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.
It's really early, but I can't think of any team sports off the top of my head that would be nearly as beneficial as Tennis. The key is you have to be thinking DURING and ABOUT the exercise. Sure there are some cases - Football QB, basketball/hockey playing, but those all spend a lot of time sitting on the bench too.
For team sports I wasn't speaking of cross training. Football players exercise in ways that directly mimic in-game activities. Ditto baseball players.
Hmmm, I don't know that no team sport would be "nearly as beneficial" as tennis. Like which sports wouldn't you think "during and about" the exercise? Don't get me wrong, I am not dissing tennis, but it seems to me that many sports would provide as much mental challenge as tennis, or am I missing something? As for the sitting part, in some cases, that reflects how much more physically demanding the sport is, either because it requires more rest, or because the culture of the sport is to limit substitutions, which is in effect to physically challenge the players who have to stay on the field. Finally, what do you mean about the training point? Doesn't every sport do some in-game mimicking?
Anyway, I hope this post doesn't come off as antagonistic, I really do want to hear which sports actvities that book recommends, and figure it can't be just tennis?! ;)
It's really early, but I can't think of any team sports off the top of my head that would be nearly as beneficial as Tennis. The key is you have to be thinking DURING and ABOUT the exercise. Sure there are some cases - Football QB, basketball/hockey playing, but those all spend a lot of time sitting on the bench too.
For team sports I wasn't speaking of cross training. Football players exercise in ways that directly mimic in-game activities. Ditto baseball players.
Any organizer who is so thin skinned they are offended by what Jean is saying probably should not be organizing.
When I had a problem player I didn't cry about it. I handled the problem.
I will tell you something general about doing volunteer jobs. It doesn't give people the right to do a shoddy job because they are not getting paid.
Well said Gary. :)
Chess organizing is a lot of work considering the pay (if any), but dealing with problem players comes with the territory. Personally I find 99% of players are no problem at all. Maybe I've just been lucky.;)
While I can appreciate PB's support for chess organizers, (and this thread is very entertaining indeed) I think some of his comments are "just a little over the top". :(
I don't know what he's taught or written so I can't comment on that.
That's a new twist. Not knowing has never stopped you before. You have been praising people you know very little about or about what they have done (more embarrassing than anything else for them), you have been commenting on canadian chess and its problems with skin deep knowledge of them while living in the States, you have been suggesting silly modifications to the most spreaded and respected thinking game on the planet while being hardly more than a beginner at it, and most importantly you have been critisizing and trying to insult me for the sheer pleasure of it on the basis of one or two posts that somehow displeased the all important PB, while disregarding and disputing out of bad faith and ignorance every bit of information contrary to your beliefs posted by numerous people, me included.
The words "I can't comment on that" should have been applied to just about every topic you have touched on this message board. At this point you have dug yourself a hole so deep that no one really expects you to turn around and start acting decently if only by keeping quiet.
So Jean is doing probably some good with his teaching and his writing, but if his writing includes his trademark attacks on organizers, then that is doing more harm than good.
I'm not failing to see the bigger picture at all. Rather, I think you as an obvious Hebert fanboy are failing to put yourself in the shoes of an organizer who volunteers (or gets paid next to nothing) to bring tournaments to the public.
That's nonsense. Jean was playing CC when I was organizing and he was never a problem player. Any organizer who is so thin skinned they are offended by what Jean is saying probably should not be organizing.
When I had a problem player I didn't cry about it. I handled the problem.
I will tell you something general about doing volunteer jobs. It doesn't give people the right to do a shoddy job because they are not getting paid.
The book in general thinks team sports are pathetic, both educationally and as an exercise tool.
It makes sense too. If they WERE good exercise, pro athletes wouldn't have to work out to be in good shape to play their games! You spend way too much time sitting around while other people do things.
The author particularly loves Tennis if you are into individual sports. A great combination of hand-eye coordination needed plus reflexes AND running around. And very little in the way of "enforced" downtime - you take a break when you're tired, not when the rules of the game require you to.
Hi Chris, thanks!
To be honest, I'm a little surprised at the team sport conclusions, especially as some team sports involve more "thinking" than others, some team sports seem to have a very high level of fitness, and so on.
Is your 2nd paragraph about pro athletes your conclusion, or the book's? I always thought that (cross-)training, without over-training was beneficial almost everywhere, but I am not a pro athlete, lol!
I have indeed enjoyed watching and playing tennis over the years, but it can be tough on some of the joints over time.
Anyway, thanks again for the info, and feel free to drop any other tidbits. I remember that when I was playing my highest-rated chess, I was doing some specific sports that I have no idea whether they were helping me or not. Hence some of my questions above.
That's one nice feature of chess. Everybody, young and old, men or women, rich and not so rich, physically handicapped, slim and not so slim can play and enjoy the game at various levels. The one possible exception being the PB type looking for brainless lottery type games with a high level of chance and randomness. Fortunately thinking games like chess have built-in features to keep those really handicapped people away. :)
I am quite sure the likes of Phil Hellmuth, Chris Ferguson, Ted Forrest, Scotty Nguyen, and many more are very GLAD that certain features of chess - such as very tiny fan interest, no TV interest, tiny sponsor interest - keep them away so they can do very well, thank you very much, in other avenues where life's randomness and chance do come into play. And there's others such as Jeff Sarwer or myself, who can handle it both ways and would much prefer the randomness and chance way, at least from a professional standpoint (Jeff Sarwer).
Someday maybe Jean will learn to respect and to deal with randomness and chance, seeing as it's everywhere around him except in his little chess piece world. Must be hard, living life in a bubble, trying so hard to keep all the randomness out.
That certainly explains a lot. Such as, when Jean Hebert posts a message that organizers that don't get sponsors are lazy dumbells, the look of surprise on his face when a PB shows up to dare to dispute his edict. PB is the random element that Jean Hebert hasn't learned to deal with, and so far Jean's reaction is simply to discredit the random element, to try and make it all go away. Guess what, this is life. Get used to it. Call me what you will, Jean Hebert, what I really am is your karma.
He writes a weekly chess magazine for 1500+ readers and spend one day a week doing it. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!
Also he beated the young Canadian top players to become the Canadian Champion 2009. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!
He stay in Canada and play in Canada's tournaments so our kids can chalenge him. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!
He gives many good advices base on his long carreer as a teacher, as a chess newspapers writer and as a chess player. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!
Carl
Jean Hebert is not a totally evil person. But neither is he the chess philanthropist that his puppy dog Carl makes him out to be.
The HPE newsletter may seem free, but not so fast. Jean gets paid by organizers to cover their tournaments, n'est-ce pas? I'm sure the organizers recoup this cost in the price of the tournament. So if you're a tournament player in Quebec, you're likely paying for this newsletter even if you don't get it. And I'm sure Jean makes at least a little profit from this activity. Not that that's a bad thing, and as long as he's not using his newsletter to make self-serving points about "Canada's retarded chess development", where Canada means everywhere in Canada outside of Quebec, then ok, this could be a good thing.
Canadian champion, ok, fine..... doesn't mean he gets to decide what's right and wrong with organized chess in Canada. Until he goes to various municipalities across Canada, outside of Quebec, and gets sponsors involved in the local chess scene there himself, or helps the local organizers do it (with his sweet charm), everything he says here on Chesstalk about organizing is just his opinion, and remember that those who can't do, teach.
So Carl, Jean plays in Canada SO THE KIDS CAN CHALLENGE HIM? AWWWWWWW, that is so sweet of him! He does it for the kids! Why, I'll bet his pursuit of GM norms is also for the kids. Get real, Carl. The only people buying that are those few whose minds are so closed they can't even fathom curling.
A long career teaching and writing can be good, depending on what is being taught and what is being written. I don't know what he's taught or written so I can't comment on that.
But once again, if you play in a tournament and you HELP THE ORGANIZER SELFLESSLY by doing things that no one else will do and that make the tournament better for the visitor, and thus enhance the whole chess experience, that's when I say you are the kind of player that Canada needs more of. It's a high standard and Jean Hebert unfortunately doesn't meet it, and why should he, he's a chess professional? Why should a financially struggling endeavour like chess expect such things? Why should chess players help to create their own success? But furthermore by his careless criticisms and arrogant "Father knows best" attitude, Jean makes chess less palatable to both organizers and sponsors and is a negative influence overall despite what may be some good points.
Carl can repeat his infantile drivel all he wants, until the nice people from the sanitorium come with the straitjacket, it doesn't make it so.
I suggest you take the blinders off. You're so focussed on trying to impale Jean Hebert that you're failing to see the bigger, more accurate picture. For example, have you read what Carl Bilodeau wrote about Jean elsewhere in this thread? How do you reconcile your viewpoint with what Carl wrote?
Well, I see that you rescinded your earlier remarks, but just to let everyone know what kind of poster you are here, I'll put your remarks back along with my response.
But first, to the above, I'm certainly not trying to "impale" Jean Hebert, this is just you being outrageous. Please remember that Jean instigates these threads with his attack on organizers. He calls them "lazy dumbells" for not getting sponsors. He further calls the state of Canadian chess development "retarded" for the same reasons.
I would not go so far as to say Jean Hebert is not doing any good at all for Canadian chess, you will see that in my response to Carl's post.
So Jean is doing probably some good with his teaching and his writing, but if his writing includes his trademark attacks on organizers, then that is doing more harm than good.
I'm not failing to see the bigger picture at all. Rather, I think you as an obvious Hebert fanboy are failing to put yourself in the shoes of an organizer who volunteers (or gets paid next to nothing) to bring tournaments to the public.
Now here's your original post, and my response to it:
I see. Well, I'm certainly relieved to hear it ... because for a while there I was concerned that you were a dyed-in-the-wool, give-him-the-whole-nine-yards, yoo-hoo-I-have-my-own-chapter-in-DSM-IV whacko. Now that it's clear that you're just an ordinary, run-of-the-mill whacko, I guess we can all breath a sigh of relief.
p.s. You don't own any firearms, do you?
Well, good for you! Isn't that special? It's good to just let it all out, isn't it? Yes, when you don't understand something, just lash out at it. Good little Hebert fanboy!
So, let's see, for standing up for organizers, I'm an ordinary whacko. Have something against organizers, do we? Did we have a bad experience? Oh, and now we're very gun-shy! Oh, my....
The book in general thinks team sports are pathetic, both educationally and as an exercise tool.
It makes sense too. If they WERE good exercise, pro athletes wouldn't have to work out to be in good shape to play their games! You spend way too much time sitting around while other people do things.
The author particularly loves Tennis if you are into individual sports. A great combination of hand-eye coordination needed plus reflexes AND running around. And very little in the way of "enforced" downtime - you take a break when you're tired, not when the rules of the game require you to.
I am (slowly) reading a great book on this subject, it's called Spark and it's about how certain types of exercise can have a dramatic effect on mental focus and ability. Their case study was a high school outside of Chicago, that went from below-average test scores to best in the country test scores after implementing a new fitness program for all students. Interesting stuff.
For anyone interested, the best exercise for this is the kind that requires some thinking (naturally). Biking outside is great, biking on a stationary bike has almost no direct effect on mental focus or ability. Ditto running outside compared to a treadmill. Rock Climbing is apparently the most amazing thing to do for this.
Hi Chris, that is very interesting! I totally agree how outside versions of an activity would be better, just with the sheer amount of extra environment awarenesss required.
Now, are there any other summaries you could provide from that book, like sports that have many "plays" vs. more continuous play, sports that have an actual opponent vs. something individual like against the clock, sports that have higher failure risk (what I mean by that is, if you lose at tennis, not a big deal, if you lose at boxing, pain baby!)
If you prefer to reply by email, feel free, I'm researching that book now, thanks! :)
Well I wish that it would be completely true but actually I may look slimmer than I am. No doubt that losing 10-15 pounds would not hurt my resistance and performances. Last summer I did quite a bit of biking which I believe was an important part of my success at the Canadian Closed. I felt more relaxed and fcused. But it didn't make me lose any weight. Nonetheless I will bike again this spring and summer...
I am (slowly) reading a great book on this subject, it's called Spark and it's about how certain types of exercise can have a dramatic effect on mental focus and ability. Their case study was a high school outside of Chicago, that went from below-average test scores to best in the country test scores after implementing a new fitness program for all students. Interesting stuff.
For anyone interested, the best exercise for this is the kind that requires some thinking (naturally). Biking outside is great, biking on a stationary bike has almost no direct effect on mental focus or ability. Ditto running outside compared to a treadmill. Rock Climbing is apparently the most amazing thing to do for this.
Leave a comment: