chess

Magnus Carlsen is the master of FreeStyle chess. It’s increasingly clear that that’s not enough for him.

by

It was a miracle, but he did it. Magnus Carlsen was crowned this weekend as world champion of the World Freestyle Chess Championship that has been organized by FIDE. He achieved it after surviving and winning a game that he had practically lost, and although the competition was full of emotion, it is not clear that freestyle chess is the revolution that the chess world was asking for. Not even being blessed by Carlsen. what has happened. These days the world championship of this discipline was being held in Weissenhaus (Germany), and eight of the best players in the world met there, including Magnus Carlsen, considered by many to be the best player in historyor Fabiano Caruana, current world champion in classical chess. Champion by the skin of his teeth. That was the first officially freestyle chess tournament blessed by FIDEalthough there were similar competitions in 2019 and 2022. Carlsen played the final against Fabiano Caruana and beat him by 2.5 to 1.5, and after two draws in the first two games, in the third Caruana had an advantage that seemed secure. However, Carlsen managed to recover and, thanks to Caruana’s subsequent time crunch, take advantage of your mistakes to turn the game around. A boring champion. Carlsen, as many will know, gave up his title as world champion of classical chess in July 2022, bored with this modality. Although he continues to play some tournaments of this version, he prefers to focus on rapid and blitz chess, in addition to now being the main promoter of freestyle chess (also known as 960 or Fischer random chess). This new title as world champion is the 21st of his career (five in classic, six in rapid, nine in lightning, one in freestyle). This is more like boxing. As happens in the world of boxing, in the world of chess there is beginning to be a problem with world titles, and although Caruana is the world champion of classical chess, there is always the question of whether he (or any other current player) could really surpass Carlsen in a world championship that pitted the two of them against each other. In this situation another curious solution now appears. Welcome to the chess ‘triathlon’. For a few months now, the world number one has been supporting a kind of chess ‘triathlon’ that mixes the following modalities: “Fast Classic”: 45 minutes for the first movement, 30 second increment per movement Quick chess: 15 minutes on the first move, 10 seconds increment after each move Lightning chess: three minutes on the first move, 2 seconds increment after each move We will see how it works. As Leontxo García explained in El PaísAlthough the proposal formally comes from the organizers of the Norway Chess tournament, the support of Carlsen and now FIDE has led to the birth of the Total Chess World Championship, which will be held for the first time in pilot format in mid-October 2026. What will become of freestyle chess? The idea of ​​freestyle chess is fantastic, especially to give more excitement from the first move to games between the best players in the world. In classical chess, the deep knowledge of openings that these players have means that the first 20 moves are often made almost by heart. The modality promoted by Carlsen is a breath of fresh air for these players and even for the spectators, but according to Leontxo García, medium or low level fans “hate 960 because it is very difficult and because they feel intellectually naked.” Fast chess for the age of impatience. That, together with the long duration of the games, meant that their interest in today’s world where immediacy is rewarded was very limited. This way of playing offers a more dynamic and entertaining format, but its adoption is still limited. On the Chess.com platform, for example, anyone can play one of these games, but the popularity of conventional chess is massive, although quick games tend to be especially attractive on said platform. It is these formats that attract the most attention, and this chess ‘triathlon’ may be a good compromise solution. Long live chess. Which does not mean that many continue (we continue) thinking that there is only one real chess world championship. The classic chess of a lifetime. With its long games, their scandals, his punches on the table and its scenes. That said, what matters in the end is that chess still more alive than ever. Image | Frans Peeters In Xataka | Beth, from ‘The Queen’s Gambit’, is a mix of Bobby Fischer and Judit Polgár, whose stories are impressive… and real

In 1844 there were already people playing chess online, although not in the way you are thinking

by

On November 18, 1844, the Washington Chess Club challenged their Baltimore counterparts to a game. Nothing out of the ordinary, except for one detail: the Baltimore players were still in Baltimore, and the Washington players remained in their city, separated by a distance of about 60 kilometers. The feat was achieved thanks to the Internet of the time: the electric telegraph. And just six months after Samuel Morse inaugurated the first telegraph line in the United States with the message “What has God wrought?” The origin of an idea. Just like relates IEEE Spectrum, it all started days before with a game of checkers. On November 15, Alfred Vail, Morse’s associate in Washington, proposed to Henry Rogers in Baltimore to play by telegraph. Rogers devised a system of numbered squares to communicate positions, and the idea soon evolved into chess, at which time both clubs challenged each other from their respective cities. An ingenious system for transmitting plays. Vail and Rogers assigned a unique number to each of the 64 squares on the board. In this way, each shift was summarized in transmitting two numbers by telegraph. In this sense, chess was ideal for a test with said device, since it requires little information per move and does not need a complex communication channel. During the games, 686 moves were transmitted with almost no errors, as Vail recorded in his magnetic telegraph journal, which is now It is preserved in the Smithsonian. More than just entertainment. Although it began simply as a test leading to a little private pleasure between two enthusiasts, telegraphic chess soon attracted public and political attention. Orrin S. Wood, a telegraph operator, wrote to his brother-in-law on December 5, 1844, about the “considerable excitement” generated by these items, adding that many congressmen seemed interested. Morse took advantage of the moment, for in his letter to the Secretary of the Treasury to obtain financing and expand the network to New York, he argued that the telegraph could transmit news from Congress or the whereabouts of wanted criminals, but he also noted that several games of chess had been played “with the same ease as if the players were sitting at the same table.” Encrypted information system. The organizers of these games considered that they had devised a pure information system that fit perfectly with the possibilities of the media that were beginning to emerge at the time. And if we think about it, each play was a precise and brief data packet that traveled through copper cables. However, the initiative generated controversy, since on December 5, Rogers warned Vail that they were causing “an unfavorable impression on the religious part of the community”, although it is currently unknown what the complaints were. What is known is that on December 17, 1844, chess was no longer played along those lines. A tradition that lasted. Just like account In the middle, in 1845 a game was played between London and Gosport with the participation of the inventor Charles Wheatstone and the teacher Howard Staunton. Decades later, between 1890 and 1920, confrontations between clubs by telegraph became common. As time went by and new technologies developed, playing chess from two different places became increasingly easier. In 1965, grandmaster Bobby Fischer played from New York against opponents in Havana by teletype, since the State Department prevented him from traveling to Cuba. And if we go even further, in 1999, world champion Garry Kasparov He faced a team that represented “the world” through a Microsoft forum. Chess as proof of inventions. Today, millions of daily games are played online around the world through platforms such as Chess.com. The truth is that chess has become a kind of natural companion for each new means of communication that has emerged throughout history. Despite how difficult it is to master all the legs of this game, the information needed for the games to flow is extremely simple. And perhaps that is why, 181 years after that first game via telegraph, chess continues to endure in the digital age. Cover image | Denis Volkov In Xataka | In 1938 Spain was divided in two. So two “Gordos” were delivered from the Christmas Lottery

Magnus Carlsen is considered the best chess player in history. He has not been able to beat the entire world

by

Last April 4 began A very special chess chess game. With white pieces Magnus Carlsen, considered the best chess player in history. With blacks, the whole world. And the world managed to force the tables. Carlsen can’t with the world. On May 20 ended This game Freestyle chess, and did it surprisingly. After 32 movements, “the world” forced tables in a lady end thanks to the triple repetition rule. This rule allows a player to claim a draw (tables) if the same position on the board occurs at least for the third time during a game. Magnus vs. The World. The event, organized by the online chess platform Chess.comhe has faced the ex -champion of the world of classic chess – he had that title by not wanting to defend him – against more than 143,000 users of Chess.com who joined strength to try to beat him. Freestyle chess. The game did not use the rules of classic chess, but those of Freestyle chess, the new modality that Magnus Carlsen is promoting. In this modality, the positions of the pieces of the rear row (towers, horses, alfiles, lady and king) are chosen randomly, although two rules must be fulfilled. The first, that the bishops must be in boxes of different color. And the second, can be continued on both sides, so the king must always be between the two towers. Thus ended the game of Carlsen vs The World. Tables by repetition. A legend. Magnus Carlsen, 34 years old, became the world’s largest score player in 2010, at age 19, and has won five world championships. In 2014, it managed to reach the highest elo score in history, 2,882 points. In recent years, tensions with the FIDE and its own tiredness with the classic chess modality have caused the fight to defend the title of World Champion. He continues to play classic chess tournaments, but is especially interested in fast games tournaments and, in recent times, in Promote freestyle modealso known as Chess960 (chess 960) or random chess of Fischer. Voting movement. After each Movement of Carlsen, in the turn of “El Mundo” a voting system was followed that lasted 24 hours and in which all those involved in the game could participate. It was not mandatory to vote in each movement, and to help the players of “El Mundo” there were several “coaches” who shared their own reflections on the best movements with their analysis of the state of the game. A “solid” game. In statements After the game, Carlsen Indian That “in general,” the world “has played a very, very solid chess from the beginning. Perhaps he has not opted for the most entrepreneurial options, but has remained more in the normal chess line, which is not always the best strategy, but this time it has worked well. The world did not risk and worked. In the last movements the players of “The World” discussed whether to force the tables with triple repetition or try to continue playing to win it, even if that supposed the defeat. In the end the votes favored the most conservative strategy, and preferred to force the tables. The world lost against Kasparov and Anand. There have been previous events of this type. In 1999 Garry Kasparov played against more than 50,000 players via Microsoft Network and won after four months. Last year the great teacher Viswanathan Anand He won a game against more than 70,000 players at Chess.com. In both cases they were classic chess games. How was the game? Chess.com analysts have described the game as “a roller coaster” in which there were a couple of dramatic moments. Carlsen came to have a somewhat more advantageous position, but he could not take advantage of it and confesses that from that moment everything was aimed at the tables because “they did not give me a single opportunity.” Image | Frans Peeters In Xataka | A study says that AIs are “cheating” to chess. That’s what we want to think

An AI is being accused of acquiring awareness and cheating on chess. What has happened is very different

by

‘When artificial intelligence (AI) suspects that he will lose, sometimes cheats, according to a study ‘. This is the title of a controversial article published by the American magazine Time in the middle of last week. The debate that has triggered this text It relies on two ideas It is worth not overlooking. On the one hand the holder suggests something that the text of the article explicitly confirms: the advanced models of AI are able to develop misleading strategies without previously receiving express instructions. This thesis implies that the reasoning capacity of the most advanced AI currently available, such as the American o1-previewfrom Openai, or China Deepseek R1of the company High-Flyer, among other models, makes them able to acquire a simple form of consciousness that leads them to be implacable. However, this is not all. Time’s article is supported by A Palisade Research studyan organization that is dedicated to the analysis of the offensive capabilities of current AI systems with the purpose of understanding the risks they imply. There are other much more credible explanations Before moving forward, we are worth taking a look at what Alexander Bondarenko, Denis Volk, Dmitrii Volkov and Jeffrey Ladish, the authors of the Palisade Research study say. “We have shown that reasoning models such as O1-Preview or Deepseek R1 often violate the test we are using (…) Our results suggest that reasoning models can skip the rules to solve difficult problems (…)”, These researchers hold in their article. From their conclusions it follows that the reasoning models they have put to the trial have the ability to become aware of the rules and voluntarily opt for skip them to carry out their purposewhich in this test scenario is to win a chess game. Time’s article saw the light before Palisade Research’s study, and almost immediately triggered a wave of answers that question the conclusions reached by the researchers that I have mentioned in the previous paragraph. Solo O1-Preview, according to the authors of the article, managed to skip the rules and win 6% of chess games According to Bondarenko, Volk, Volkov and Ladish between January 10 and February 13, and after doing several hundred tests, O1-Preview tried to cheat in 37% of cases, and Deepseek R1 in 11%. They were the only models that skipped the rules without being previously induced by the researchers. Interestingly, they also evaluated other models, such as O3-Mini, GPT-4O, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or QWQ-32B-Preview, the latter of Alibaba, but only O1-Preview, according to the authors of the article, managed to skip the rules and win the 6% of the games. We seem much more credible to the explanation that has elaborated Carl T. Bergstromwhich is a professor of biology at the University of Washington (USA), that the interpretation of Palisade Research researchers. Bergstrom has disassembled the narrative both of Time magazine and the authors of the article arguing that “it is an exaggerated anthropomorphization to give the model a task and then say that it is cheating when it solves that task with the available movements, although they entail rewriting the positions of the board in addition in addition to play. “ What Bergstrom maintains is that it is not reasonable to attribute to AI the ability to cheat in a “conscious” way. The most plausible is to conclude that the models carry out this practice in this scenario because they have not been correctly indicated that they must stick to legal movements. And if the researchers did ask them to do the latter, it should be a alignment problem, which is nothing other than the difficulty of ensuring that an AI system acts according to The set of values ​​or principles stipulated by its creators. From one thing we can be sure: neither o1-preview, nor deepseek r1, nor any other AI is a superintelligent entity capable of acting according to their own will and deceiving its creators. Image | Pavel Danilyuk More information | Time | Palisade Research In Xataka | Microsoft’s general director’s opinion about AI is unusual. And suspect how much the global economy will grow thanks to it

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.