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.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
Extra! Extra! Bobby Fischer Was A Complete Dick! (Old CBC TV interview)
amateurish chess player? you mean not a professional?
Almost all CFC players contend for money prizes, thus they are more professional than amateurish, aren't they? And there are much more colors than white and black.
How would you call players to whom you can give odds and still win:
a pawn -
a bishop - (probably G.Ruben's patsers play this level)
two knights -
a queen -
queen and both rooks -
all figures -
even more - (here is my patzers, mentioned in the original posts ;)
What was Montreal'79 impact on Canadian chess, where Karpov and Tal shared the first place? Saint John blitz with Tal as the winner, and Karpov with Kasparov coming from their drawn title match?
Montreal '79, Saint John events were only known to club players outside of these areas. EVERYBODY knew Fischer and Spassky. Even Spassky is a bigger media attraction than Karpov or Kasparov. There wouldn't have been a Montreal '79 without Fischer.
In the late 60s chess in Toronto started a revival, reflected by a youth-ran high school league and a new Star column and national magazine by Dobrich. In the early '70s (after his match in Vancouver) Fischer had sustained coverage in the media, which spread to chess being mentioned in other areas such as comedy routines. There were over 50 chess clubs in Toronto. That boom led to a CFC magazine and house, photos of weekend chess tournaments of 300 players, sponsorship of chess simults in malls, and marketing of new chess-like games and eventually computers.
Fischer not playing Karpov resulted in a loss of media attention. Korchnoi wasn't big enough news.
Many strong players dropped off to develop careers, but some of the new players of the '70s are still around today (like Mark Dutton, Brian Fiedler, David Filipovich).
Almost all CFC players contend for money prizes, thus they are more professional than amateurish, aren't they? And there are much more colors than white and black.
How would you call players to whom you can give odds and still win:
a pawn -
a bishop - (probably G.Ruben's patsers play this level)
two knights -
a queen -
queen and both rooks -
all figures -
even more - (here is my patzers, mentioned in the original posts ;)
no because the tax code does not require this prize money to be declared as income unless the person is professional (ie making a living)and then it is considered business income, its not enough to compete for money, one must be strong enough to actually receive money if that's going to be the benchmark, with the prize structure of say a Canadian closed or open most of the people competing won't have earned a single dime and will have in fact spent money to indulge their hobby
would you like Revenue Canada to change that, would you like to start paying tax on your winnings so you can call yourself a professional? it would only require a little effort on the part of Revenue Canada to hold organizers accountable for withholding taxes at source as happens with other events such as golf tournaments and equestrian events
sadly its nowhere near enough to live off of and one also has to deduct ones entry fee, transportation costs and possibly accomodation costs - after which there's no income there, anytime I've won a prize its basically covered my expenses to drive from Hamilton to Toronto every day of the tournament - most people are not even playing for prizes, evidenced by the number that play up a section where they have less chance of winning money, also evidenced by the popularity of Hal Bond's Guelph tournaments where there are no cash prizes except in the open section
you are a patzer at logic, I can be a 'wood' or 'plastic' pusher and enter a tournament with prize money by paying my entry fee and even if I'm playing in the unrated section and have never played chess before, suddenly I'm a professional because the I'm competing for money?
you are either professional or amateur, if its a sliding scale everyone is going to say anyone with a rating lower than my current rating is an amateur whereas I am of course professionalish
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Friday, 29th May, 2009, 03:52 PM.
no because the tax code does not require this prize money to be declared as income unless the person is professional (ie making a living)and then it is considered business income
That are taxman's words. What do friends tell you about your participation in chess tournaments? How many times do you need to explain that you are not a professional player ;)
the popularity of Hal Bond's Guelph tournaments where there are no cash prizes except in the open section
May we clone Hal to spread these tournaments?
I can be a 'wood' or 'plastic' pusher and enter a tournament with prize money by paying my entry fee and even if I'm playing in the unrated section and have never played chess before, suddenly I'm a professional because the I'm competing for money?
Hehe, that is the first step to professionalism. :D And such patzers were attracted by mass media during Fischer's climb to Olympia heights. However, for a lot of them it was only an affair.
If I have to explain the Fischer era to you I take it you just started playing chess recently?
Actually I started around 2004. Nothing surprises me more than the blatant hero worship of Fischer. IMHO Karpov would have CRUSHED Fischer. My reasons? Just look at Karpovs tournament record after he was given the title. Fischer is ONLY big here in North America BECAUSE he is American. Chess is huge in (the former) soviet union because of their champions, much like there is a revival in chess in India because of Anand. Sure he was a great player, but only one great player in a list of former champions. Get over him.
Now you will say how would a patzer like me know that Karpov would have crushed him? how could someone my rating even have the knowledge to make such a statement? (tired argument I have heard several times). I reverse the question right back at you. How can ANYONE not rated 2700 say that Karpov wouldn't have crushed him... I use history to back my claims and how DOMINANT Karpov was in Tournaments until Kasparov (another far better player than fischer) challenged him.
As far as Fischer being good for chess... I will state just the opposite. There is NOTHING more detrimental to chess today than the Hero worship of a RACIST, SEXIST mentally unstable man who REFUSED to defend his title. I can not think of a worse poster boy for the game. But those who 'played chess in the Fischer era' will continue to pine over the past ignoring the talent of today. If there is anyone who is an ideal person as an ambassador for the game today current World champion V.Anand is the man. (M.Carlsen is a close second).
Re: Extra! Extra! Bobby Fischer Was A Complete Dick! (Old CBC TV interview)
I'm not interested in whether Karpov or Fischer would have won the match. The match never happened, I can see it obsesses you though. Nor do I participate in fantasy baseball or debates on whether Ali or some heavyweight champ he never got to fight was the greatest boxer of all time. You are 50% right though, one of them would have won.
Ironically I just received in the mail today The Best of Chess Informant Karpov CD. I like Karpov.
I will say that when Fischer was world champion he was the world champion for the sake of chess - for the sake of the game. He turned down lucrative contracts to endorse products not related to chess. He turned his back on commercialism. He is the only chess grandmaster that I know of that did the late night talk show circuit and was on the cover of Sports Illustrated. Do you have any idea what that meant for the game?
Karpov and especially Kasparov were in chess to benefit themselves just as Kasparov is in Russian politics to benefit himself. Just like all the world champions before them with the possible exception of Capablanca. That's why FIDE had to be developed so instead of champions ducking worthy contenders and demanding impossible prize funds or conditions there was a proper contender process.
Chess is a small little thing today, far away from the world stage, on par with bridge and backgammon and scrabble, although I think scrabble is out ahead by a mile. The only ones who know of the players you speak of are the hard core of tournament players. I have many friends who know how to play chess that have no idea who the current world champion is today, as nice a fellow as Ananad is. Carlsen, forget it, what's a Carlsen? Is that a beer? If it were not for Jonathan Berry and Lawrence Day doing columns for the Globe and Star we wouldn't even have a fraction of the exposure that crossword puzzles get.
If you like your heroes to be pure, virtuous and bland so be it. Nobody is asking or has asked you to like Fischer, least of all Fischer in his lifetime.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Friday, 29th May, 2009, 05:54 PM.
I'm not interested in whether Karpov or Fischer would have won the match. The match never happened, I can see it obsesses you though.
I will say that when Fischer was world champion he was the world champion for the sake of chess - for the sake of the game.
Karpov and especially Kasparov were in chess to benefit themselves just as Kasparov is in Russian politics to benefit himself.
I have many friends who know how to play chess that have no idea who the current world champion is today, as nice a fellow as Ananad is. Carlsen, forget it, what's a Carlsen? Is that a beer? .
If you like your heroes to be pure, virtuous and bland so be it. Nobody is asking or has asked you to like Fischer, least of all Fischer in his lifetime.
1. - I don't obsess over the match, I am just sick and tired of the CONSTANT fischer hero worship.
2. Fischer was in it for chess???? he never played ONE CHESS GAME when he was world champion. If he was really in it for chess he would have actually played. Sure he didn't take sponsorships... that's because he wanted ALL the money and was pissed off if anyone made 1 cent of his name.
3. Karpov and Kasparov are only in it for themselves? Just because Kasparov is in politics after he retired doesn't mean that he is in it for himself. Karpov still promotes chess today, if anything he is doing far more for chess than Fischer ever did.
4. And whos problem is that your friends have never heard of the world champion? if it wasn't for the CONSTANT pining over Fischer perhaps they would get some actual press? Carlsen actually gets more press than Anand, because he is considered a 'wunderkind' child prodigy.
5. I don't expect my hero's to be pure, but I do have a minimum standard of behavior. Racist, sexist, mentally unstable jerks need not apply for people I respect. Actually I am very disappointed that the US government didn't get ahold of Fischer. The should have put him in a mental institution where he could get some help. Perhaps then he would have realized his idiotic racists statements were pure bunk and would have apologized.
Re: Extra! Extra! Bobby Fischer Was A Complete Dick! (Old CBC TV interview)
Interesting, you don't expect your heroes to be pure, but you do expect them to be put in a rubber room and straight jacketed if they say something you don't like.
Its clear the match does obsess you, you've obviously thought alot about it judging from your comments on something that never happened.
Fischer wasn't required to sacrifice himself on the altar of chess. He did a tremendous amount for chess and achieved a tremendous amount. If he didn't want to defend his championship that was up to him. It obviously took a lot out of him to achieve so much. I'm not one of those who demand my heroes satisfy my every wish or else I reject them. He was a chess champion not a gladiator, I'm a fan not part of a demanding mob. I also don't demand that they meet some kind of thought police or inquisition, I take Fischer for what he was, good & bad.
If Anand decided not to defend his championship would you be all over him for doing so?
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Saturday, 30th May, 2009, 12:59 AM.
Actually I started around 2004. Nothing surprises me more than the blatant hero worship of Fischer. IMHO Karpov would have CRUSHED Fischer. My reasons? Just look at Karpovs tournament record after he was given the title. Fischer is ONLY big here in North America BECAUSE he is American. Chess is huge in (the former) soviet union because of their champions, much like there is a revival in chess in India because of Anand. Sure he was a great player, but only one great player in a list of former champions. Get over him.
Now you will say how would a patzer like me know that Karpov would have crushed him? how could someone my rating even have the knowledge to make such a statement? (tired argument I have heard several times). I reverse the question right back at you. How can ANYONE not rated 2700 say that Karpov wouldn't have crushed him... I use history to back my claims and how DOMINANT Karpov was in Tournaments until Kasparov (another far better player than fischer) challenged him.
As far as Fischer being good for chess... I will state just the opposite. There is NOTHING more detrimental to chess today than the Hero worship of a RACIST, SEXIST mentally unstable man who REFUSED to defend his title. I can not think of a worse poster boy for the game. But those who 'played chess in the Fischer era' will continue to pine over the past ignoring the talent of today. If there is anyone who is an ideal person as an ambassador for the game today current World champion V.Anand is the man. (M.Carlsen is a close second).
A book that has received little attention outside the United States is Karpov on Karpov, subtitled ‘Memoirs of a Chess World Champion’, a translation from the Russian by Todd Bludeau. A selection of quotes will give the flavour:
(...)
(Regarding Fischer): ‘I don’t know anyone else in the history of chess to whom we owe so much ... No-one from our generation of chessplayers, nor the one to follow, should ever forget that we are living off the dividends guaranteed us by Robert James Fischer.’ (page 167)
As far as Fischer being good for chess... I will state just the opposite. There is NOTHING more detrimental to chess today than the Hero worship of a RACIST, SEXIST mentally unstable man who REFUSED to defend his title. I can not think of a worse poster boy for the game. But those who 'played chess in the Fischer era' will continue to pine over the past ignoring the talent of today. If there is anyone who is an ideal person as an ambassador for the game today current World champion V.Anand is the man. (M.Carlsen is a close second).
The Fischer who won the WC was an incredible ambassador for chess, in that he was able to get chess into the mainstream media. The Fischer you know (insane, hate filled, never play) is obviously not someone the chess world wants to be associated with in any way.
Everything you say about Anand and Carlsen is true, if we were the ones who get to choose who the public should pay attention to. We aren't, and no chess player has ever captured the world's attention like Fischer. Kasparov can play all the computers he wants, and he'll never make 25% of the impact on society that Fischer did.
Those of us from the Fischer era can recognize all Fischer's faults, but still recognize as well the incredible positive contribution he made to chess.
Tweet
Comment