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.
Same about poker, isn't? I only watched several episodes of poker games because: 1. it was played by a trash-talker; 2 (main) he was a Lithuanian LOL
As for 1) memorizing. Why do you care about those elite players? Does it hurt your mind that they can remember long variations, and find there some good and interesting ideas? As for the game 3 - the truth might surfaced later why Magnus went into that variation. Do you remember the Kramnik-Leko disaster?
I care about the memorization aspect because it means even young kids have to start memorizing openings in order to progress. If we wanted to test people's memorization ability, there are better ways than chess to do it. Chess should be about creating over the board. Memorization as a necessary skill means players will just keep going with memorized lines (out of laziness) and this in turn increases the number of draws, because memorized lines are the ones that keep things relatively equal.
And who as a spectator wants to see 50 plies of a memorized line played, with each player taking several minutes to make each ply?
The better question is, why is FIDE against chess960 (to the extent that they do not sanction it)?
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Fair points Garland, but I would point out that in a hand of poker there are a rather small number of decisions that must be made by the player - the next card is determined by chance and about all the player can do is calculate probabilities at each point and make a decision. Chess is quite a bit more complex than that I think. Poker is 'gambling' by any reasonable definition but I agree that it involves more human input than the other forms of gambling you mentioned (although I think blackjack is almost the same situation, no?). Maybe I should Google for the "house odds advantage" for blackjack and various flavours of poker - I wonder if they are actually close or if my presumption is valid?
Some common misconceptions here from both Kerry and Garland.
Kerry, you are oversimplifying things as Garland suggests. Firstly, the number of AVAILABLE decisions may be smaller in poker when action is on you, but the number of TOTAL decisions to be made over the course of a tournament or a cash game can be far greater than that for chess (especially considering how many opening moves in chess are made from memory).
Also, even though in poker the decisions come down to fold, check, call, bet or raise, the last two involve another decision: HOW MUCH to bet or raise? This secondary decision is critically important and is part of what makes one poker player good and another not so good. Betting or raising all-in every chance you get is a recipe for disaster.
And finally, let's not forget that poker allows for BLUFFING. And so part of the skill of poker is reading opponents and making decisions as to whether an opponent is bluffing or not. And when YOU bluff, you have to hide the fact that you are bluffing. If you play poker without ever bluffing, this will become apparent to your opponents and they will use that knowledge against you.
I think Garland does overextend the skill factor in poker: if you, Kerry, were invited to poker against serious players, you DO have a reasonable chance to come away the winner. This is why the World Series of Poker Main Event attracts over 6,000 entries every year at $10,000 a shot. Joe Sixpack enters believing he has a chance to win life-changing money, and he doesn't have to finish first for that. Even a 30th place finish offers a decent payout, and the top 10% of total entries receive back more than their entry fee.
Regarding gambling: strictly speaking, poker is not gambling because there is no house you are all playing against which holds a large advantage over all the players. The players are playing against each other and, ignoring skill, each player has equal chance to win. There is no 'house advantage' to speak of.
If we widen the definition of gambling to include any element of chance, then games like hockey, baseball, football could all be considered gambling: games are decided partly on skill but also largely on luck. Upsets do happen!
Chess is one of the few games that relies purely on skill (GO being another). As such, it does not imitate or model real life at all -- it's even a poor model for warfare. I have conjectured whether this is something that makes serious chess players have so much apparent difficulty with real life: they simply don't like / can't adjust to the randomness that keeps popping up. Each human being they have to deal with is far more complex than a chess piece, and far more random in behavior!
Anyone who wants to cope with real life is much better off playing poker than playing chess, although perhaps the most optimal course is to play both with equal endeavour.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
In blackjack there is no human element in the decision making of the dealer. He must hit on 16 and stand on 17, regardless of what you show, unless he has already beat your hand.
In poker it's different, as you have to know both the odds, the psychology of the player and the size of his stake and your stake. For example, suppose you have in your hand a Ten of spades and Ten of hearts and you and one other player haved stayed in. The A-Q-T of diamonds show up on the river, giving you trip tens. You bet 10% of your stake. Your opponent goes all-in.
First, what are the odds that he has a flush, straight, trip aces, or trip Queens, to beat your tens?
Second, could he have another hand, such as a high 2 pair, that he thinks is a winner but is actually losing?
Third, what could still turn up that could change your hand from a winner to a loser? Another diamond, to give him a flush that he didn't have before?
Finally what did your opponent just stake? Did he go all in because he has almost no money left, and is in danger of simply not being around in a few hands? Do you?
These are all decision points, and using this information correctly separates the winning poker players from the losers. On TV the viewer has the advantage of seeing all the hands, not just their own, making their task much easier than the players. This makes it an easier spectator sport.
Computers can now play poker about as well as the best humans, a position similar to computer chess in the 1990's. It is a source of cheating, similar to chess. But given that computers can calculate mathematical odds almost instantly and yet 20 years ago were clearly inferior to the best humans indicates that just being able to calculate probabilities was insufficient.
Tweet
Comment