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.
Brad, I think you are still being called an a-hole, it's just that you are being grouped in with all men. .
Paul, this is typical of your personality. Why do you possess such a need to dig into possible literal interpretations of what people say instead of seeking the spirit of their comments? The guy apologized, he meant it. So what if he chose words which someone like you like might choose to misinterpret so as to demonstrate stupidity, or whatever the hell it is you think you are demonstrating by this form of conduct? Stop being so obsessed with finding little logical mistakes in what people say. You display profound insecurity by doing so. Try to understand what they mean to say, and if you are not sure, do not jump to conclusions which only serve to reveal the nature of your own problems.
Yup, and it's sad to see of the total CFC members only 6% are female.
Why is it sad? If women do not like to play chess as much as men, then so what? As a result of this shall we run special tournaments just for them, special tournaments where males are NOT allowed, so as to try to induce more females to play?
Last edited by Brad Thomson; Tuesday, 27th December, 2016, 08:33 AM.
Is there anyone willing to state that females, because they are females, are not as capable of playing chess as well as males, who because they are males, are more capable of playing chess than females?
Is there anyone willing to state that males, because they are males, are not as capable of playing chess as well as females, who because they are females, are more capable of playing chess than males?
So why do we need or want segregated events in this modern, advanced, politically correct age? Paul, are we not guilty of 19th Century thinking on this?
Hi Brad:
Years ago, then multi-time Canadian women's champion, Nava Starr (Then Shterenberg) made, I believe, a presentation to the CFC governors, or at some CFC event, that clearly was:
Women are inferior to men at chess, due to biological differences.
This was raised on Chesstalk some time ago in the context of the identical issue being discussed. Sasha Starr, her husband, posted here on Ct some info on this. Maybe some expert Ct researcher can locate it?
I believe there are now some more current scientific papers that support Nava's earlier position (but I think it is still somewhat controversial), but I do not have them saved in my file on this issue.
I am at this time watching the World Rapid Chess Championships. Great stuff for sure!!
What I find sad is the fact that because they have a segregated event, we are not getting to see the women play much. I think this event would be much better if the women and the men were in one tournament. Then the women would get lots of coverage and maybe more new females would be interested in playing. To stick the women off on their own someplace else disgusts me. Why not have them play with the men? Think of how much fun it would be when they knocked off the men in individual games!!
Last edited by Brad Thomson; Tuesday, 27th December, 2016, 10:50 AM.
Think of how much fun it would be when two women happened to get paired!! I could go on and on. Imagine if one of the women beat Magnus!! Think of the fun it would be when a woman WON an event!!!!! AND DO NOT TELL ME THEY CANNOT. SO WHY DO THEY NEED THEIR OWN EVENTS????
Female exclusive events have ruined chess. They have ruined this great tournament we have the pleasure of watching at this time.
All of this fun is lost by the 19th century attitude of segregation in chess.
But I would prefer the women and men together, not segregated. It would be far more exciting and interesting, and it would do far more to encourage females to play. Sticking the girls off on their own as if they are second-rate players is wrong. They are not.
I do not understand anyone who prefers it as it is now. Would this World Rapid not be a lot better if the women and men were in one tournament?
What does it serve having females play a segregated event?
Historically, men certainly have been and perhaps still are afraid to lose chess games to women. So they have contrived a way to buy the women off by offering them their own trinkets. Some women accept trinkets and some do not.
Either way, we are now in the 21st Century. Let's get over it and simply have males and females play chess together.
Why is it sad? If women do not like to play chess as much as men, then so what? As a result of this shall we run special tournaments just for them, special tournaments where males are NOT allowed, so as to try to induce more females to play?
In cafe and casual chess levels for decades I've seen almost an equal participation of male and female. When I ran three Chapter's chess nights per week, yes three per week, it was great to see the equality! The same true with in all the years at Cafe Wim. And multi-generational too.
Why this is not reflected in CFC memberships baffles me.
Last edited by Neil Frarey; Tuesday, 27th December, 2016, 05:28 PM.
In cafe and casual chess levels for decades I've seen almost an equal participation of male and female. When I ran three Chapter's chess nights per week, yes three per week, it was great to see the equality! The same true with in all the years at Cafe Wim. And multi-generational too.
Why this is not reflected in CFC memberships baffles me.
I recall your excellent work.
Maybe this would be reflected if they would stop being sexist and insulting. Let everyone play chess on a completely equal basis and the numbers will balance more.
Maybe this would be reflected if they would stop being sexist and insulting. Let everyone play chess on a completely equal basis and the numbers will balance more.
Thanks bro, but none of it would be possible without friends like you, Tom, and a whole hoard of others!
I noticed the Pro Chess League is caught up catering to female chess players:
Female players will give a ten-point bonus to the team's allowable average rating. So if you have a woman in your lineup, your team’s average rating can now be 2510 FIDE. If you have two women, it can be 2520 FIDE and so on. This rule is in place solely because it is good for the league's marketability to have more women playing.
Think of how much fun it would be when two women happened to get paired!! I could go on and on. Imagine if one of the women beat Magnus!! Think of the fun it would be when a woman WON an event!!!!! AND DO NOT TELL ME THEY CANNOT. SO WHY DO THEY NEED THEIR OWN EVENTS????
Female exclusive events have ruined chess. They have ruined this great tournament we have the pleasure of watching at this time.
All of this fun is lost by the 19th century attitude of segregation in chess.
Right Paul? :)
Don't drag me into your silly arguments. I've already made my view clear, I agree with Peter McKillop that we should leave both women AND organizers to do what they think best.
For decades organizers have run tournaments which allow women to participate with men, and there were no women-only events running parallel to keep the women out of the open events. Did it work in terms of attracting women to play? Obviously not. Organizers are now trying a different strategy of having separate and parallel women's events, and the women are turning out in fairly good number, all things considered. It's all good as far as I can tell.
...(I'd reiterate Peter McKillop's point that perhaps women just want to play chess without a bunch of assholes around, but then...(sigh)... Brad would demand an apology for calling him an asshole, when neither Peter nor I ever called him an asshole, we are simply saying that maybe women chess players view male chess players as assholes in a general sense... and supposedly my even mentioning this point would demonstrate "my profound insecurity" by another of Brad's "pseudo-Freudian/Hegelian explanations" .... so I put it here in brackets in the hope that Brad won't notice it... but if he does, his own profound insecurity is bound to have him thinking he's being called an asshole)...
Brad, you are guilty of the very sin you are railing against. You are PRESUMING that the women see these women-only events as an insult to them, as if male organizers are implying that women are second-rate players who need special nurturing. BUT YOU HAVEN'T ACTUALLY TALKED TO THE WOMEN!
If you want your point to be taken seriously, back it up with support from women players, preferably a majority of them. Or if not actual women players, how about women who WOULD be players if not for this so-called male organizer put-down attitude? Perhaps you can find some of them? Get them to sign a petition for organizers to stop holding parallel women-only events, and every woman who signs it should be sure to enter an open event if there is no parallel women-only event.
Good luck with all that.
In the meantime, Brad, I have to ask: what is this "fun" you are talking about?
"Think of how much fun it would be when two women happened to get paired!!" Wow, two exclams. Please, can you explain this new concept of "fun"? Again, you are guilty of the sins you rail against. You are saying that women are so different in chess that to have two of them paired against each other is somehow "fun"... with TWO EXCLAMS!!
Personally, I can't fathom what would be so special about it. The time controls would still be the same. The moves would still be legal chess moves. The result would still be one of 1-0, 1/2-1/2, or 0-1. There would still be tactics and strategy, the same kind of tactics and strategy you'd see in a game between two male players.
What is so effing special, Brad? What is this "fun" that doesn't exist in a game between two male players?
"Imagine if one of the women beat Magnus!!" Two more exclams!! Anyone beating Magnus is special, but you are saying it would be way more special if it was a woman!!
How much "fun" it would then be if an albino eskimo midget were to beat Magnus!!! See Brad I even put THREE EXCLAMS for that!!!
Somehow, Brad, I think that YOU are the only one here guilty of putting women into some special category of player. For you and you alone, only women players can really add "fun" to chess, whatever that means.
"Female exclusive events have ruined chess." Ohhhhh... no exclams. :( So sad, so terribly sad.
This reminds me of the Monty Python "Nudge nudge, wink wink" skit. The guy who keeps saying "nudge nudge, wink wink, know what I mean, eh?" is making all sorts of presumptions and then at the very end asks..... "So what's it like?" revealing his absolute ignorance.
Talk to women, Brad. I know it's scary, but you have to do it if you want anyone to take your points seriously.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Tweet
Comment