Magnus Carlsen Wins the Freestyle (Chess960) World Championship (fide.com)

It's like being a contender in the Jordan age, but this is arguably worse because of Carlson's longevity.

Chess ability seems distributed in a power law, rather than any sort of a normal distribution. There are repeatedly, throughout history, players that are just much better than everybody else, including the 2nd best player in the world. Lasker, for instance, was world champion for 26 consecutive years while also regularly dominating tournaments during that period as well. Kasparov was #1 for 21 years, and so on.

I'd go further to say I think this is true in many things. For instance if you're into wrestling, you know the name of Alexander Karelin [1] who ended his career with a record of 887 wins and 2 losses (both losses by a single point and both highly controversial). He was winning olympic gold, repeatedly, not only without a single defeat but without his opponents even scoring a single point against him. His ears tell the story - 889 world class matches, and he doesn't even have cauliflower ear.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Karelin

We often think of chess as something you "learn" how to do. But players like Magnus are evidence that there's really some neurological "muscle" for chess which some people just have naturally more of than others. The way in which Magnus has just so obviously been so much better than every other player in the world for over 15 years now, to the point of becoming bored and refusing to continue competing in the classical World Championships, speaks volumes.

Magnus it often feels like opponents aren't just playing the position, they're playing the idea of Magnus

I’d love to see a classical (or rapid/blitz) tournament where the players don’t know who they’re playing.

Separate rooms, arbiters make the moves for the opponent.

I think we’d see some interesting results.

What are the rules of castling in chess, and why is there castling in chess 960!?

I somewhat remeber reading that this format is about playing against book opening, and I thought there is no castling.

Magnus does a castling from king d1 rook h1 which I didn't even know its an allowed move! https://lichess.org/broadcast/fide-freestyle-chess-world-cha...

> Hikaru Nakamura, the 2022 Fischer Random World Champion, declined his invitation to the event, citing the changes in the format, rushed arrangement, reduced prize fund, and his focus on the upcoming Candidates Tournament 2026. He said he had been invited to the first leg of the 2026 Freestyle Tour, with the same format and prize fund as the 2025 tour; however, a few days before the announcement of the world championship, he was informed there would be no year-long tour. Instead, only a three-day event with rapid time controls would be held, and it would be called a World Championship. He called it a "hastily arranged tournament with less than 1/3rd the prize fund it originally had", and lamented that the classical length format from the first event in 2025 wasn't continued.

Engines have a significantly bigger edge in frc. Humans generally know enough about openings to minimize mistakes for the first 10 or so moves (such that computers playing humans generally are trained to make a couple highly dubious moves to get far away from theory in the opening). engines on the other hand don't go based on theory and are just as capable in 960 as they are in regular chess.

George Sheldrick wrote an important program at the age of 75. He chose not to follow a chess career as a young man, but he could have.

The most devastating fact of life is that physical (and mental) performance drops off at around mid 30s. Hakuho, by far the greatest sumo wrestler in history, retired at 38 when he should have retired years earlier.

I think the question is different for the typical chess player compared to those at the very top. And at the very top we don't have that much data... going back to Fischer, he had a short career and disappeared by 32, but not really for lack of ability. For Karpov, his reign lasted about 10 years from age 24-34, but even after that he was in the top 3 or top 5 for another 15 years until he retired in his 50s. Kasparov reigned for 20 years, retiring at the top at age 41, and is maybe most impressive for defeating his same-generation rival Karpov while also holding the newcomers of Kramnik and Anand at bay. With Kasparov gone those two battled at the top for another 10ish years into their late 30s and mid-40s respectively (and I'd give the edge to the older Anand) before Magnus won the championship in 2013 and has been dominating for 13 years since. So to summarize, I don't think it's that "impressive" to still be winning at 35, he can probably keep winning for quite some time to come. He probably won't surpass his peak ELO though.

I wouldn't be surprised if Carlsen remains competitive for another decade, especially in formats that rely more on intuition and less on memorizing massive opening prep

He relinquished the world champion title because he thought defending it was boring (and not paying well). So one can say he is already past his peak. Chess is a mental game after all. But it will take many years before his rating drops noticeably though.

Most players actually peak in strength around age 35 [1].

But Carlsen has been number one for more time than any player for him, safe Kasparov [2]:

- Kasparov 255 months at number 1

- Carlsen 188

- Karpov 102

- Fischer 54

Bonus nuance: Carlsen has the longest unbroken run of 174 consecutive rating lists

[1]: https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-age-related-decline-in-che...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_FIDE_chess_world_numbe...

Magnus peak rating was on 2014.

But he lost motivation afterwards, so that was not necessarily his peak, maybe he just yoloed a little after that. In his own words he's way past his peak. In recent interview he said his bullet no increment (most taxing on reflex/fast calculation) peak was around 7 years ago. I would assume his prime physical form came after his rating peak, because classical chess rewards deep study and consistency, and he admits all motivation was gone once there were basically no challengers and he distanced himself too much of the pack after Caruana also peaked hard.

But regardless, safe to assume his peak was 10-7 years ago. Still good enough to surpass current gen easily.

Originally Freestyle Chess referred to something else entirely, namely “anything goes” online chess: https://en.chessbase.com/post/scintillating-che-in-the-pal-c...

You were allowed to use engines, opening books and tablebases. You were allowed to play in teams (GMs were part of some). You were even allowed to bribe your opponents into losing! But it died out fairly quickly and now the name has been reused to mean Chess960.

I wouldn't say it's "boring" (hence the downvotes, I imagine) - but this does seem like an interesting idea, to let the players choose their positions. Does such a style exist?

I think that pretty much ruins the whole point of Fischer Random. The point is to not be able to open prep at all, and have to deal with a wide variety of opening possibilities. Too many to reasonable predict and prepare for past the first few moves.

With being able to place your own pieces, you can much easily dictate your opening beforehand. And I have little to no doubt top players would converge towards certain optimal placements. And then you'd be back to playing the same positions over and over, just like standard chess. Which is what Fischer Random attempts to stray from.

Also, on a more subjective note, quite the crazy opinion to call this format "boring". I haven't looked at these games yet, but the 2022 World Championship had some absolute crazy games. With crazy openings and positions that you just never get in standard chess.

They changed the name because it was proposed by Fischer

> In terms of strength he's the weakest player to win in half a century even in absolute terms.

Gukesh is arguably stronger than either of Khalifman, Kasimdzhanov and Ponomariov, who won the FIDE title before it was re-unified. Also his current rating is higher than either Karpov’s or Kasparov’s were when they first won the title. His rating when he first won was about the same as Fischer’s when Fischer first won. Neither Kramnik or Anand were clearly the best player throughout the entirety of their reigns and both of their ranks fluctuated amongst the top ten positions.

Yet it's criminal they don't call it by the proper name, Fischer Random.

Is there an alternative 'actual' reason #drama #politics ?

Because they won't call it by the proper name, Fischer Random