I love this Xtreme Chess series.  Great music, filming, cast, and commentary.  To further qixel's suggestions, they can present the show like that Boxing show, "The Contender", where there are more developed biographical sketches of the players' backgrounds.  I'd also be interested in getting the player's emotions/thoughts about the game - somehow while the game is happening.  I'm looking forward to the final! 

When I watched this video ... I think ... relevant, exciting, entertaining, professional quality ... and above all fun!  It showcases some of our young talented players, makes chess look like what it is ... a sport and above all presents our game in the best possible light!  It is fun to compete and play chess and this video and format is amazing!

Well,it's an interesting approach,and if it works?? Why not give it a go!

lol, a cock farm of dudes? I mean, so is Tata Steel and we watch them :D

Just watched episode 2 - I thought it was much better than episode 1.

It was great having the female chess players.  The show might be better if it were all female actually :) 

Especially if they are doing overhead camera shots, while the girls are wearing low cut shirts lol!

I'm not as excited to see episode 3 with a cock farm of dudes battling it out - I can see that at any chess tournament.

Didn't seem like there were as many cringe worthy moments in this one.    I would take Greg Shahade out, and have the female "hostess" doing all the stuff that he was doing.

I thought it was good too that they gave an idea of the players strength in this one as well.

For everyone who's interested, Episode 2 is here!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FZb6R0GhHc

I will likely write something about my thoughts on where this idea is headed soon, but for now, enjoy this

Danny

Greg Shahade is constantly trying to find ways to change the game in order to make it more popular.  But there is nothing wrong with chess the way it has been played for more than a century.  He tries to make himself out as a leader of the chess community.  But, in my eyes anyway, he is subversive.  If he got his way he would ruin the game.

"But isn't sometimes popularity that can make something more respectable."

Well, if by respectable you mean among the general public, then yes. But why should it matter to me what the general public thinks?

  "Also, it's not like the new players, that this video will get, will completely disrespect chess."

Yeah, I don't think the people getting into it would be disrespecting the game; but in some cases, I think the people who already like chess and make chess out to be something it isn't, could be.

If someone who doesn't understand chess doesn't respect the game, although it's closed-minded, it is still more forgivable than someone who actually takes the game seriously.

But isn't sometimes popularity that can make something more respectable.  Also, it's not like the new players, that this video will get, will completely disrespect chess.

IM Rensch: You make good points, of course, but he has a right to his own opinion. Don't act like what he is saying can't have any merit (although, the way he put it was very blunt).

I personally believe more in the individual than a group: the fact that few people like the game has no effect on the pleasure I get from playing the game. Sometimes I think it's a little acquiescent of us when we try to pretend that our game is as extreme and rough as stuff like partying at a bar. We don't need them to like us. I would want them to like the game for what it is, not what we make it out to be. No matter how someone gets into chess, that's nice -- but I myself wouldn't go out of my way to misrepresent the game -- it's just completely superfluous embarrassment to me. In other words, in some ways respect for the game is more important to me than its popularity, and I want to maintain that integrity at all costs. Honestly, sometimes I don't think the ends always justify the means, because sometimes the means create disrespect that's just too obnoxious to take in.

As I have said, I actually thought this particular video was a pretty good attempt at making chess more accessible -- I liked it -- but I definitely understand Magnus's philosophy, and I think it says a lot about how much he respects the game -- that he can enjoy it no matter how few others do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sm_cZ8_tm_c

As an example, I think this one goes too far and is just obnoxious. That's just me though. Maybe it would get a few more players to consider playing, but frankly, I don't care that much. Besides, it's unlikely that it would excite people anyway: chess is hard enough when you can clearly see the board. I doubt that even exaggeration is enough to make a significant difference.

Ace I do understand the purpose of this video, but the video is horrible, I couldn't watch the full video - it made me sick. Apart from that it is a nice idea to promote chess.

I understand what your saying ace but i agree with magnus in my own view i could hardly watch this without throwing up but maybe it will attract more players

well the participants need to be younger and have more lisps like in searching for bobby fischer. laurence fischburn should reprise as morpheus/"homeless chess guy" (we all know he was morpheus the whole time)

Thanks to everyone for the awesome, and highly revealing feedback! Please keep it coming...

I won't continue this discussion much further, but I want to make two important points that I think are being overlooked here:

First, I will say to MagnusM, and those who share similar views, that I believe a mistake is being made in evaluating the purpose of this video, and one of the critical ideas behind Xtreme Chess itself: To increase interest levels of chess to all different types demographics in anyway possible! In an increasingly "attention-deficit-disorder-driven-society" -- if it doesn't pop or wow, people simply dismiss it. So yes, you may be right that some of the classical and most "proper" (if that's the right term ) aspects of chess are not represented here, but what's the harm in using a little "pop" to grab someone's attention, potentially opening the door to something they may never have realized existed???

Many people, if not for this type of representation angle, would never ever play the great game that we love!!! Maybe this doesn't matter to you, or the player who simply cares about his/her own games and growth as a chess player -- BUT for someone like me, a "Chess Pro" who has devoted his life to the game and is always looking for ways to increase popularity, I think it's a great idea that is worth a shot...

And let's be honest, you wouldn't be commenting in a thread like this if ALL you cared about was your own games. You give your opinion because you care about chess, so now, I am asking you to consider the possibility that your viewpoint regarding this particular topic is narrowminded and biased to your own love and views of chess, and perhaps you are not considering the "big picture"...

And if my first point wasn't good enough , I want to clear something up (and believe me, I have given this exact lecture to the 10s if not hundreds of students I have had under my tutelage): Blitz Chess, fast chess, rapid chess, IS STILL CHESS!!!

Those who constantly claim "I just hate blitz, it just isn't chess" or the commonly used "I am much better at longer time controls because I only lose most my games because of time pressure" are failing to realize something: The best players in the world at chess are also the best blitz/rapid chess players in the world. If it were an entirely different game, that would not be the case! What makes a great player in classical time controls, also makes a great player in all time controls!!!

Rapid Chess is the same game! Yes, more mistakes are made by all players when they have less time, but time is part of the game -- AND LIFE!!! Unless you want to take us back to the "stone ages of chess" where people played games over the periods of months, and even years, then you have to see that a "set time limit" is required in every other sport, so why not speed up chess (on occasion) to grab some more "ooohs, and aaahhhss"???

Last I checked, there are still tons of us who appreciate a drawn out, month long match, with 6 hour games between the two best players in the world. We LOVE it, and there is still tons of sponsorship for those types of chess events as well where a "higher quality game" is unarguably played...

BUT somthing like this is just another fun way to enjoy the game and isn't hurting the image of chess or anything else. It can only increase popularity. If it fails, it fails for a select few who took the risk, but I support the idea and wish it nothing but the best...

Best,

Danny

Yeah it is cool that more people learn the rules, but I don't like the way it is being taught here. Most people that will learn from this "fun" video will have problems learning the game properly.

I'm 16 and i think its awesome for my generation to be interested.

I just hate it when they try to teach something in that sort of way.

There is nothing extreme about chess and there never will be.

@EnterTheDragon I am involved in chess, I love the game and I play it all the time because it is interesting.

If they want to learn the game, they should learn it properly,

"BS"  Well that was enlightening.  Always nice to see the youngins get involved.

BS