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.
Our youngest Olympian, Qiyu Zhou, seems to now be Canada's 2nd highest rated female player, behind only Yuanling Yuan, who had another excellent Olympiad.
Congratulations to Qiyu on an excellent performance especially after her second round setback. And, of course, to Yuanling who continues to lead the Canadian women with distinction.
Congratulations also to Anton who turned in a fine performance on first board in the Open.
I saw somewhere that Qiyu already had the WFM by two other ways (rating and NAYCC), but it's not listed on the FIDE website. Maybe she didn't pay the required amount.
I wonder what kind of odds one could have got on Kyrgyzstan finishing ahead of Canada? Kgrgyzstan had an FM on board 1, an IM on board 2, and untitled players on boards 3 and 4 (with no board 5) and somehow managed to finish 34th.
If one looks as the performance ratings, one gets an idea of how well we actually performed. I personally consider a player with a performance rating between ±50 points of their current rating as performing as expected, and outside those brackets better or worst than expected.
By this definition, all of our GMs performed as expected, while IMs Gerzhoy and Hambleton are likely disappointed with their results.
On the Women's team, Khoudgarian and Starr are most likely disappointed, while the rest of the team performed as expected.
I'm sure everyone hoped for more but the result is not too surprising. For the open team, the turning points were England and Brazil. The England match could have easily gone the other way, while the Brazil result was the worst of the event.
The games were hard fought. They were worthy teams. Let's all cheer for our players, and look forward to the next Olympiad.
Topalov was the only top ten GM who gained rating points in Tromso. So who are the fast charging youngsters, Giri (#11), So (#13), and Liren (#15) likely to bump from the top ten?
There's no point "rubbing it in". Our team tried and they had some very difficult pairings.
The other thing of note is that it was a Swiss pairing methodology, so the "yo-yo effect" is a significant factor. Swiss pairing is great for determining a clear winner in as few rounds as possible, but beyond that it is hit and miss.
Dogs will bark, but the caravan of chess moves on.
1. Topalov, Veselin BUL Rp 2872 9 games 6.5 points 72%
2. Adams, Michael ENG Rp 2839 9 games 6.5 points 72%
3. Giri, Anish NED Rp 2836 11 games 8.0 points 73%
4. Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar AZE Rp 2833 10 games 7.0 points 70%
5. Shirov, Alexei LAT Rp 2800 10 games 7.0 points 70%
6. Carlsen, Magnus NOR Rp 2799 9 games 6.0 points 67%
Board Two
1. Nguyen, Ngoc VIE Rp 2843 10 games 8.5 points 85%
2. Balogh, Csaba HUN Rp 2839 9 games 7.0 points 78%
3. Ding, Liren CHN Rp 2831 10 games 7.5 points 75%
4. Svelushkin, Dmitry MDA Rp 2809 9 games 8.0 points 89%
5. Bacrot, Etienne FRA Rp 2781 10 games 7.0 points 70%
Board Three
1. Yu, Yangyi CHN Rp 2912 11 games 9.5 points 86%
2. Sasikiran, Krishnan IND Rp 2753 10 games 7.5 points 75%
3. Eljanov, Pavel UKR Rp 2745 9 games 7.0 points 78%
4. Iotov, Valentin BUL Rp 2741 11 games 8.0 points 73%
5. Markus, Robert SRB Rp 2730 9 games 6.5 points 72%
Board Four
1. Sedlak, Nikola SRB Rp 2773 8 games 6.5 points 81.3%
2. Ortiz, Isan CUB Rp 2766 8 games 6.0 points 75%
3. Ni, Hua CHN Rp 2723 9 games 6.5 points 72.2%
4. Howell, David ENG Rp 2709 10 games 7.5 points 75%
5. Safari, Eitaj AZE Rp 2693 8 games 5.5 points 68.8%
Board Five
1. Shankland, Samuel USA Rp 2831 10 games 9.0 points 90%
2. Moiseenko, Alexander UKR Rp 2714 9 games 7.0 points 77.8%
3. Nepomniachtchi, Ian RUS Rp 2650 9 games 6.5 points 72.2%
4. Sadler, Matthew ENG Rp 2637 10 games 7.0 points 70%
5. Van Kampen, Robin NET Rp 2617 8 games 5.0 points 62.5%
_____________
Board Prizes Women
Board One
1. Dzagnidze, Nana GEO Rp 2719 9 games 8.0 points 88.9%
2. Hou, Yifan CHN Rp 2671 9 games 7.0 points 77.8%
3. Cramling, Pia SWE Rp 2659 11 games 10 points 90.9%
Board Two
1. Gunina, Valentina RUS Rp 2651 10 games 8.0 points 80%
2. Khotenashvili, Bela GEO Rp 2589 10 games 8.0 points 80%
3. Ju, Wenjun CHN Rp 2584 11 games 8.0 points 73%
Board Three
1. Kosteniuk, Alexandre RUS Rp 2639 9 games 7.5 points 83%
2. Matnadze, Ana ESP Rp 2445 10 games 7.5 points 75%
3. Frisk, Elinor SWE Rp 2432 11 games 9.5 points 86%
Board Four
1. Zhukova, Natalia UKR Rp 2512 10 games 7.5 points 75%
2. Bartei, Marta POL Rp 2439 9 games 6.5 points 72%
3. Bulmaga, Inna ROU Rp 2433 10 games 8.0 points 80%
Board Five
1. Padmini, Rout IND Rp 2584 8 games 7.5 points 94%
2. Guo, Qi CHN Rp 2520 8 games 6.5 points 81%
3. Dauletova, Guimira KAZ Rp 2486 8 games 7.0 points 88%
Last edited by Wayne Komer; Thursday, 14th August, 2014, 02:39 PM.
Reason: wrong country code for Moldova
1. Topalov, Veselin BUL Rp 2872 9 games 6.5 points 72%
2. Adams, Michael ENG Rp 2839 9 games 6.5 points 72%
3. Giri, Anish NED Rp 2836 11 games 8.0 points 73%
Why does Giri, with a higher percentage, place 3rd?
If one looks as the performance ratings, one gets an idea of how well we actually performed. I personally consider a player with a performance rating between ±50 points of their current rating as performing as expected, and outside those brackets better or worst than expected.
By this definition, all of our GMs performed as expected, while IMs Gerzhoy and Hambleton are likely disappointed with their results.
On the Women's team, Khoudgarian and Starr are most likely disappointed, while the rest of the team performed as expected.
I'm sure everyone hoped for more but the result is not too surprising. For the open team, the turning points were England and Brazil. The England match could have easily gone the other way, while the Brazil result was the worst of the event.
The games were hard fought. They were worthy teams. Let's all cheer for our players, and look forward to the next Olympiad.
The rating performance is a good indicator but in a team event it has some drawbacks. For example, I think that Bator Sambuev's result was really good. He brought the team some very important victories (like the one today) and on the other hand some of his losses came when the team needed him to win and he pushed too much.
Tweet
Comment