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.
Interesting ideas Pargat. I myself am attracted to chess in part because there is no luck element, no randomness, no dice, no bad bounces, it is a finite game, and you win when make the best moves. Thank goodness I am strictly an intermediate player, if I had gotten any better I may have ended up being even more disreputable than I already am.
I would not put it quite this way. But it is surely the case that persons with certain difficult to specify eccentricities are also sometimes fabulous chess players. I am not sure what comes first, the chicken or the egg.
I on the other hand know exactly what comes first. I learned it by being a chess variant inventor. The reaction I get from long-time chess players is almost vitriolic if I dare introduce any element of chance into a variant. That really is telling.
It means, and I can understand this, that long-time chess players, especially the good ones who are more serious about chess, cannot tolerate ANY act of randomness. Everything to them must be cause and effect. If you plan and direct your energy to a goal, and your plan is superior to someone you are competing against, you MUST win. To lose by some roll of the dice, even if that roll involves probability rather than just pure luck (it is more probable that 2 dice will roll a 7 than a 12), is absolute desecration.
And to me, this is why they have so much trouble with our physical universe, in which randomness does come along quite often and ruins the best-laid plans of mice and men. It literally wounds their psyche.
Part of the problem is that these good chess players have been studying chess intensely since very early childhood ... and in the process, lost part of their childhood. It affects different players to different degrees, as we are all both biologically and psychologically different. But none of these players can ever, in my opinion, be as tolerant and flexible in dealing with the world around them as we who have not been indoctrinated into chess in such a serious way.
As a generalization, the stronger the chess player the weirder they are.
I would not put it quite this way. But it is surely the case that persons with certain difficult to specify eccentricities are also sometimes fabulous chess players. I am not sure what comes first, the chicken or the egg.
An interesting but strange read. I don't follow Dlugy's rationalization for confessing to cheating when he claims he didn't cheat. I suppose it's an indication of how little value he attaches to online chess. If it's an insignificant activity then who really cares, right? But then he contradicts himself by annotating 9 games to demonstrate that he wasn't cheating. WTF? Why waste that time if he doesn't care? As a generalization, the stronger the chess player the weirder they are.
As I read it, basically once chess.com decides you cheated, you have two options:
1) admit that you cheated, apologize, promise not to do it again and be allowed back
2) deny you cheated and be banned for life and face whispers that you were banned and what that implies
Dlugy's article implies (or states pretty close to directly) that there's no such thing as a third option of:
3) Deny you cheated and have your case re-examined
I don't get the impression from his writing that he doesn't care about online chess; quite the opposite.
An interesting but strange read. I don't follow Dlugy's rationalization for confessing to cheating when he claims he didn't cheat. I suppose it's an indication of how little value he attaches to online chess. If it's an insignificant activity then who really cares, right? But then he contradicts himself by annotating 9 games to demonstrate that he wasn't cheating. WTF? Why waste that time if he doesn't care? As a generalization, the stronger the chess player the weirder they are.
As a shirt I think Neimann's face would look nice in the centre, but that's mean. He doesn't wear beads, it's only a string theory.
Do you also have the instruction manual? Morse code: long for file, short for rank? That's a lot of beads, each with it's own chip, receiver, vibrator, and battery. How does one feel the difference pieces move?
It does give new meaning to deep analysis.
LOOL!!!
FYI ... Niemann beads can also pulse a playlist!
Vibes such as ...
One Night in Bangkok by Murray Head!
or perhaps
Weak Spot by Wu-Tang Clan!
maybe even
Grandmasters LP by DJ Muggs and GZA!
... ha!!!
Niemann was the only player butt scanned at the U.S. Chess Championships ...
Pargat, I'm concerned about you. It was only a few months ago that you revealed, right here at Chesstalk, that you suffered from PCSD (post cleavage stress disorder). And now here you are publicly recommending a line of anal bead giftware. My friend, it appears that you are on the slippery slope to perdition. I hope it wasn't my bad example that helped put you there.
I am fully pacified now from that disorder, Peter, don't worry :)
Also, I did confess to cheating on the "oral" exams required to apply to be Underwear Secretary of the Interior for Kellyanne Conway (I was listening on headphones to the Fleetwook Mac song "Big Love" during the "exam").
Peter, how are you doing with your own disorder? What was it called now? .... Oh yeah, Post Erectile Nervous Insanity Syndrome ....
As a shirt I think Neimann's face would look nice in the centre, but that's mean. He doesn't wear beads, it's only a string theory.
Do you also have the instruction manual? Morse code: long for file, short for rank? That's a lot of beads, each with it's own chip, receiver, vibrator, and battery. How does one feel the difference pieces move?
It does give new meaning to deep analysis.
Last edited by Erik Malmsten; Thursday, 6th October, 2022, 09:47 PM.
Either I didn't express myself well or you've misinterpreted what I said. At no time in this thread have I said that Niemann's online cheating should be used as a basis for punishing him in OTB chess. In fact, I believe he should NOT be punished further unless there is conclusive evidence that he cheated in OTB chess too. My point was that we should care about Niemann's online cheating history, and not simply dismiss it as a childish error in judgement, because he did it so many times and then lied about it. Niemann is a highly intelligent young man. He knew what he was doing was wrong but he chose to do it anyway. Where I was raised that is considered a character flaw, a moral failing. He had the intelligence to make the right decisions but he deliberately chose to make the wrong decisions. The fact that Niemann is currently undergoing a sort of punishment by suspicion and innuendo is 100% his own fault. As the old idiom says, the kid made his bed.....
Perhaps you're right but where are you getting this from? Are you a professional behavioural psychologist with links to online information that will back this up, or is this just your personal opinion?
It's my personal opinion, but I think it's also common sense. A lot of people are willing to transgress boundaries in situations a.) where it's really easy to give into temptation and b.) not much is at stake. Not that many people are willing (and able) to mastermind a sophisticated criminal enterprise where there is a significant amount at stake.
Well put, Patrick, I for one agree with you on this.
Since Neimann is a confessed cheater at online chess from some years ago, he is playing top level chess with a target on his back. Thus it seems doubly unlikely to me that he would engage in a much more sophisticated* and dangerous cheating method in OTB play at super-GM events.
I liked your comparison, Patrick, but here's a way to really put it into perspective: Niemann if he is a cheater right now at OTB events would be like a person who in high-school was CONVICTED of selling pot to his fellow students (before pot became legal) and who is now WORKING AS A DEA AGENT while secretly running a heroin / cocaine / fentanyl dealing network across the whole country.
It's several orders of magnitude jump in both the scrutiny he is under PLUS the complexity needed to pull it off.
Just doesn't pass the smell test to me. Ohhhh I just realized that could be taken literally .... Anal Beads Code Vibrations!!!!!!
or as the Canadian military would refer to it, ABCVs.
Neil Frarey, can you make Anal Beads Code Vibrations into a viral Internet meme?
T-shirts? Coffee mugs? Stocking stuffers for Christmas? (sold at Dollarama, little plastic anal beads powered by watch batteries) .....
EDIT: perhaps what is really going on here is that Magnus sees Niemann and a real threat, perhaps a chess genius, and is trying to use Niemann's online cheating from the past to DERAIL his career at the top levels!
Pargat, I'm concerned about you. It was only a few months ago that you revealed, right here at Chesstalk, that you suffered from PCSD (post cleavage stress disorder). And now here you are publicly recommending a line of anal bead giftware. My friend, it appears that you are on the slippery slope to perdition. I hope it wasn't my bad example that helped put you there.
He paid the price for his cheating by being banned from Chess.com and having to forgo opportunities as a result. And justifiably so. ....
Either I didn't express myself well or you've misinterpreted what I said. At no time in this thread have I said that Niemann's online cheating should be used as a basis for punishing him in OTB chess. In fact, I believe he should NOT be punished further unless there is conclusive evidence that he cheated in OTB chess too. My point was that we should care about Niemann's online cheating history, and not simply dismiss it as a childish error in judgement, because he did it so many times and then lied about it. Niemann is a highly intelligent young man. He knew what he was doing was wrong but he chose to do it anyway. Where I was raised that is considered a character flaw, a moral failing. He had the intelligence to make the right decisions but he deliberately chose to make the wrong decisions. The fact that Niemann is currently undergoing a sort of punishment by suspicion and innuendo is 100% his own fault. As the old idiom says, the kid made his bed.....
What I'm saying is that online cheating is a very weak indicator of propensity to cheat over-the-board, and cheating in low-stakes online games is a very weak indicator of overall moral character. .....
Perhaps you're right but where are you getting this from? Are you a professional behavioural psychologist with links to online information that will back this up, or is this just your personal opinion?
Leave a comment: