If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Your team of choice, Montreal, managed to lose to a mediocre team to start the month of November. Good thing Subban had a good night or the score might not even have been respectable. Tonight they get to entertain Colorado. The only chance Montreal has is if Colorado saw that game last night and doesn't take them seriously.
Are you still telling everyone who will listen why Boston can't win the Baseball World Series after all the decades of losing?
The Leafs vs. Canucks game is now underway, hence no bet now re: Leafs record in November. However, the Leafs may yet let me down both as a (former) fan and (now) as an Anti-fan.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
A bet by definition includes money or something of value. You can google the definition of bet. Your offer fell short.
BTW, Montreal is now ZERO for TWO in November. I called the game with Colorado.
Good call on the Montreal game. Fwiw, I'd have made it myself, except I don't like predicting my own team's loss.
Perhaps I was a bit sloppy, in that I refered to my offer of a gentlemen's bet as a "bet" for short. Unless Google disputes me re: what a gentlemen's bet would be too.
[edit: I once made a gentlemen's bet of a soft drink with Alvah Mayo on his losing a game to Frank Dixon. My reasoning was that Frank once beat an IM. I lost that (unpopular) gentlemen's bet.]
Duncan asked, why do I think the Leafs had been lucky so far this season? Well, besides some bluster on my part, last night showed why the Leafs have been lucky, and why they may well stop being so. That's since they've allowed a ton of shots on goal this season in many games. Good goaltending can only save a team from many defeats for so long in such a situation. The Leafs need a better defensive system, or some such improvement.
Last edited by Kevin Pacey; Sunday, 3rd November, 2013, 07:24 PM.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
The bet of a soft drink is a bit different. The soft drink is an item of value. Presumably, it would have to be purchased.
I don't bet games like last nights Leaf game. Vancouver retired Bure's number before the game and the team had a ton of incentive to win. Also, it didn't help that one of their players stepped on the Leafs players leg or foot putting him out for what will probably be a month or two. Something about surgery being needed in the report I heard.
So, looking at it analytically, the Canucks get one puck for home ice, one puck for the incentive and they have pretty good goaltending. The Leafs were finishing off a long road trip and I didn't think they could overcome the 2 pucks I assigned the Canucks to even take it to overtime. And that was before the injury. I also take other important things into consideration. Also, it's a competitive event so one never really knows the outcome for sure.
By the way, Ottawa lost today. Anderson is disappointing a bit, I suppose, for those who are fans.
Last edited by Gary Ruben; Sunday, 3rd November, 2013, 08:02 PM.
I suppose you needed a diversion from watching Montreal and Ottawa lose a lot of games recently. Yes, Toronto failed to sweep their road trip.
Toronto has the personnel to get more defensive if it's a priority. Simply demoting O'Reilly and trading Gardiner would have immediate impact.
The team is taking a short term hit to develop O'Reilly and Gardiner plays because he makes the team better offensively.
Last edited by Duncan Smith; Monday, 4th November, 2013, 01:57 AM.
The bet of a soft drink is a bit different. The soft drink is an item of value. Presumably, it would have to be purchased.
I don't bet games like last nights Leaf game. Vancouver retired Bure's number before the game and the team had a ton of incentive to win. Also, it didn't help that one of their players stepped on the Leafs players leg or foot putting him out for what will probably be a month or two. Something about surgery being needed in the report I heard.
So, looking at it analytically, the Canucks get one puck for home ice, one puck for the incentive and they have pretty good goaltending. The Leafs were finishing off a long road trip and I didn't think they could overcome the 2 pucks I assigned the Canucks to even take it to overtime. And that was before the injury. I also take other important things into consideration. Also, it's a competitive event so one never really knows the outcome for sure.
By the way, Ottawa lost today. Anderson is disappointing a bit, I suppose, for those who are fans.
Hi Gary
I once was talking to a bartender at the RA in Ottawa and he confided that he once "lost a bet". The loser had to get a tattoo of something particularly disgusting put on his arm. Not that I would go that far with this sort of 'negative wager' (a form of a gentlemen's bet, I'd call it) that I might offer to Duncan or anyone else. My offer to Duncan just seemed very suitable for a special sort of chesstalk viewer entertainment. Beats starting several chesstalk threads on the same topic, which Duncan did to me when he thought he had the upper hand in our Blue Jays discussions last summer. Anyway I'm a bit surprised that Google doesn't seem to include this as one definition of a bet (or wager?). Then again, maybe Google doesn't claim to be an authority like a dictionary. I'd be surprised if you haven't encountered stories of such negative bets yourself, though you may not have thought of them as real bets.
[edit: the bartender at the RA at least didn't have to receive a certain number for losing his bet, although at a recent tournament I happened to ask GM Sambuev what his latest CFC rating was. Grinning, he replied "2666".]
Getting back to hockey, the injury to Anderson in overtime was unfortunate, assuming you caught that part by now, if not when you posted. The Senators went on to lose in the shootout with a relatively cold goalie coming in.
Like for the Blue Jays, I've seemed to notice that the Leafs may be prone to injuries (accidental or not), more than normally the case, over the years. I can't explain this trend, if I'm right about it.
[edit: here's the wikipedia entry for the Toronto Maple Leafs. Interestingly mentions a 'curse' in the 1950s, but nothing I caught re: frequent injuries.
I suppose you needed a diversion from watching Montreal and Ottawa lose a lot of games recently. Yes, Toronto failed to sweep their road trip.
Toronto has the personnel to get more defensive if it's a priority. Simply demoting O'Reilly and trading Gardiner would have immediate impact.
The team is taking a short term hit to develop O'Reilly and Gardiner plays because he makes the team better offensively.
Are you perhaps suggesting the Leafs have been merely toying with their opponents so far this year, Duncan? :p The great Habs teams of old would not have allowed 5 defeats by this stage of the season. :p
The 2 November Leaf game happened prior to the Habs game that night. I watched both. At least the Habs didn't lose as badly as the Leafs. :p Reimer looked reasonably human for the Leafs that night.
The Senators' Anderson had an incredible game earlier this year, in a goaltender's duel against an almost equally incredible Miller (in net for Buffalo). The Senators scored late in regulation. Buffalo doesn't deserve to have its terrible record thus far, I suspect, so watch out Leafs when the Sabres are the opponents, in games to come later this month.
Last edited by Kevin Pacey; Monday, 4th November, 2013, 02:30 PM.
Reason: Spelling
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
I suppose you needed a diversion from watching Montreal and Ottawa lose a lot of games recently. Yes, Toronto failed to sweep their road trip.
Toronto has the personnel to get more defensive if it's a priority. Simply demoting O'Reilly and trading Gardiner would have immediate impact.
The team is taking a short term hit to develop O'Reilly and Gardiner plays because he makes the team better offensively.
it's rielly, not o'reilly
maybe look into things a bit more before fronting like an expert?
everytime it hurts, it hurts just like the first (and then you cry till there's no more tears)
Are you perhaps suggesting the Leafs have been merely toying with their opponents so far this year, Duncan? :p The great Habs teams of old would not have allowed 5 defeats by this stage of the season. :p
The 2 November Leaf game happened prior to the Habs game that night. I watched both. At least the Habs didn't lose as badly as the Leafs. :p Reimer looked reasonably human for the Leafs that night.
The Senators' Anderson had an incredible game earlier this year, in a goaltender's duel against an almost equally incredible Miller (in net for Buffalo). The Senators scored late in regulation. Buffalo doesn't deserve to have its terrible record thus far, I suspect, so watch out Leafs when the Sabres are the opponents, in games to come later this month.
I'm not sure where you get your ideas but Buffalo is in full rebuild mode and deserves every bit of their record.
Last edited by Duncan Smith; Monday, 4th November, 2013, 08:25 PM.
I don't recall the Leafs being injury prone at all over the years. Its largely irrelevant anyways because the Leafs are primarily a brand
new roster since 3 years ago and there were no huge injury issues last year. I ignore Lupul in that analysis because the man came to the
team with an injury history so its expected. The man is a great player when he's in the lineup.
I hope you aren't going to start posting about the Leafs having a bad rink or some demon is floating around the rink preventing them
from winning because that would suggest you aren't a very rational person. Please say it isn't so.
Last edited by Duncan Smith; Monday, 4th November, 2013, 08:40 PM.
Originally Posted by Duncan Smith
Re: Pacey's NHL hockey picks
Originally Posted by Kevin Pacey
Are you perhaps suggesting the Leafs have been merely toying with their opponents so far this year, Duncan? The great Habs teams of old would not have allowed 5 defeats by this stage of the season.
The 2 November Leaf game happened prior to the Habs game that night. I watched both. At least the Habs didn't lose as badly as the Leafs. Reimer looked reasonably human for the Leafs that night.
The Senators' Anderson had an incredible game earlier this year, in a goaltender's duel against an almost equally incredible Miller (in net for Buffalo). The Senators scored late in regulation. Buffalo doesn't deserve to have its terrible record thus far, I suspect, so watch out Leafs when the Sabres are the opponents, in games to come later this month.
I'm not sure where you get your ideas but Buffalo is in full rebuild mode and deserves every bit of their record.
I mentioned an earlier Buffalo-Ottawa game this season. In the Sportsnet coverage of that game the colour commentator opined that the Sabres surely weren't as bad as their record made them look. My own optimistic view on Buffalo possibly recovering at least some dignity from their season is based partly upon their star goaltender Miller, who performed so well for Team USA in a Gold Medal effort years back.
At any rate, that a top-tier team like the SJ Sharks can take the Sabres lightly, as may have happened last night, may give a certain amount of justification for my optimism. Anyway, I may yet be having maple syrup with my ice cream and birthday cake, on one of the nights I believe that the Sabres will play the Maple Leafs. :D
Last night my favourite teams Ottawa and Montreal performed at least slightly better, the latter at least picking up a point before losing after regulation. Not that I'm sold on the idea of a team receiving an extra point for making it past regulation and then winning. I prefered a tie in regulation standing during regular season games, but the NHL tinkers with the game's rules etc. every year in the hope that changes that may be only gimmicks (e.g. reversing teams' home and road uniforms from long tradition) will bring in more viewers/fans.
Originally Posted by Duncan Smith
Re: Pacey's NHL hockey picks
I don't recall the Leafs being injury prone at all over the years. Its largely irrelevant anyways because the Leafs are primarily a brand
new roster since 3 years ago and there were no huge injury issues last year. I ignore Lupul in that analysis because the man came to the
team with an injury history so its expected. The man is a great player when he's in the lineup.
I hope you aren't going to start posting about the Leafs having a bad rink or some demon is floating around the rink preventing them
from winning because that would suggest you aren't a very rational person. Please say it isn't so.
Like I posted in my (edited) earlier post, I only found reports of a possible Leaf injury bug in 2008, 2011 and 2013 in my quickie websearch. As a former Leaf fan I have vague memories of inconvenient injuries for the Leafs stretching back decades ago, at least, e.g. back in the Ballard years when captain Wendel Clark was injured for a long period of time (it didn't help that Ballard publicly called Clark a "malingerer"[sp?] ). I also have memories of the Leafs often being involved in rough games, which may be due to a style they might have often had, involving fights and a generally rough (chipy?) sort of play they've engaged in. I once remarked to a friend back then that the Leafs were good 'along the edges' (i.e. boards), implying not so much in the middle, which is more important like in chess. Many injuries happen near the boards, however, like being hit from behind.
Regarding supernatural things like demons and curses and such, I have no suspicion myself that the Leafs as an organization are thus afflicted. However I don't dismiss the possibility of the supernatural out of hand, like many people who put too much faith in science do. Besides, the correct position for a scientist to have is 'agnostic' rather than 'aetheistic' (the latter implies an often fervant sort of belief system in itself). A scientist, or rational person, should have the view there can be no reliable experiments or data regarding the existence of the supernatural, and therefore it falls outside the field of science, as my physics teacher more or less put it to our class back in my high school days.
[edit: oddly enough, I had asked my physics teacher about the 'Pyramid Power' craze that was going on in the 1970s (at least one of the other kids snickered, naturally). At one point I recall Leafs coach Roger Nielsen may have been into that, using it with the team. Unfortunately, there may be a darker side to this. I once saw a near-death experience being related on TV, in which a person experienced going to the outskirts of what he thought was the well-known place people don't want to be. There was a symbol above it, which was a triangle.
I have my own experiences, though not near-death ones, though they of course can't be proven, and are often assumed to be symptoms of my disability when I relate them to people. Anyway, one time I experienced going to the outskirts of the well-known place where people do want to be. Once I saw it illuminated as a white light, but another, later time, it was different in that I saw what looked like a pulsating yellow characature of the sun. It had a symbol of a blood-red cross on it. I guess people see what they are meant to see.]
Last edited by Kevin Pacey; Wednesday, 6th November, 2013, 08:19 PM.
Reason: Grammar
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Tweet
Comment