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.
ChessBomb seems to have got the colours reversed in the Adams -Giri game that Adams evidently won as Black. If that's indeed correct, then the standings heading into the final round are:
While perhaps not a major impediment to his World Champion aspirations, his shortcomings in this aspect of the game are certainly a handicap. First and foremost, his chances of winning the World Cup take a serious hit since so many of the matches are decided via Blitz playoffs. One has only to think of Grischuk taking quick draws with White the last World Cup just so he could get to the shorter time controls in the Rapid/Blitz playoffs. I wouldn't think Caruana could even be considered a bona fide favourite in such a format.
"I have played a blitz game once. It was on a train, in 1929." – Mikhail Botvinnik
"He who analyses blitz is stupid*." – Rashid Nezhmetdinov
"Blitz chess kills your ideas." – Bobby Fischer
*some here would prefer "intellectually inept"
Perhaps you should have confined your quotes to Botvinnik, Mathieu. To utilize quotes by two of the greatest blitz players of their day strikes me as decidedly incongruous to your counterargument. Moreover, you might want to scrutinize the verb in that Nezhmetdinov quote (:
This was a six-player all play all tournament today with a time limit of 4 minutes + 2 seconds from the first move. The players played both blitz games against each other consecutively. Players received 3 points for a win, 1 point for a draw and 0 points for a loss.
There was some confusion with the speed of the results coming in. The official final standings after tie-break are:
Perhaps you should have confined your quotes to Botvinnik, Mathieu. To utilize quotes by two of the greatest blitz players of their day strikes me as decidedly incongruous to your counterargument. Moreover, you might want to scrutinize the verb in that Nezhmetdinov quote (:
Come on man, it's 2014. I just took some famous quotes from the wiki article on blitz... ;)
Obviously, my point was just that there's not really much to analyze from one day of playing blitz. Who cares if Caruana or Kramnik are down on the blitz rating list. That has absolutely nothing to do with their capacity to play a game of real chess.
...Who cares if Caruana or Kramnik are down on the blitz rating list. That has absolutely nothing to do with their capacity to play a game of real chess.
This line of reasoning involving 'real' chess can be extended indefinitely.
Let's start with this: the only reason a time control such as 40 moves in 2 hours, then 1 hour SD with 30 seconds increment is considered as 'real' chess is because FIDE decrees it so. And the reason FIDE decrees it so is to enable tournaments to finish in reasonable time. It isn't because the very best chess quality is ordained to be at that time control.
Given that, one could just as easily say "Who cares if Joe Sixpack is down on the FIDE rating list? It has nothing to do with his capacity to play a game of real chess." In this case, 'real' chess would mean chess with much longer time controls, maybe 2 hours per move or something.
And one could extend further, comparing 2 hours per move to correspondence chess, where not only are there days to make moves, but one can play out lines on a board, not have to visualize them. Is this 'real' chess? Well, how about centuries to make moves, and the ability to have 100 million lines being played out on 100 million chess boards? Ahhh.... getting close to computer chess, and since computers make calculations much faster than humans, we can replace centuries with seconds as in blitz. Is this 'real' chess? Well, no computer we can imagine can search the entire chess tree in ANY amount of time, so again start increasing times, give the computer hours per move.... is that 'real' chess?
It looks like we need a definition for 'real' chess, and that would likely be for us limited humans back to FIDE time controls. But it's not about some absolute quality, it's instead a compromise between quality and time.
Blitz is also a compromise between quality and time. We get a lot more games of a lot less quality. There is nothing less 'real' about blitz. And I would also say there is nothing more or less 'real' about correspondence chess.
The argument that blitz performance doesn't have anything to do with slower time controls is incorrect. Slow time controls still allow for a given move having to be decided on in seconds. Slow time control games can be and often are decided in these moments.
Mathieu, you've given us your opinion in another thread of the back-to-back blunders** from first Carlsen, then Anand, in game 6 of the WC, saying it's not so bad in a historical context. You are willing to accept such blunders in 'real' chess. Yet here you are now, belittling blitz chess for its preponderance of errors and non-optimal play stemming from a very restricting time control. But restrictive time controls are RELATIVE, not absolute. Your 'real' chess can be equally belittled.
**Mathieu's definition of blunder needs revisiting: "For me, a real blunder has to clearly change the evaluation of the position." He argues that if Anand had replied to Carlsen's blunder with the correct ...Nxe5+ Carlsen may still have held the game to a draw. What this indicates is that before playing 26.Kd2, Carlsen still had winning chances, but after that move, the BEST Carlsen could have hoped for with no blunder from Anand was a draw. And that should be the definition of blunder: a move that with best play robs you of any winning or drawing chances you had before the move.
Last edited by Paul Bonham; Tuesday, 9th December, 2014, 04:12 PM.
Reason: clarification
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Come on man, it's 2014. I just took some famous quotes from the wiki article on blitz... ;)
Obviously, my point was just that there's not really much to analyze from one day of playing blitz......That has absolutely nothing to do with their capacity to play a game of real chess.
Poor Usain Bolt, Carl Lewis, Jim Hines!
Now we know the blazing sprints are not "real" track,
compared to the slow-chugging long-distance runners:-(
Tweet
Comment