Elianna, on 2020-November-05, 12:36, said:
I agree that it is quite fantastical, but it's very engaging. What I found most surprising is how interesting they made the chess matches to audiences that aren't interested in chess. (Speaking for myself, I know how the pieces move. I could play a game following the rules. And that's it.) I don't know how the games were to anyone who knows anything about chess, but they supposedly had Kasparov as a technical consultant, so maybe the games are challenging, plus my guess is that they got the depictions of the Soviet System correct (even though all the players and events were fictional).
I wish that someone could do something similar with bridge. Maybe based on Sachar's book?
The story is a stretch, and she rose very fast (win all games state champ at first try?).
There is a significant list of children/teenagers with outstanding results, so not THAT much of a stretch.
But the youngest World Champion was 22 when he got the title.
Of course, beating the World Champion in a game, while quite an achievement, doesn't make you World Champion.
The games in the show are replays of actual games.
The adjournement (by the way, killed by the rise of the computers as players and analyzers) scenes were spot on.
Players getting their rest while teams of people analyze the position and present their finding to the player.
The Soviets had the upper hand here, in quality and quantity.
The book is based on an early 1980s novel by Walter Tevis, so missed the rise of the computers.
I was interested in the show as a chess
amateur patzer, but it was quite good in general. The protagonist was superb.
Small peeve: The mexican commentator naming the chess piece "caballero", which is a literal translation of "knight"
but does NOT apply here, correct translation being "caballo" (horse).