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.
That sounds great Larry. I may try one of my Peel Invitationals there.
Assuming it is still available in the future. I give Book Prizes to any non cash winners so Gift Certificates would do the job perfectly. Do I just call the Strategy games to book a date?
I think the CFC needs to look carefully at how to draw casual players into competitive tournament chess. I think it needs to look at non-CFC rated ( so there is no payment necessary of an annual CFC membership ), low entry fee, " for the casual player " , clocks if possible, but recording not required, with lots of low-priced prizes ( chess books, local retail gift certificates, annual membership in local chess club; etc. ) tournaments, with good publicity where chess never really publicizes itself much - in the marketplace; on the community board at the local supermarket; flyers on telephone polls ( I know it's technically illegal ! ); on library bulletin boards; at the Toronto " Chess in the Library " Program; in the local community newspaper; on school bulletin boards, with administration approval ( elementary, highschool, community college, university ); and whereever else volunteer help is willing to advertise.
Once we have casual players playing under " near " tournament conditions, some will want the " real deal ", and they can then get the proposed first-time CFC'er 40% Discount annual membership when they play in their first CFC-rated tournament ( and they won't be asking about some historical relic called a " tournament membership " ).
Seems a sound way to grow the CFC membership.
Any more ideas on promoting chess outside the already-committed CFC community of players?
Bob
These kinds of thoughts have all been hashed around before, and probably even tried before. Remember that we are talking about casual players, which means people that are familiar with chess but never liked it enough before to try it out seriously. They had other things they thought of as more interesting to do with their weekends. Now you want to entice them into weekend tournament chess with special offers.
It can have moderate success, in that these attempts lead to a "revolving door" of casual players who try competitive tournament chess for a while, eventually realize they can't make it worthwhile financially, and then they remember that they aren't really crazy about chess and they have those more interesting things to do with their weekends, and they're gone.
All this leads to is a small pool of "dead money" for the entrenched players to win on the weekends. Emphasis on the word "small".
Personally, I believe the only way to make this work in a lasting way, gaining long-term members, is to compress the "dynamic range" (I'm borrowing this term from acoustics) of each and every tournament. What I mean by this is the range in the odds that any given player has of winning a tournament or a section of a tournament.
For example, here's a typical dynamic range for chess:
Player A: 33% chance of winning
Player B: 25% chance of winning
Player C: 25% chance of winning
Player D: 15% chance of winning
Player E: 0.5% chance of winning
Player F: 0.5% chance of winning these 6 players make up 99%
Players G through Z: approximately 0.1% chance of winning each
A highly compressed dynamic range would be something like this:
Players A, B: 8% chance of winning each
Players C, D: 7% chance of winning each
Players E, F, G, H, I, J, K: 6% chance of winning each
.
.
.
Players W, X, Y, Z: 1% chance of winning each
No way is regular chess ever going to see a dynamic range like this. Thus the above "revolving door" scenario is the best that standard chess can hope for.
The CFC should consider holding chess960 tournaments alongside of standard tournaments, and allow the casual player to choose from the two. With chess960, opening knowledge goes away and that immediately compresses the dynamic range. The casual player can be relieved from the task of even learning openings, which for such a player is a daunting and boring task. Instead they could focus on learning tactics, much more interesting.
There should be a separate CFC chess960 rating system. The only downside seems to be the extra effort needed to keep track of two separate tournaments, and I suppose the need to redesign scoresheets for chess960, so that opening lineup can be notated for each game.
There is an opportunity to be a world leader in bringing this version of chess into the mainstream.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
The CFC should consider holding chess960 tournaments alongside of standard tournaments, and allow the casual player to choose from the two. With chess960, opening knowledge goes away and that immediately compresses the dynamic range. The casual player can be relieved from the task of even learning openings, which for such a player is a daunting and boring task. Instead they could focus on learning tactics, much more interesting.
I would be quite surprised if chess960 compressed the dynamic range much, certainly not as much as you seem to be suggesting. The point that studying tactics is more interesting than studying openings, though ... I have to personally agree with wholeheartedly. ;-)
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
A highly compressed dynamic range would be something like this...
With chess960, opening knowledge goes away and that immediately compresses the dynamic range.
How about playing with dices, with a chess piece (or pawn) on each side ? That would take away not only openings but also much of the rest. That would compress things allright, but probably not to the size of your brain.
An interesting case study! It looks like this was one gigantic Open section, correct? That would be harder to see compression of the dynamic range, as the first rounds will see ratings differences of several hundred rating points. I'm assuming the posted ratings are for standard chess? Or are there separate chess960 ratings maintained?
I do see signs of some significant compression. We have a 2530 rated player, Igor Gleck, finishing with 8.0 points, ahead of 16 higher rated players. We have a 2600-level GM, Grigoriants,Sergey, finishing at 6.0 points, on par with a player rated 1948! That would never happen in a Canadian Open (barring illness). We have multiple instances of untitled players finishing even with or ahead of titled players. If this had been sectioned, the compression would have been even more, I believe.
What's even more noticeable and remarkable: the very low number of draws!
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
How about playing with dices, with a chess piece (or pawn) on each side ? That would take away not only openings but also much of the rest. That would compress things allright, but probably not to the size of your brain.
I'm pretty sure this won't add much of value to the discussion. Your disdain for M.Bonham's comments is well known by now... perhaps you two can declare a truce - at least in public forums?
I would be quite surprised if chess960 compressed the dynamic range much, certainly not as much as you seem to be suggesting. The point that studying tactics is more interesting than studying openings, though ... I have to personally agree with wholeheartedly. ;-)
Sorry, I didn't mean to say chess960 would result in the kind of compression I gave in the example. You're correct to say it wouldn't.
But aside from that, is there any valid reason that the CFC or any other chess organization should not run a chess960 tournament alongside a standard chess tournament, and give each player the choice of which one they want to enter?
IMO, all the top players would congregate in the standard chess tournament because they've spent years studying openings and they want to leverage that as much as possible. All the casual players that Bob Armstrong speaks of would likely prefer the chess960 and would have more fun and be more likely to come back again and again.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
I'm pretty sure this won't add much of value to the discussion. Your disdain for M.Bonham's comments is well known by now... perhaps you two can declare a truce - at least in public forums?
I've had chances to troll Jean Hebert the past few months, and have abstained. The fact that he trolls me does not bother me, but as you say Kerry, it adds nothing of value. I won't reciprocate, unless he posts an opinion on chess, which I am 99% sure to disagree with, or some other topic... and in those cases, I'll try to keep it on topic.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Tweet
Comment