Pog.
"Check." weighs in on #PogChamps, #growthegame, and the controversy over backlash from the "chess elite."
In May of 2020, shortly after the coronavirus pandemic had wreaked havoc on the global economy and forced most of the world’s population into some variation of “shelter-in-place,” Chess.com announced that the site would be sponsoring and hosting a new kind of chess tournament, launched in tandem with the video-game streaming site, Twitch, as part of a series of e-Sports tournament-style competitions known as, “Twitch Rivals.” In June of 2020, “PogChamps,” was born - a chess tournament with a $50,000 prize pool - in which 16 popular twitch streamers were pitted against each other in a series of 10-minute plus 5-second increment rapid chess games. Part of the intrigue of the tournament was that most of its participants were at least relatively new to the game of chess. The players had wildly disparate skill levels (though none were Expert, or even really “class” level chess players), and the audience was interested to follow their chess journey as the players took 1 on 1 lessons from Hikaru Nakamura or Alexandra Botez, and grew into the game even as the tournament was progressing. Of course, part of the concept is an advertisement for the game of chess itself - which is so devilishly complex that even professional gamers like “forsen” and “xQc” are not able to master it after a few weeks of lessons and practice.
What happened next couldn’t have been reasonably predicted in any of chess.com’s most optimistic or ambitious marketing meetings. PogChamps went viral. On June 10th, a clip of xQc being checkmated in six moves by moistCr1TiKaL (as well as Charlie’s colorful post-game attestation, “My d*ck is throbbing right now! Throbbing. What is xQc’s chat saying?”) was viewed more than 8 million times. The total viewership of chess on Twitch set records for the month.
(Chess in the time of Coronavirus.)
PogChamps would be won by League of Legends streamer, Voyboy. PogChamps 2 was held mere months later, in August, and won by a Hearthstone streamer, Hafu. PogChamps 3 would be announced on January 11th, 2021, to be held during the final two weeks of February. But this time, Chess.com was prepared to capitalize on the runaway success of the first two events, as well as the boom in new player registrations and daily games played on their site in the wake of the successful Netflix Series, “Queen’s Gambit.” The company secured a number of new sponsorships, raised the prize fund to $100,000, and announced that Ludwig, Myth, MoistCr1tiKaL, Pokimane, and Neeko would be joined by a YouTube celebrity, MrBeast, a rapper, Logic, Rainn Wilson (who played “Dwight” in The Office), and Daniel Negreanu of World Series of Poker fame.
At least commercially, there’s virtually no statistic that one can find to suggest that PogChamps is anything other than a runaway success. But perhaps it was rather lost on many viewers that the $100,000 prize fund boasted by PogChamps 3 is literally the size of the prize fund for all 6 of the “regular” tournaments on the Champions Chess Tour, which feature the absolute cream of the crop, the best of the global chess elite, professional players competing against other professional payers in a frustrating and difficult attempt to eke out a living playing the ancient game of chess, which is at once and interchangeably described as a sport, an art, or a science. It wasn’t lost on Ian Nepomniatchi, who isn’t afraid to lob a live grenade out into the twittersphere whenever he feels like it:
Over the last 48 hours, “chess twitter” has been set ablaze with a series of hot takes about PogChamps, mostly in defense of the tournament and mostly critical of any opinions that hint at “elitism,” which has no place in the modern chess landscape. After all, “afraid of change,” and “upset that so many enjoy something that I do not,” have been bad takes for far longer than social media has been around to amplify them. But I wanted to take some time out in this week’s column to give air to the debate. I think there’s more to be said about Nepomniatchi’s tweet than, perhaps, he was able to articulate. And I think it’s worth remembering that Ian Nepomniatchi is not some fuddy-duddy Russian grandpa unfamiliar with e-Sports, or this newfangled thing called the internet. He’s at least a semi-professional Dota 2 player, in addition to being in the top 5 in the world at classical chess, by rating. He’s the one credited with introducing Peter Svidler to the game of Hearthstone, which has conspired together with international cricket to bring about the Russian legend’s near-total retirement from professional chess. Ultimately, Nepo is an odd standard-bearer for the “classical chess elite.” He’s an insider in the world of Twitch, and e-Sports, who’s commentated on European Dota 2 events using the nickname “FrostNova,” and provided play-testing and feedback to Hearthstone’s team of developers.
So how can we start to unpack this? First of all, with all due respect, I think Nepo is just factually wrong, here, and I think that this one particular issue is the cause of a lot of the vitriol that he’s received in response to his tweet. PogChamps doesn’t seem to be displacing “real chess content,” so much as it is bringing an entirely new audience (or audiences, if we’re counting the various streamers’ communities) to the game of chess. The viewership numbers for the Champions Chess Tour are as high as any “real chess event,” has ever seen (outside of a world championship cycle, perhaps), and the numbers of players on chess.com, chess24, and lichess appear to be growing exponentially in tandem with the growth of PogChamps and the success of “Queen’s Gambit.” So we can definitively say that today, PogChamps is not displacing “real chess.” But what impact might we expect PogChamps to have on “real chess,” in the future?
It’s hard to say. The hope, for the proponents of #PogChamps and #growthegame, is that some small percentage of those viewers new to the game of chess might “stick around awhile,” and begin to call the game their hobby, too. A very reasonable viewpoint, and one well articulated by chess streamer and twitch personality Anna Rudolf:
The challenge is quantifying this in any meaningful way. It’s impossible to separate out the impact that PogChamps has had on the game of chess from the impact Coronavirus has had, or the impact that “The Queen’s Gambit” has had. And its difficult to find a precedent outside of the game of chess for such an event. Celebrity Pro-Am, charity events might be new to chess, but they are commonplace in other sports, and they are never credited with “growing the game,” or introducing new players to the game. But then, they aren’t really marketed the way that PogChamps is, and it’s arguably a lot more difficult to get into the game of golf than it is to pick up a chess set at the local Target. One analogy I came across is the phenomenally successful reality TV show “Dancing With the Stars,” which had barely any impact on the popularity of ballroom dance, in the United States, for example. In 2013, after 8 seasons of the show, a non-profit “Dance USA” attempted to credit a “35% spike over the past ten years” in the number of U.S. adults seeking dance lessons to Dancing with the stars, but failed to mention that 35% growth over 10 years is barely more than a 3% annual growth rate, hardly higher than the 1% population growth in the U.S. over the same time frame, and well below growth in other fitness related categories like gym memberships, exercise equipment and apparel, over the course of that decade.
And then, there’s a meaningful discussion to be had about the purpose of “growing the game,” in the first place. For chess enthusiasts like this author, I do feel that there is a palpable desire within the community to see growth in the popularity of the game, to have more friends and acquaintances to share beautiful combinations with, and to hear chess results being discussed around the watercooler. But there is a danger with an event like PogChamps that it contributes not merely to the growth of the game, but also to the celebritization of it, which may or may not be a desireable end, in itself. PogChamps viewers, in a very real sense, are not there to watch chess. They are there to watch xQc get humiliated by MoistCr1tiKaL. They are there to delight in the absurdity of Cr1tiKaL’s post-game reaction, secure in the knowledge that it could not have been chess that caused his (evidently) physical discomfort (pleasure? who can say). They are there to laugh at the chess community, from outside of it, as much as they are to laugh with the chess community, from inside of it.
There’s another meaningful discussion to be had about the constitution and makeup of the “chess elite.” Because there’s something rather perverse about calling the life of a professional chess player “elitist.” Chess is a brutal and unrewarding occupation that basically can’t support anyone but Magnus Carlsen, financially. Chess professionals earn a living writing, or teaching, not (usually) playing. It’s insanely costly and time consuming to devote yourself to this game for long enough to even attain a title like “International Master,” or “Grand Master,” so much so that popular streamer and YouTube personality John Bartholomew just came up with this brainstorm:
And it is in that context that this author does find something a little perverse in that Chess.com has used it’s prodigious marketing might to promote an event in which millionaire celebrities and twitch streamers are set to earn more money playing chess, poorly, than all but a select few chess players could ever dream of winning in their entire lives, after devoting themselves to the game and selling their very soul to Caissa herself. No doubt, some form of this thought has occurred to Ian Nepomniatchi, at some point.
The seductive and popular feeling is that because anyone can be a Twitch streamer, and because the distribution of the various channels is handled by the internet, rather than the cable companies, Twitch events are promoting the “democratization” of video games, e-Sports, and chess. The reality is that, nine years in, Twitch is a long way from the days of Justin.tv. It’s an Amazon.com subsidiary that’s become incredibly successful in its own right, and just as reliant on it’s affiliates, partners, and stars as any cable channel ever was. For every time “democratization” is invoked as a rallying cry in support of PogChamps, “celebritization” might be hurled right back, as invective. The dirty secret is: the games are secondary to the celebrity. Half the time that Alexandra Botez (or her sister) are streaming, it’s in the “just chatting” category, whether they are playing chess or not. And there’s nothing wrong with that - meet your community where they are. But if we’re being candid about the impact Twitch has had on chess, we must admit that the platform is providing celebrities and viral web sensations with the ability to monetize video games, just as traditional media revenue streams appear to be at risk, and customers are increasingly turning to “cord-cutting,” as their budget stretches thin and their favorite content increasingly migrates online.
If you’re still with me at this point, and haven’t hurled your laptop out the window at my old-fashioned, elitist, attitude, let me just say this, in conclusion: I LIKE PogChamps. I actually don’t have a problem with it. I am a consumer of PogChamps, though I was more interested in PogChamps 2 than 3, in part because I wanted to follow the progress of Hearthstone streamers I enjoy (“dog,” and “itshafu”), and wouldn’t you know it, I was delighted that Hafu won the thing. I don’t think that there’s a reason to ability-shame lower rated players, and I don’t think that all educational, “real chess,” content has to come from the top ten players in the world. I’m delighted to see so many people watching the category. But at the same time, I believe that chess is an art form (and a science, and a sport). It’s one that I have devoted a lot of my life to, in my own way, and I’m spiritually connected with those who view PogChamps as something, “other” than the game that they love, and a little sad to see their viewpoint shouted down. Above all else, I’m somebody that is deeply concerned with both the growth and direction of the game of chess, and happy to engage with my readers and their opinions, whether they be similar to mine, or the opposite. Leave a comment, or drop me an email (JensenUVA@gmail.com), or get at me on twitter @JensenUVA.
And lest we change the format of the newsletter too much, let’s make this week’s game of the week MoistCr1TiKaL’s stunning, viral, 6-move victory over xQc, from PogChamps 1. Advanced players can skip this one - but beginners might want to look over this for a minute as a brief lesson in opening basics and tactical awareness:
Game of the Week #22:
xQc vs. MoistCr1TiKal (0-1) - PogChamps 1, June 2020
Before we begin, a few words on the opening position:
One of the lowest-cost ways for beginners to start making a massive improvement in their chess performance and Elo rating is to develop the habit of scanning the board, every move, for loose and undefended pieces and pawns. Undefended pieces are just that, undefended. But loose pieces are pieces that are defended only once, or defended only by a piece of a much greater value, which might not be ready yet to join the fray. If we begin to cultivate this habit by staring at the opening position, before the very first move of the game, we can understand that white’s f2 pawn (and black’s f7 pawn) are the weakest pawns on the board. They are defended only once, and then only by the King, which certainly doesn’t want to be bothered so early in the contest. It is the weakness of the f-pawn which gives rise to popular opening traps like the scholar’s mate:
Of course, the 4-move checkmate can be avoided, with proper play, but even sound opening variations like 4. Ng5 against the two knights’ defense attempt to quickly make the weakness of the f7 point tell:
In this variation, black is compelled to sacrifice a pawn with the maneuver 4. … d5! 5. exd5 Na5! 6. Bb5+ c6 7. dxc6 bxc6, but claims that there is sufficient compensation for the material in the form of open lines for development, and the fact that the white player is already compelled to retreat his light squared bishop.
As the game begins, both players look to develop their knights, and open lines for the development of the bishops. But, it’s always useful to scan for weak points in your own position, or your opponents, and seek to develop your pieces in combination to attack those weak points, that you might gain valuable tempi by forcing your opponent to passively defend.
In our game of the week, xQc began classically, and played the “Scotch opening,” which he had favored for the entire PogChamps event to that point:
e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Bc5 5. c3 (diagram)
With 4. … Bc5, MoistCr1TiKal went for the second most popular line at the top level, but a line that is generally not recommended to newer players. There’s no actual issue with it, except that a lot of absolute beginners tend to think that the motivation behind the move 4. … Bc5 is to threaten capturing on d4. After 5. c3, which xQc played, black never actually wants to capture on d4, because he’d merely be giving his opponent an ideal pawn center, with the pawn duo on e4 and d4. A plan more consistent with the fight for the central squares would be: 4. … Nf6, intending to meet 5. Nc3 with 5. … Bb4! pinning the c3 knight, and putting the question to white’s e4 pawn, again. Nevertheless, Cr1TiKal had prepared this with his coach, Daniel (“Danya”) Naroditsky, who had showed him how to harmoniously develop black’s pieces, and suggested the trap that xQc would ultimately fall into:
… Qf6 (diagram)
Here, if we return to the advice given at the opening of the game, white should be careful about the growing pressure on his f2 pawn. The pawn is only defended once, by the king, and if the d4 knight ever moves, it’s mate. A simple developing move, bringing a bishop out and another defender to f2 (and d4), while challenging the black bishop’s mastery of the a7-g1 diagaonal, is called for. After 6. Be3 Nge7, the game revolves around the tension between the knight on c6 and its counterpart on d4. Black doesn’t want to exchange the knight and give white the ideal pawn center, but neither does white want to exchange on c6, allowing Bxe3, which leaves the white player with doubled, isolated pawns after fxe3. If 7. Bc4, the black player might even play 7. … Ne5, inducing the retreat of white’s c4 bishop. Of course, for his part, the white player should be satisfied that the black queen sits on the f6 square, that would otherwise be the ideal square for the g8 knight, and that he can lay claim to more central control, by virtue of the strong knight on d4, and the safe pawn on e4.
But another mistake that’s very common in beginner level chess games is exchanging pieces just because they can be exchanged, and with no greater strategic purpose. It’s difficult for beginners to labor under “tension” in a chess position like the tension between the d4 knight and c6 knight, because either one can take the other on every move, and the consequences of such an exchange must be repeatedly calculated. It’s hard for a lot of beginners who see that they can take their opponent’s knight, to simply, NOT do that, for strategic reasons. In this case strategically, the d4 knight is white’s best, and only, developed piece. So he doesn’t want to trade it off. But even worse than that, the knight is pinned to f2 - and if it moves, mate can be delivered:
Nxc6?? (a true chess crime) Qxf2# (diagram)
And thus, xQc fell into the trap that MoistCr1TiKal and Daniel Naroditsky had planned for him. Well played Cr1T, and Danya. If you’re just starting out in chess, don’t let it happen to you! (1) Scan for loose and undefended pieces and pawns (2) Develop your pieces (3) Don’t trade your good pieces (if you can avoid it) (4) Do trade your bad ones (if you can) (5) Don’t get mated!
Puzzle of the Week #23:
But first, a solution to last letter’s puzzle:
… Rxa2! would have saved the game for black, since 2. Qxa2 could be safely met by 2. … Rxb8, and 2. Rxe8 would lose to 2. … Rxa8.
Capablanca could’ve improved on 1. Qa8? by paying a little closer attention. 1. Qb5 and white cannot be stopped from delivering mate on the back rank, without catastrophic loss of material, for example: 1. … Rxb8 2. Qxb8 Kg8 3. Qb3+ Kh8 4. Qxc2 and wins.
This week’s puzzle is taken from this year’s PogChamps, from a game between xQc and Daniel Negreanu. In our position, xQc was already down a piece, but Negreanu blundered into a tactic that allowed white back into the game. Can you spot it?
As usual, feel free to email answers to JensenUVA@gmail, or DM on twitter @JensenUVA. And in general, like, follow, subscribe, share, do what you do - it’s free!