Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Game of the Year 8th Place Critique
Yet another dreadfully horrendous pick which couldn't have been much further off. I really though I had it nailed this week as throughout the contest I figured the Bhat vs Nakamura game to be one which would likely get a couple very high rankings along with a few mediocre ones, and the clue of being in 8th place along with having gotten a first place vote seemed to be exactly the ticket for it, but as usual I was in error. While the game which did go this week had slowly but surely grown on me, I'm still quite surprised that it received a first place vote as despite how highly I chose to rank it in my most recent predictions, I just never got that "first place feeling" from it. Let's look at what the judges said.
Ron Young: I've already stated above that I'm quite surprised that this got a first place ranking, and it's quite hard for me to comment on the remainder of what he says as my mother doesn't even know how to play chess making it hard for to understand his connotation about the ending of this game not being "your mother's back-rank mate".
Dennis Monokroussos: I'm somewhat surprised by his saying that he thought this was one of the most visually pleasing games of the year. Like most things, it of course depends at the way you look at it, but to me other than the Qe3+ blow, I wouldn't have really described this game as "visually pleasing" while I felt there were other games in the contest which had multiple moves of that nature.
Alex Shabalov: Succinct comment so succinct critique.
Jennifer Shahade: I've always been skeptical of any claim that a game "played itself". Obviously some games fit that description more than others, but when you defeat such a strong player, I would never rush to say something of that nature.
Robby Adamson: Did he consult FM Young for his comment this week? This after all is the first analogy attempt made by FM Adamson, and I suppose he timed it quite well given exactly what stage we are in in the NCAA tournament. This "super-precise" note is rather strange to me also, but likely has a hidden meaning (especially given who it's credited to) of which I'm unaware. Perhaps someone can elaborate?
I've given up on saying "hopefully I do better next week" since that's clearly not working so I guess I'll just say "hopefully I do worse next week" (reverse psychology maybe?, I don't know, I'll try anything at this stage).