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!)
We need your help with preparation! (for Richard Wang)
Richard Wang is playing tomorrow on board 2 for a chance to a gold medal at the World Youth Chess Championship:
Wang Richard 2044 CAN 8 8 FM Duda Jan-Krzysztof 2079 POL
Is late here and the tomorrow game is early for us at 10AM, if any fan from back home has time and can send any lines that might help Richard it will be greatly appreciated.
Re: We need your help with preparation! (for Richard Wang)
I'm not sure if this is a right approach to that game? What about his opponent? What would he say if he has known about such "help"? Is this healthy or sporty behaviour??
I'm not sure if this is a right approach to that game? What about his opponent? What would he say if he has known about such "help"? Is this healthy or sporty behaviour??
Yes, in the 20th and 21st centuries, any help you can get before the game is OK. It's only unsporting if somebody with special access to the opponent's camp reveals a secret.
No quarter is expected or offered.
Whether special preparation for the opening of a single game is effective--that is a whole other question. The answer: it depends.
Re: We need your help with preparation! (for Richard Wang)
I consider chess as an individual sport (everybody shows off his own skills) - not a group one. Certainly, I know what situation in that is. At last ... one person takes credit for that result?
I consider chess as an individual sport (everybody shows off his own skills) - not a group one. Certainly, I know what situation in that is. At last ... one person takes credit for that result?
Your opinion seems dated, doing well primarily involves the player but it also involves the efforts of the team coaches, private coaches, family, friends, technical resources, one's chess federation, and chess organizers who potentially provide you with preperation opportunities. Consider that in many sports that sports psychologists are taking roles (for adults ) well what does that indicate what kids 12 years old likely need to do well in these environments ?
In WYCC, one point ( or less ) could make a difference of dozens of placements, or in the case of a contendor colour of medal or medal versus top ten. Unfortunately, in Canada in most cases a young player is handicapped by modest local opportunities and less ambitious team organization at WYCC. Exceptions exist, on the surface it seems Eric Hansen has some support ( meaning he had a second and local Alberta organizers have organized many high quality events ideal for his progress ).
Given the realities, it is amazing how many contendors and near contendors Canada has produced at WYCC the last dozen years. Although, perhaps this has bred some complacency and misunderstanding what difficulties exist to facilitate these successes, particularly if the WYCC is held in or near Europe. Big teams with one coach / one captain ( sometimes the same person ) are not helpful towards getting more big individual results, but may lead to better middling results as it's a more social setting.
Last edited by Duncan Smith; Sunday, 22nd November, 2009, 02:42 PM.
I consider chess as an individual sport (everybody shows off his own skills) - not a group one. Certainly, I know what situation in that is. At last ... one person takes credit for that result?
Caesar,
It's common in every sport to study and take advantage of your opponents' weaknesses. Individual players (especially in tennis and other racquet sports) and all kinds of sports teams watch videos of their upcoming opponents to find weaknesses they can exploit.
Surely you know that Kasparov is the strongest chess player ever because he was the best prepared player for every one of his opponents. Are you suggesting that Kasparov's strength in chess was based on unethical practices?
Jordan
No matter how big and bad you are, when a two-year-old hands you a toy phone, you answer it.
Re: We need your help with preparation! (for Richard Wang)
I do not argue about the rules or those unethical practices. One thing in all of this is certain - there are no individualists anymore, like for instance Bobby Fisher was. There is a team work only, I understand. Therefore, why those medals (awards) are handed out to those individuals (for their individual work or skills)? Is that fair?
I do not argue about the rules or those unethical practices. One thing in all of this is certain - there are no individualists anymore, like for instance Bobby Fisher was. There is a team work only, I understand. Therefore, why those medals (awards) are handed out to those individuals (for their individual work or skills)? Is that fair?
Caesar,
That's a good point you raise... and that's why the individual who wins has to pay his team. Most trainers and seconds would rather be recognized in cash than in kind :)
The only thing that top players used to do that was legal, however unethical IMHO, is analyse adjourned games with their teams. I suppose since it's impossible to prevent such help after the game is adjourned, there was no point in making it illegal, however while the game is not yet decided, I cannot understand why anyone would consider the practice an ethical one. Since games are now only played in one session (from what I understand, there are no more adjournments), then the practice no longer applies.
And if Richard Bérubé is reading this, hopefully he won't remember the one and only time I had an adjourned game and he helped me analyse the position before the game resumed. It was at least 15 years ago, and I remember my position was slightly losing, but my opponent chose the one path that allowed me a nice winning trap... so ethics aside, it was well worth it :)
Jordan
Last edited by Jordan S. Berson; Sunday, 22nd November, 2009, 07:13 PM.
No matter how big and bad you are, when a two-year-old hands you a toy phone, you answer it.
I do not argue about the rules or those unethical practices. One thing in all of this is certain - there are no individualists anymore, like for instance Bobby Fisher was. There is a team work only, I understand. Therefore, why those medals (awards) are handed out to those individuals (for their individual work or skills)? Is that fair?
Exactly which era are you speaking of? The Fischer era was 40 years ago. Even then it had been commonplace for players to have seconds, trainers, etc. And of course NOOOOObody (apologies to Mel Lastman) read an opening treatise or analyzed their opponent's previous games. How many years has Informant been publishing?
I seem to recall that Marshall once prepared a specific line to use against Tarrasch.
Tweet
Comment