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.
I have no interest in getting drawn into the debate provoked by Jonathan's rather mean-spirited comments but I would note that the observation that Shirov was undoubtedly the highest-ranked player to come to Ottawa was mine and mine alone.
BTW, Shirov is of course higher ranked than Short was when he came to Ottawa. I was not aware that Karpov or Keres had put on a simul in Ottawa and Zuketort was a little before my time. Let's just say that it was a real treat to have someone of Shirov's caliber visit our little hamlet.:)
CFC Vice President Stijn de Kerpel, himself a master player who had gone down in flames against the SuperGM, pronounced himself delighted by the evening's performance. He noted that Alexei Shirov is undoubtedly the highest-ranked player ever to visit the Nation's Capital.
...
Jonathan's rather mean-spirited comments but I would note that the observation that Shirov was undoubtedly the highest-ranked player to come to Ottawa was mine and mine alone.
Emphases mine.
Looks like a bad outing for Curmudgeons. Only one score:
1. Pointed out the factoid is wrong.
But the Good-Spirited team scored three times:
1. The factoid is wrong;
2. One good-spirited member generously credited the incorrect factoid to another good-spirited member;
3. Undoubtedly.
So it looks like the Good-Spirited team wins on points, 3-1. Better luck next time, Curmudgeons.
I had no inkling about point 2. So the OP's joke is larger than I thought.
Factoids like that can easily go viral. A jab in the arm may be called mean-spirited, but in this case I thought to inoculate, to not have to look at it in a dozen places later. I do see these little jokes, but rarely do they show enough viral qualities for a step to be taken. And the reaction is tiresome. "I made a little joke, so he's mean-spirited." Right. Up Curmudgeons!
I have no interest in getting drawn into the debate provoked by Jonathan's rather mean-spirited comments but I would note that the observation that Shirov was undoubtedly the highest-ranked player to come to Ottawa was mine and mine alone.
BTW, Shirov is of course higher ranked than Short was when he came to Ottawa. I was not aware that Karpov or Keres had put on a simul in Ottawa and Zuketort was a little before my time. Let's just say that it was a real treat to have someone of Shirov's caliber visit our little hamlet.:)
Jonathan seems to be on a horowitzian point counting system (non-larsenian)bent as of late.
A surly berry is fourscore and so much more generous, technically poetic and humanististic than a sober ks could ever be. So here we have an Ra Club in our nations capital with disgusting pieces and boards( not as bad as winnipegs yellowed and mixed-sized and stained boards that may have a culturally cost-saving element at 'play'), and Alexei, nearly coming off his greatest result ever, surrounded by weak chessplayers, by any standards, European, and especially Slavic, giving away a quick loss, and another, and nearly a dozen draws.Embarrassed?
For the organizers that probably underpaid him and treated him like dirt, or Shirov?
That old dishevelled locked cabinet for equipment must have reminded him of yesteryears, excepting the busts of Stalin and Lenin.Third-world ignorance or Western pomposity? Scarborough club has a similar cabinet, or used to. Purely a psychological local and territorial ploy? Or the way it was
when one was a kid? Mean-spriritedness is interpreted. So is curmudgeonliness.A lack of decent dress-code and presentable pieces only belies ignorance, if not disrespect. This was a show. Have a look at some of
the photos. .There is no Canadian chess really.A few dollars to throw at travel and money hungry GMs dating back to other more presentable exhibitions, esp., ironically, in one of the newer provinces, B.C..
Lets not manufacture factoids and websites dedicated to this most recent atrocity.
Of half of Phil Ham of not Rosenkrantz,
An innocent father's big centers' advance,
We can only besmirkingly all take a glance ,
Of sasha's eateries and other dalliance,
Begrudging learniers last defensive stance,
To pays up your money and take your chance
Last edited by David McTavish; Saturday, 13th February, 2010, 03:42 AM.
Reason: Jonathan, not jonathon
I think also Spassky has given a simul in Ottawa, perhaps in 1967 on his way to or from Winnipeg (?).
Spassky and Keres each gave three simuls in BC on that tour. It would be good to find out, and--if it happened--add to Stephen Wright's excellent list. Chessmetrics gives Spassky as 5th in the world and Keres as 14th-16th during the time that such simuls might reasonably have been given.
Tony Miles gave one or two simuls in Ottawa during a visit in the early 1980s. I'm sorry, I don't remember the date or even the year. The organizer was Michael (I'm not sure of the surname, perhaps) Mansfield. On the Jan 1983 FIDE rating list, Miles was tied for 16th; on the Jan 1984 FIDE rating list, Miles was tied for 13th.
I didn't mention Miles earlier because I was thinking of ranking in terms of closeness to the Classical Chess World Championship. Shirov was arguably 2nd in the world on that scale, but Miles wasn't. However, the question of the player's ranking when he visited Ottawa was brought up, and Shirov is 18th on the Live Ratings after Corus. Karpov was first and Zukertort second by that standard (admittedly they didn't have Live Ratings in 1884 or even in 1979, but using best available data).
Another way of looking at ranking is chessmetrics. The all-time 3-year peak rating figures, for example, give this order:
7th Karpov
22nd Zukertort
23rd Keres
36th Shirov
54th Kotov
60th Short
among the players who have visited Ottawa.
Yes, a new name, Kotov. Chessmetrics ranks Alexander Kotov 9th in the world in June 1954, in the same month that he gave a small simul in Ottawa.
Last edited by Jonathan Berry; Saturday, 13th February, 2010, 12:00 PM.
Tony Miles gave one or two simuls in Ottawa during a visit in the early 1980s. I'm sorry, I don't remember the date or even the year. The organizer was Michael (I'm not sure of the surname, perhaps) Mansfield. On the Jan 1983 FIDE rating list, Miles was tied for 16th; on the Jan 1984 FIDE rating list, Miles was tied for 13th.
Here we go. From the column of 7 November 1981:
"The exhibition tour of Anthony Miles did not attract the attention you would expect for one of the world's best players. In Montreal, he faced 19 opponents at once, losing only to Sheldon Keesal. In Ottawa, 29 took on the challenge. Mr. Miles lost only to Dr. Ken Winterton. In Toronto, Robert Morrison was the only one of 17 to win a game."
I remember Miles saying afterwards that the turnout was better in the tiniest hamlets back in England. Anyway, this means that Miles is not on the list of players above Shirov (18th in Live Ratings) in world ranking (chessmetrics gives Miles as 27th in October 1981) at the time he visited the nation's capital. So far, that list comprises only Karpov, Zukertort, and Kotov.
Spassky and Keres each gave three simuls in BC on that tour. It would be good to find out, and--if it happened--add to Stephen Wright's excellent list.
Well, I played Spassky in what I remember as a 10 board clock simul in Nanimo around that time. At the same time Keres was playing around fifty without clocks.
I distinguished myself by being the first to lose, in around 12 moves, in the clock simul. I remember little else about that event but I seem to recall, perhaps quite wrongly, that Spassky won all games. At that time I was an A class player and I'm think most of the others were at least that highly rated and some were experts. I do not have any game scores from that time of my life.
Well, I played Spassky in what I remember as a 10 board clock simul in Nanimo around that time. At the same time Keres was playing around fifty without clocks.
I distinguished myself by being the first to lose, in around 12 moves, in the clock simul. I remember little else about that event but I seem to recall, perhaps quite wrongly, that Spassky won all games. At that time I was an A class player and I'm think most of the others were at least that highly rated and some were experts. I do not have any game scores from that time of my life.
According to the page of Stephen Wright, who doesn't guess about these things, Spassky won all 10 games while Keres had 22 wins and 1 draw in Nanaimo, 14 October 1967. The BC and Montreal parts of the tour are documented, we just don't know about anywhere else.
It was a great honour to play the great Alexei Shirov, a gracious and modest grandmaster who shares his honest and deliberate passion for a wonderful game. For chess fans like the players in our national capital, this well-organized event was a incredible opportunity to exchange ideas with a man who lives and breathes some of the most exciting chess ever played. Sincere thanks to the organizers and GM Shirov!
If the organizers promoted the event (which was a great success) by highlighting and summarizing Shirov's accomplishments by way of his high ranking, one might imagine that such language would be aimed at improving chess in Canada -- an attempt to improve the lives of chess players (to rally our enthusiasm), to support a vision of further great events with great players, and to encourage the growth of Canadian chess while deepening a connection with World Chess (encouraging youth and adults to participate in events which connect with the real chess world). I know my life has been improved, and we are all looking forward to further great events.
It gives me no pleasure to say so, but some comments have been petty and disgraceful, distracting from the positive and expansive effects of a wonderful event. If you have nothing constructive to say, we would be so grateful if you please say nothing at all.
Alexei Shirov playing chess in Ottawa is a great privilege and a memory that we will share, and for which we will be always grateful!
I'm also curious.
Did you draw Daryl? Wouldn't mind seeing the game. In fact, it'd be cool for all the players who were up against Shirov to post their games.
I've long been a fan of Alexei Shirov. Yesterday was Valentine's Day. I'll declare today Chess Valentine's day. I did a text search for Mr. Shirov among a subset of my chess columns, and this, an edited version of which was published in the Globe and Mail on January 29, 1994 is the one I clicked on at random. Corrections, of course, are welcomed.
* Victory is sweet. Chess is the quintessential competitive game: if
you don't play to win, take up composing studies. Players may
research chess as a science or enjoy the beauty of chess as an art,
but winning is the point of the game.
* Rarely, winning for its own sake becomes an obsession. Some
players carefully avoid competition, choosing opponents they can
always beat. Fortunately, this perversion becomes rarer as the
players become stronger. A real game of chess is one in which both
players have a realistic chance to win. That is also why fans are
annoyed by games which are agreed drawn after only a few moves.
* The preceding caustic remarks do not apply when one player
(say, a coach) is trying to train another player (say, a junior) to
become better. The coach may win hundreds of games in a row, but that
is not (bold)why(unbold) he is playing.
* At the top of the chess pyramid, the best players are not those who
win 99% of their games. The best players defeat the
slightly-not-so-best players over 50% of the time. A world champion
is sometimes the player who defeats the other best players as rarely
as 55% of the time.
* The inevitable consequence is that even the best lose a lot of
games, sometimes at the most inappropriate moments. Our game features
two excellent players who must be wondering if fate has conspired
against them. Vassily Ivanchuk (Ukraine) had White against Alexey
Shirov (Latvia) at the Tilburg tournament.
* (unbold) Black usually replies 9...a7-a5, trying to pre-empt White's
queenside ambitions.
* (bold) 9...c7-c6 10.d5xc6 b7xc6 11.b2-b4
* (unbold) White plans b4-b5, to secure control of d5 for the knight
at c3. However, his last move also weakened White along the a1-h8
diagonal. As so frequently in the King's Indian Defense, hell soon
breaks loose.
* (bold) 11... d6-d5 12.a2-a4
* DIAGRAM 34
* (bold) 12...Nf6-h5
* (unbold) The horizons of chess knowledge expand. When Bobby Fischer
played this move in a similar position against Boris Spassky in 1972,
the chess world was agog that Mr. Fischer could afford his king field
to be weakened by doubling the h-pawns.
* Here, White can even win a pawn. After 13.Be2xh5 g6xh5 14.Qd1xh5,
Black forces matters with 14...f7-f5, and then 15.e4xd5 c6xd5
16.Nc3xd5 Ne7xd5 17.c4xd5 Qd8xd5 18.Ra1-a3 gives Black adequate
compensation for the pawn: the bishop pair and a mobile pawn centre.
Wiser heads--Mr. Spassky in 1972 and Mr. Ivanchuk in 1993--have
decided that the knight is taboo. White pursues a centralizing
strategy.
* (bold) 13.e4xd5 c6xd5 14.c4xd5 Bc8-b7
* (unbold) Black develops another piece before recapturing the pawn.
He hopes to gain a move by attacking the unprotected knight at c3.
* (bold) 15.d5-d6
* (unbold) White returns the pawn on his own terms, simplifying.
* (unbold) Mr. Shirov continues to push, directing the knight towards
the dangerous d4-square, while offering White a dizzying choice of
tactical replies. The top Latvian players, of whom Mr. Shirov is the
leader, are rightly feared as uninhibited attackers. They follow in
the trail blazed by the late Mikhail Tal early in his career. The
stereotypical move is 17...Nh5-f4.
* (unbold) Having exhausted the possibilities of the position, and
probably also of themselves, the players agreed to a draw.
* Mr. Ivanchuk went on to win this semi-final match, but lost the
finals to Anatoly Karpov.
* On the world championship trail, Mr. Shirov narrowly missed
qualifying both at Biel and at Groningen. Mr. Ivanchuk also came up
short at Biel, and withdrew from Groningen before play began for
personal reasons. So neither of these young players, ranked in the
top five in the world, has a chance to become world champion at least
until 1997.
Last edited by Jonathan Berry; Monday, 15th February, 2010, 11:49 PM.
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Nd2 c6 ({Black usually replies} 9... a5 {, trying to pre-empt White's queenside ambitions.}) 10. dxc6 bxc6 11. b4 {White plans b4-b5, to secure control of d5 for the knight at c3. However, his last move also weakened White along the a1-h8 diagonal. As so frequently in the King's Indian Defense, hell soon breaks loose.} d5 12. a4 {Diagram #} Nh5 {The horizons of chess knowledge expand. When Bobby Fischer played this move in a similar position against Boris Spassky in 1972, the chess world was agog that Mr. Fischer could afford his king field to be weakened by doubling the h-pawns.} 13. exd5 ({Here, White can even win a pawn. After} 13. Bxh5 gxh5 14. Qxh5 {Black forces matters with} f5 {, and then} 15. exd5 cxd5 16. Nxd5 Nxd5 17. cxd5 Qxd5 18. Ra3 {gives Black adequate compensation for the pawn: the bishop pair and a mobile pawn centre. Wiser heads--Mr. Spassky in 1972 and Mr. Ivanchuk in 1993--have decided that the knight is taboo. White pursues a centralizing strategy.}) 13... cxd5 14. cxd5 Bb7 {Black develops another piece before recapturing the pawn. He hopes to gain a move by attacking the unprotected knight at c3.} 15. d6 {White
returns the pawn on his own terms, simplifying.} Qxd6 16. Nde4 Qxd1 17. Rxd1 Nf5 ({Mr. Shirov continues to push, directing the knight towards the dangerous d4-square, while offering White a dizzying choice of tactical replies. The top Latvian players, of whom Mr. Shirov is the leader, are rightly feared as uninhibited attackers. They follow in the trail blazed by the late Mikhail Tal early in his career. The stereotypical move is} 17... Nf4) 18. Nc5 e4 19. Ra3 Rac8 20. g4 a5 $1 {Just as White prepares to digest the ample meal of a knight, Black uses forks to scramble the other side of the board.} 21. Nxb7 axb4 22. Rb3 Nd4 23. Rxb4 Rxc3 24. Rbxd4 Bxd4 25. gxh5 Rc2 {Another wave of tactics has subsided with White apparently on top, but Black's centre pawns prove strong.} 26. Kf1 Ra8 27. a5 Be5 28. a6 f5 29. Be3 Rxe2 30. Kxe2 Rxa6 31. Rd8+ Kf7 32. Rd7+ Kf6 33. Rxh7 Ra2+ 34. Bd2 gxh5 35. Nc5 Bxh2 36. Rxh5 Bg1 37. Nb3 f4 38. Kd1 Bxf2 39. Bxf4 e3 40. Bxe3 Bxe3 {Having exhausted the possibilities of the position, and probably also of themselves, the players agreed to a draw.} 1/2-1/2
Factoids like that can easily go viral. A jab in the arm may be called mean-spirited, but in this case I thought to inoculate, to not have to look at it in a dozen places later.
Excuse me for quoting myself, but it has begun. The erroneous passage was reproduced verbatim in the ChessBase report. What's the opposite of mirabile dictu?
Tweet
Comment