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.
As you may know, 3 of the National and Women teams members are selected based on their average of the highest CFC and FIDE ratings.
1207. Selection Ratings
Selection of players for the Teams by rating shall be based on the average of the player’s highest CFC rating and highest FIDE rating during the year prior to the start of the selection process (which begins 180 days before the start of the Olympiad).
However, this formula might be not very fair for the players who participate mainly abroad and do not report their results for the CFC rating calculations, as the CFC ratings became inflated compared to FIDE for the top level players. (the CFC vs FIDE ratings comparison at http://www.chess.ca/CFCvsFIDE.htm )
As the Olympiad is the tournament with foreign players, I think it should be more reasonable to use parameter (e.g., FIDE rating) which would show the strength on the international level. Thus, as the CFC governor, I am looking for general opinion on this matter, and if it would be positive I would move a Motion to change it. (At the same time I would look for the seconder)
(Your poll choice will not be visible to the public and to me but to administrators)
Actually, everyone in the entire world should be under one rating system. It's absurd that one can have up to four different classical ratings living in this country. Example: FIDE, CFC, FQE, and USCF. All varying wildly by as much as 300 points in some cases, and I'm not talking provisional ratings either. With today's technology, one's rating could be standardized and instantly calculated no matter where one plays. There is no longer any excuse for not having a single rating system. The time has come...
Coincidence - on May 19 on the members' CFC Chess Forum I posted:
" A) FIDE Rating System - I would like to see the CFC system replaced by the FIDE rating system ( is for over 1200’s ) – I see no benefit in Canada having a separate system ( a position long espoused by IM Tom O’Donnell I believe ). CMA, if they’d agree to rate adults, could certainly do the U 1200’s – though technically I’m not sure how this would happen when both over 1200’s and U 1200’s are in the same cross table. But I’m sure there is an answer. "
Actually, everyone in the entire world should be under one rating system. It's absurd that one can have up to four different classical ratings living in this country. Example: FIDE, CFC, FQE, and USCF. All varying wildly by as much as 300 points in some cases, and I'm not talking provisional ratings either. With today's technology, one's rating could be standardized and instantly calculated no matter where one plays. There is no longer any excuse for not having a single rating system. The time has come...
In theory this idea looks orderly and logical but is no more acceptable than having one single world wide government, or even one single government in Canada. Concentrating powers in one place is a very dangerous thing, which is why in our parliamentary systems we have three separate powers, executive, legislative and judicial that balance each other to avoid power abuse.
These days we see quite a few complaints about CFC rating fees being too costly. If enough people agree, this can be changed. But imagine for a second that FIDE controls worldwide ratings. What would happen if, for example, dictator Iloumzhinov suddenly decides to triple or quadruple rating fees for small nations with less than 3000 players ? What could we do about it ? For that reason and many others there will never be one single rating system unless one day the planet is under the boot of a worldwide totalitarian dictatorship.
How many rating systems do we need then ? Just enough. Not too many but not too few either.
How many rating systems do we need then ? Just enough. Not too many but not too few either.
Absolutely correct! Well said Jean.
Having more than 1 keeps them all honest!
Instead of replacing the CFC rating system with FIDE, lets improve it! The solutions are easily within our grasp! :)
I look forward to the day when other countries abandon FIDE ratings in favour of the CFC ratings! ;) What, it's possible!
Various clubs in Canada and around the world are using it because a) they are affordable at $7 / year per player with no tournament rating fee; b) they offer better stats than a mere rating. At the Kingston Club we found that many players didn't play anywhere else and they were happy to quit paying the CFC. I am hoping that the day comes when the CFC out-sources it's rating services to CXR who do a better job, cheaper.
Instead of replacing the CFC rating system with FIDE, lets improve it! The solutions are easily within our grasp! :)
I think the poll is about which rating to use for the Olympic selections. The rational put forward being since the team will be playing those from other nations, those on the team should be the ones who have shown they can do well against players from other nations.
I don't necessarily agree with Jean and Bob G's responses here. I'm not advocating a single world government, just a uniform chess rating system. And if FIDE is corrupt, as it may very well be, then it should be held accountable and/or morphed into something new; an open and transparent chess federation that can honestly represent the game and the players who participate in rated tournaments throughout the world. perhaps I am dreaming but look at the "world" of tennis, golf, and FIFA esp., just to name a few organizations which use global rankings. People (teams) know exactly where they stand on a daily compared to others in the entire world. Today, in this country, it is possible for someone in Ottawa rated as an expert player of 2000 CFC to be only a Class B player FQE just across the river 1KM away in Gatineau. Totally absurd! Again, I am stressing that it is the technology that is now ready for such an instantaneous system of ratings to function effectively. The politics, that is entirely another issue entirely I know, but if the will is there there may be a way...
An interesting article somewhat regarding this issue was on chessbase recently. I know that most of those successful countries do have national ratings as well, which would be beneficial to those under 1600 perhaps. I think having two systems in Canada is fine, (although having FQE and CFC is silly). But for the higher levels of chess, FIDE rating is the most accurate way to judge strength and how someone will perform in an international playing field like Gary mentioned.
...Instead of replacing the CFC rating system with FIDE, lets improve it! ...
The last "improvement" is exactly what has caused the CFC rating system to become ridiculous. It's not as if this is some sort of secret or couldn't be predicted.
"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.
Perhaps I am dreaming but look at the "world" of tennis, golf, and FIFA esp., just to name a few organizations which use global rankings.
These rankings apply only to the elite players, the professionnals. And it make sense that the international bodies take care of their international players. But what FIDE is doing is different. Before they had an elite system for international players worth at least 2200. That was fine and it gave value and distinction to obtaining such ratings. Now it is extending its tentacles over the rank and file player and in so doing they are weakening their affiliates, the national federations, and devaluating FIDE ratings to increase their power over each and every federation, and each and every player.
I have got to be careful Bob. A few more posts like this and you could fall into the 50/50 group, or worse, in the top group which would be totally intolerable. :)
Tennis for sure has multiple levels. I know back when I was taking a few lessons I was looking at obtaining an Ontario ranking (never got around to it) through some tournaments.
I did like the one post a couple years back where someone (Hal maybe?) pointed out that no single country on the FIDE Ratings Commission actually has its own rating system.
I did like the one post a couple years back where someone (Hal maybe?) pointed out that no single country on the FIDE Ratings Commission actually has its own rating system.
That is not surprising. FIDE does not want people defending national ranking systems.
I did like the one post a couple years back where someone (Hal maybe?) pointed out that no single country on the FIDE Ratings Commission actually has its own rating system.
Tweet
Comment