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.
I didn't agree with his politics but he was fun in a discussion. If I was reading him right that he isn't a fan of the US, I'm sure he has his reasons. I think they should worry about chess in their own country and not obsess over Canadian chess and our politics and voting patterns.
I've always thought American Intelligence is an oxymoron.
I'm taking a break from moderating here for 3 months. Maybe longer. I don't intend to disappear, however.
I think Brian is the new moderator but it would be best for him, or someone responsible, to say so.
Cheers.
ETA: Francis Rodriguez [of Strategy Games I think] I see has noted Brian as the new volunteer moderator. Please direct any abuse previously intended for me ... to him! lol.
Heh. Seriously, please try to make him feel welcome. It's a dirty job, but somebody has to do it.
Last edited by Nigel Hanrahan; Friday, 15th August, 2014, 03:21 PM.
Reason: ETA
Dogs will bark, but the caravan of chess moves on.
Oh no! Nigel up and went to Russia! Say it isn't so! He's been rendered by CSIS, perhaps.
Nigel is actually one of the Kirsan aliens, and his mission here of encouraging Vlad Drkulec with crazy irrational logic worked like a charm.
Now that Kirsan has won, Nigel can return to the mothership. That's why he says he'll be gone for "3 months... maybe longer". Since he'll be travelling at near light speeds, he can't estimate the Earth time very well. Just a few minutes off in his spaceship time could be a few weeks in Earth time.
The master aliens have to reprogram Nigel because they now realize they overdid it with all the 'lol' comments. When he comes back, he'll start writing more serious words... like 'bribe'.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Nigel is actually one of the Kirsan aliens, and his mission here of encouraging Vlad Drkulec with crazy irrational logic worked like a charm.
Now that Kirsan has won, Nigel can return to the mothership. That's why he says he'll be gone for "3 months... maybe longer". Since he'll be travelling at near light speeds, he can't estimate the Earth time very well. Just a few minutes off in his spaceship time could be a few weeks in Earth time.
The master aliens have to reprogram Nigel because they now realize they overdid it with all the 'lol' comments. When he comes back, he'll start writing more serious words... like 'bribe'.
The three months, coincidently, lines up with the civic election period in BC, as far as I know.
I admire the way the Kasparov campaign was conducted. I particularly got a laugh out of the 10 Million 20 million promises. It paid to speak last. FUNNY!!!!!!!
This piece seems pro-Kasparov and anti-politics, and the last sentence sums things up nicely:
"Somehow, Ilyumzhinov has made Kasparov look like the extremist, even though Kasparov's suggestions for the future of chess seem to make a great deal of sense."
And this is the great issue that we should all be having with Vlad Drkulec's (and Hal Bond's) handling of the FIDE election: they both fell hook, line and sinker into this trap of Kirsan's, and Vlad abandoned his duties as representative of Canadian chess and let his ego take over. In all the debates that ensued, Vlad showed total inflexibility and a great void of ability to parse fact from fiction. Vlad became a legend in his own mind, whose thinking could do no wrong, when in fact he was doing no thinking whatsoever.
Vlad's 'mouse that roared' speech here on ChessTalk declaring that no one in the future would ever intimidate the CFC was the height of his egocentric thinking. He really believes his own hype. He actually believes that he has somehow permanently turned the CFC into some kind of 'chess Rambo' that nobody will mess with. Too many Stallone movies perhaps, but in any event, all he's really done is turn the CFC into an international laughing stock. The 'Kasparov people' were genuinely interested in helping raise the CFC and chess in Canada to a new level and Vlad was not only rejecting them, but insulting them for good measure. Alienating those that are trying to help and burning bridges behind you such that support will never come from that direction again is not only a total lack of good judgement, but a dereliction of leadership.
Vlad was encouraged by statements of agreement from chess kids and their parents, who were obviously sold by Vlad's acknowledged Carnegie sales techniques. If they are going to believe anything, it might as well be the pronouncements of this new 'warrior' leader. These people that are fairly new to organized chess were aping Vlad's own opinions because they simply don't know any better. When veteran participants in organized chess such as Brian Hartman, Ian Findlay, and even Jean Hebert speak up to try and get Vlad to realize how wrong headed his approach is, Vlad predictably casts them aside.
The reality that is coming for the CFC is no support from anywhere. No $80K from Kirsan or FIDE. No Sid Belzberg or Robert Hamilton or Mig. Just a long, cold winter ahead and possibly lawsuits that will do damage to the core of Canadian chess. Many, many people just on this forum have posted lamenting this state of affairs, but your glorious CFC leader prefers to bask in the glow of 'victory'.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
This piece seems pro-Kasparov and anti-politics, and the last sentence sums things up nicely:
"Somehow, Ilyumzhinov has made Kasparov look like the extremist, even though Kasparov's suggestions for the future of chess seem to make a great deal of sense."
And this is the great issue that we should all be having with Vlad Drkulec's (and Hal Bond's) handling of the FIDE election: they both fell hook, line and sinker into this trap of Kirsan's, and Vlad abandoned his duties as representative of Canadian chess and let his ego take over. In all the debates that ensued, Vlad showed total inflexibility and a great void of ability to parse fact from fiction. Vlad became a legend in his own mind, whose thinking could do no wrong, when in fact he was doing no thinking whatsoever.
Vlad's 'mouse that roared' speech here on ChessTalk declaring that no one in the future would ever intimidate the CFC was the height of his egocentric thinking. He really believes his own hype. He actually believes that he has somehow permanently turned the CFC into some kind of 'chess Rambo' that nobody will mess with. Too many Stallone movies perhaps, but in any event, all he's really done is turn the CFC into an international laughing stock. The 'Kasparov people' were genuinely interested in helping raise the CFC and chess in Canada to a new level and Vlad was not only rejecting them, but insulting them for good measure. Alienating those that are trying to help and burning bridges behind you such that support will never come from that direction again is not only a total lack of good judgement, but a dereliction of leadership.
Vlad was encouraged by statements of agreement from chess kids and their parents, who were obviously sold by Vlad's acknowledged Carnegie sales techniques. If they are going to believe anything, it might as well be the pronouncements of this new 'warrior' leader. These people that are fairly new to organized chess were aping Vlad's own opinions because they simply don't know any better. When veteran participants in organized chess such as Brian Hartman, Ian Findlay, and even Jean Hebert speak up to try and get Vlad to realize how wrong headed his approach is, Vlad predictably casts them aside.
The reality that is coming for the CFC is no support from anywhere. No $80K from Kirsan or FIDE. No Sid Belzberg or Robert Hamilton or Mig. Just a long, cold winter ahead and possibly lawsuits that will do damage to the core of Canadian chess. Many, many people just on this forum have posted lamenting this state of affairs, but your glorious CFC leader prefers to bask in the glow of 'victory'.
The only person who made Kasparov look like an extremist was Kasparov himself. And that run for the last quarter of a century.
"I certainly do not wish to be totally anti-Kasparov. Any chessplayer of more than modest strength will have hag great respect, and have learnt from, Kasparov's magnificent chess, and the way in which he has pushed chess forwards for a quarter of a century. The problem is, and sorry, this is something of a chess cliché, that he seems to have the tendency of regarding people as pawns, either for or against him. This is not so good in a democracy."
"I certainly do not wish to be totally anti-Kasparov. Any chessplayer of more than modest strength will have hag great respect, and have learnt from, Kasparov's magnificent chess, and the way in which he has pushed chess forwards for a quarter of a century. The problem is, and sorry, this is something of a chess cliché, that he seems to have the tendency of regarding people as pawns, either for or against him. This is not so good in a democracy."
Steve
I take it you did not read the final paragraph.
"I am even more so, definitely not a fan of Ilyumzhinov, for reasons which have been very well aired by others. He is, as far as I can tell, a much shrewder politician than Kasparov. He knows that he has enemies, and he knows that he has supporters, and, importantly, he knows that he needs to take care of the centre ground.
Somehow, Ilyumzhinov has made Kasparov look like the extremist, even though Kasparov's suggestions for the future of chess seem to make a great deal of sense."
"I certainly do not wish to be totally anti-Kasparov. Any chessplayer of more than modest strength will have hag great respect, and have learnt from, Kasparov's magnificent chess, and the way in which he has pushed chess forwards for a quarter of a century. The problem is, and sorry, this is something of a chess cliché, that he seems to have the tendency of regarding people as pawns, either for or against him. This is not so good in a democracy."
Steve
Let's sum up the author's pro- and con-Kasparov comments.
Pro:
- had ambitious ideas about the way forward for chess
- he was extremely hard working in canvassing federations across the various continents
- did not resort to Kirsan's rather shallow promise that if GK could offer so much extra money to FIDE, then KI would double the offer
- his suggestions for the future of chess seem to make a great deal of sense
Con:
- Kasparov and Nigel Short between them aimed to create a breakaway event from the World Championship, setting up the PCA (NOTE: the author expresses no opinion on this, he only mentions it as something KI would use against Kasparov)
- there was a perception of arrogance among parts of the Kasparov campaign
(NOTE: the use of the word 'perception' and the phrase 'among parts of'. The author is saying there wasn't necessarily arrogance, there was only a perception of arrogance. The author is also saying it wasn't necessarily Kasparov himself who gave this perception, it was 'parts of' the campaign. Steve, you should learn to read between the lines!
Also, the author excuses Kasparov for this perception of arrogance with the statement: "It should be added though that this is a continual weakness of politicians." Again, the author is softening the blow of this perception.)
- Kasparov's lecturing on Europe is not particularly helpful.
- he seems to have the tendency of regarding people as pawns, either for or against him (NOTE: this is also a tendency of Vlad Drkulec, far more so than of Kasparov. Vlad turned against Sid Belzberg from the beginning, and despite Sid's willingness to overlook that and still offer Vlad an out, Vlad persisted because Vlad simply cannot admit being wrong unless he has some external excuse; Vlad's judgment is sacrosanct and simply not subject to error.)
In all the above arguments, an objective reader should pay special attention to the very first pro argument, Kasparov's ambitious arguments about the way forward for chess. And the last pro argument, that his suggestions for the future of chess seem to make a great deal of sense. All the other arguments are almost frivolous. Organized chess needs ambitious ideas, and Kirsan doesn't have them. Arrogance and criticizing Europe and a past break with FIDE all pale in comparison to having the best ideas for chess going forward.
Finally, there is still this coup-de-grace which definitely shows whose side the author is on:
"I am even more so, definitely not a fan of Ilyumzhinov, for reasons which have been very well aired by others."
Uh, I guess YOU didn't read THAT, did you Steve?
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
"I am even more so, definitely not a fan of Ilyumzhinov, for reasons which have been very well aired by others."
Uh, I guess YOU didn't read THAT, did you Steve?
I did read it. You made the unsupported claim that the article was pro-Kasparov. It wasn't. Further, I didn't suggest that the article, or Crouch's viewpoint, was pro-Kirsan. As far as I know, Crouch is generally quite anti-Kirsan.
Tweet
Comment