this, it’s bound to be excellent.
I’m pretty happy he is making a platform like this, it’s bound to be excellent.
there's just something about Kasparov that reeks of a lifetime away from the board that's looks to me like it has been a very unsatisfactory if not even unhappy excercise in trying to parlay undoubted excellence in the game into a intellectual halo of unassailable and unquestionable superiority, from political motivations to commercial exploitation and branding.
honestly I really hope that I'm entirely wrong about the man's life and success, but at the very least I'm convinced that Kasparov has never associated with the best available public relations and marketing minds, certainly no one equal to his genius for the game.
honestly I really hope that I'm entirely wrong about the man's life and success, but at the very least I'm convinced that Kasparov has never associated with the best available public relations and marketing minds, certainly no one equal to his genius for the game.
I get the idea that what I wrote might be misunderstood as a adhimonem or purely personal opinion, but I have just found confirmation of the memory that caused my misgivings concerning Kasparov : my father took me to see Korchnoi, Spassky, Karpov compete in the Hastings international chess congress near to the tiny town where I was born, but I never heard of Kasparov playing in this tournament and now this confirms only Fisher also never competed :
http://www.hastingschess.com/congress-history/
my apologies if I received a very early impression from Kasparov by the fact that he most certainly made a impression on my youth but disappointed greatly by ignoring the nearest and most wonderful setting where nobody else was above competing in.
http://www.hastingschess.com/congress-history/
my apologies if I received a very early impression from Kasparov by the fact that he most certainly made a impression on my youth but disappointed greatly by ignoring the nearest and most wonderful setting where nobody else was above competing in.
I would anticipate that if the site had actually launched, I could register and play right now.
But as it stands, I can only pre-register. For a chance to be one of 6400 players granted early access.
But as it stands, I can only pre-register. For a chance to be one of 6400 players granted early access.
I really seem to have a filter how I see thy this that I just found confirmation about the original disappointment of when I was a impressionable young chess fan, in my comment above,
but I can only say that I really would have felt very hurt by this limitation if I could transplant my childhood me to today. I have such a distinctive memory of the way I felt about arbitrarily elitist and opaque barriers to intellectual pursuit.
I'm not doing a very good job expressing myself probably because I have such a clear recollection of the way I was as a kid, but I think that my earlier comment about how better PR and marketing would be a help with Kasparov's image when you consider this limitation remains opaque in functional reality even if the reason of the limit is clear any inquiring mind has to ask why not take it more slowly / soft launch, as you suggested, or if something else isn't quite there yet.
but I can only say that I really would have felt very hurt by this limitation if I could transplant my childhood me to today. I have such a distinctive memory of the way I felt about arbitrarily elitist and opaque barriers to intellectual pursuit.
I'm not doing a very good job expressing myself probably because I have such a clear recollection of the way I was as a kid, but I think that my earlier comment about how better PR and marketing would be a help with Kasparov's image when you consider this limitation remains opaque in functional reality even if the reason of the limit is clear any inquiring mind has to ask why not take it more slowly / soft launch, as you suggested, or if something else isn't quite there yet.
Can someone please explain how this is valued at 2.5 billion?
nice looking lander, which is a big form to request access. of course that is the easy part.
There was a kasparovchess.com before: Mig Greengard's wikipedia says he "was vice president of content for Kasparov Chess Online and editor-in-chief of kasparovchess.com from 1999 until the site's demise in 2002." Greengard has been Kasparov's PA/confidante for a long time. Before 2011 he also had the best chess blog, the Daily Dirt.[0]
I wanted to share a fascinating insight into Kasparov that Mig wrote to Edward Winter in April 2005:
"A few words regarding your interesting note about Garry Kasparov and his retirement. While I don’t disagree with the content of your item, Garry has always been demonstrably impetuous and I’m a little surprised you give much credit to an entourage of Iagos and people trying to make a buck off of him. They may exist, to a degree, but he makes his own decisions, often with what I consider too little external input. That, and his mother is still very much the only real member the inner circle, or at least the “inner inner” circle.
In the brief time I have been close to him, most of his big decisions, dubious and otherwise, were made quickly and on his own. (Obviously the degree of his mother’s influence is unknown to me.) His sudden decision to dive into politics last year with the Committee 2008 Free Choice was against the advice of just about everyone. This was also true with his retirement. In both cases it was more after the fact concern than pre-announcement advice. Certainly in my case, as a selfish chess fan, I would much prefer he played chess until, at least, his best isn’t good enough. I’ve encouraged him to stay involved in the chess world by writing a column or training young players, and I expect he will eventually return to the board.
You can make a case that his combative, contrarian nature tends to lead him against the advice of friends and public opinion because he enjoys trying to prove people wrong. (I believe this largely explains his interest in the New Chronology.) If you are looking for a tidy reason why Garry has made bad decisions, I’d say it’s simply because he makes them very quickly. He doesn’t like dragging things out (what I would call contemplation) and he is very confident of the correctness of his decisions. This is essential in chess, but often a recipe for disaster in other areas, at least if you’re not as good at them as Kasparov is at chess.
This may be too prosaic, but it’s also Occam’s Razor. Since he has demonstrably improved in this area in the past five or six years (Predecessors Vol. 1 notwithstanding), I can’t imagine he was anything but worse ten or 15 years ago. It was all about action, making something happen, shocking the critics. He’s very sure of himself in just about everything and rarely seeks advice or tells people what he’s going to do.
Regarding his decline in public opinion, I think here too the answers are fairly simple. I concur with your specific examples, but the real basis is that people root for underdogs, not the favorite. When Kasparov was an outsider it was much different from when he became the status quo. Who doesn’t like a young rebel? Having power is very different from shouting at the gates. When you actually try to do something you are going to make enemies. And again he went about many of these things too much on his own, convinced he was 100% right and unwilling to compromise."
[0] Mig got me into seriously following and studying chess in about 2007-8, with his hilarious audio tournament broadcasts on ICC's ChessFM . There'd be him being extremely funny, teamed with a serious GM, usually strongly accented, like Yermolinsky or Har-Zvi. It was great. I'd listen to that while following tournaments live on FICS, and taking part in discussion about each game on there (no computer lines allowed), which were wonderful. That was a great community. The tv-style streamed youtube videos of today from Chess24 or St Louis, featuring strong GM commentators, live video of the players, player post-mortems, are amazing, but still maybe not as instructional and enjoyable as those days.
The ancient history: the ICS (Internet Chess Server) began in 1992, and started charging $ in 1995, becoming the ICC (Internet Chess Club). FICS (Free Internet Chess Server) split off then, led by people who wanted to keep it non-commercial.
[1] https://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/kasparov2.html
I wanted to share a fascinating insight into Kasparov that Mig wrote to Edward Winter in April 2005:
"A few words regarding your interesting note about Garry Kasparov and his retirement. While I don’t disagree with the content of your item, Garry has always been demonstrably impetuous and I’m a little surprised you give much credit to an entourage of Iagos and people trying to make a buck off of him. They may exist, to a degree, but he makes his own decisions, often with what I consider too little external input. That, and his mother is still very much the only real member the inner circle, or at least the “inner inner” circle.
In the brief time I have been close to him, most of his big decisions, dubious and otherwise, were made quickly and on his own. (Obviously the degree of his mother’s influence is unknown to me.) His sudden decision to dive into politics last year with the Committee 2008 Free Choice was against the advice of just about everyone. This was also true with his retirement. In both cases it was more after the fact concern than pre-announcement advice. Certainly in my case, as a selfish chess fan, I would much prefer he played chess until, at least, his best isn’t good enough. I’ve encouraged him to stay involved in the chess world by writing a column or training young players, and I expect he will eventually return to the board.
You can make a case that his combative, contrarian nature tends to lead him against the advice of friends and public opinion because he enjoys trying to prove people wrong. (I believe this largely explains his interest in the New Chronology.) If you are looking for a tidy reason why Garry has made bad decisions, I’d say it’s simply because he makes them very quickly. He doesn’t like dragging things out (what I would call contemplation) and he is very confident of the correctness of his decisions. This is essential in chess, but often a recipe for disaster in other areas, at least if you’re not as good at them as Kasparov is at chess.
This may be too prosaic, but it’s also Occam’s Razor. Since he has demonstrably improved in this area in the past five or six years (Predecessors Vol. 1 notwithstanding), I can’t imagine he was anything but worse ten or 15 years ago. It was all about action, making something happen, shocking the critics. He’s very sure of himself in just about everything and rarely seeks advice or tells people what he’s going to do.
Regarding his decline in public opinion, I think here too the answers are fairly simple. I concur with your specific examples, but the real basis is that people root for underdogs, not the favorite. When Kasparov was an outsider it was much different from when he became the status quo. Who doesn’t like a young rebel? Having power is very different from shouting at the gates. When you actually try to do something you are going to make enemies. And again he went about many of these things too much on his own, convinced he was 100% right and unwilling to compromise."
[0] Mig got me into seriously following and studying chess in about 2007-8, with his hilarious audio tournament broadcasts on ICC's ChessFM . There'd be him being extremely funny, teamed with a serious GM, usually strongly accented, like Yermolinsky or Har-Zvi. It was great. I'd listen to that while following tournaments live on FICS, and taking part in discussion about each game on there (no computer lines allowed), which were wonderful. That was a great community. The tv-style streamed youtube videos of today from Chess24 or St Louis, featuring strong GM commentators, live video of the players, player post-mortems, are amazing, but still maybe not as instructional and enjoyable as those days.
The ancient history: the ICS (Internet Chess Server) began in 1992, and started charging $ in 1995, becoming the ICC (Internet Chess Club). FICS (Free Internet Chess Server) split off then, led by people who wanted to keep it non-commercial.
[1] https://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/kasparov2.html
Kasparov is a big human rights advocate, but his business’s privacy policy is extremely long and complex, and allows a lot of tracking and targeting. I suppose he is not fully aware of how important privacy is for freedom of speech