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.
Well, I think we've seen a good clue this week. The entire women's team entered one of the toughest chess events you can find locally this weekend. As a result, several less then courteous male critics have decided to use this as an excuse to criticize any perceived weakness in their play.
There were actually some great games played by the women. Not every game but this is rare for anyone on a weekend event.
Is it any wonder that women gradually drift into all female events ? Or just drop the game period.
One thing I noticed is the younger junior ranks are getting depleted, particularily amongst strong junior girls. Dare I say one factor is the "dream" is getting killed, so people don't chase the dream. It's not too late to restart the dream. Any team involving Dina, Hazel, and Yuanling could get very good very fast. But they need to feel it's worthwhile. All the chatter this year about the worthlessness of the team and questioning the team inclusions is bad for everyone. So was the CFC premise that we might only support one team.
Last edited by Duncan Smith; Friday, 5th September, 2008, 01:26 AM.
although ben stated his opinion in less than diplomatic terms he does have a valid point.
The canadian olympic team for all other sports has standards that must be met to compete internationally. What Ben is essentially stating is that thit is not so in chess. There should be a minimum standard rating set to be sent. If there aren't enough players to fill that role then we shouldn't lower our standards just to send a team. Why send a team that can't compete ?
Personally if Canada wanted to send me to the world patzer competition and the CFC offered to pay I would refuse, I would personally much rather see this money spent wisely to promote chess or to the Junior programs to grow Canadian players. With dwindling dollars available for chess I don't see why the CFC should send a team that is not competitive.
Canada has some great women players, and rising stars. I'm sure that the female players in Canada aren't made of glass and are able to take some flak.
As for Ben, yes he can be abrasive online (as can I :) ) but in person he is actually quite quiet... and in the Langley open his 'orange ear accessories' were quite amusing :p
Well, seeing as how most people don't read Chesstalk, I'm PRETTY SURE that that is not why more women do not play. If you choose to play anything competitively, then criticism and adversity are to be expected. If you cannot handle said criticism AND/OR adversity, then you clearly should not be representing Canada in something like this.
A TRUE COMPETITOR would rise above this, and show who is boss. Who is a true competitor? Me. I would not be like "Oh no, peeps is criticising my play, I'ma quit chess and start playing World of Warcraft instead." I would improve my rating by over 100 points, and play Starcraft instead of Wow.
If you want to see how accurate ratings are in predicting performance check out the Canadian team in 2004. How are you going to set a minimum rating when someone of similar rating almost copped a board medal on board 2 ?
Again, we also have the strong suggestion of weakness. On what basis are you claiming this year's team "can't compete" ? Are you saying out of say 100 countries they'd finish 98th ? Allow me to correct you. It won't happen.
... several less then courteous male critics have decided to use this as an excuse to criticize any perceived weakness in their play.
Duncan, surely you are not making the mistake of thinking that this board is super-influential. Most chessplayers have never heard of it.
In the thread you refer to, there were seven posters. Two posters (Ben-or-ben and Gary) were critical, two posters (Kerry and myself) were supportive, and two posters (Nigel and Howard) criticized the original poster. The seventh was you, Duncan.
Also, consider the source. I don't want to get all ad hominem, but Gary always comes across as bitter; Ben-or-ben is just being provocative, as naughty children usually are.
I've had a great chess career, John. Did OK as a junior. Organized at a large chess club and served as president and vice-president for multiple terms. Organized Canadian correspondence chess for a decade. Spent most of another decades directing international correspondence events for the ICCF by mail. which eventually had me directing more than 300 players at a time. Earned international correspondence titles. Both playing and an International Arbiter for directing.
About the only thing I have to be bitter about is not having reached the GM title but as long as I'm still playing top boards for Canada and get invitations to events that's still a possibility. Not likely but possible.
Maybe the fact that I don't like the way chess in Canada has been decimated in recent year or the problems of the CFC and that they are unable to rebuild the membership, makes me sound bitter. That's OK, John. If you want to sound cheery and are satisfied with the status quo then give them an "atta boy" and expect more of the same. I consider it unacceptable.
Maybe the fact that I don't like the way chess in Canada has been decimated in recent year or the problems of the CFC and that they are unable to rebuild the membership, makes me sound bitter. That's OK, John. If you want to sound cheery and are satisfied with the status quo then give them an "atta boy" and expect more of the same. I consider it unacceptable.
You look like , while others simple . According to FIDE federations ranking list, CAN stand at ~40 (men) and ~60 (women). If you do not like that, stop and start . Then we will have what to or . Ok I just but I think you got an idea that the boards are not the best place to make things work.
I remember when Pascal Charbonneau first showed up at Olympiad there was a ton of talk from Kevin Spraggett and Gary Ruben about how inexperienced he was and how he had to play a low board etc etc.. Pascal even had a few down results occasionally. All of us from the junior world were thinking come on this guy can play he's going to be a huge asset to the team. And in 2006 he beat Anand amongst other successes.
It seems to me people have short memories. Canada is lucky Pascal stuck with it and accepts the opportunities to represent Canada.
Quite objectively there is a lot of potential with the current women's group and not yet a lot of back up from the junior ranks other then the girls already on the team. So it truly is time to get behind these players ride out the rough spots and aim for doing really well as a team by 2010. Irina earned her spot there wasn't a lot of alternatives really the other junior girls are too lowly rated to merit a "youth movement" type selection and Dinara we're not sure if she's playing any chess right now.
I remember when Pascal Charbonneau first showed up at Olympiad there was a ton of talk from Kevin Spraggett and Gary Ruben about how inexperienced he was and how he had to play a low board etc etc..
Actually, any email exchanges I've had with Pascal were quite pleasant.
I think I get along with Kevin and enjoyed discussions with him on the Ottawa board. I think he's a fine chess player and a gentleman.
Duncan Smith, on the other hand, I remember differently. I remember Duncan Smith coming back from the last Olympic complaining about the other women on the team and whining that his daughter was not afforded a higher board than she was given. Wasn't it something about "cultural" differences, whatever they are?
Your subject line is very interesting. "Why do more women not play chess?" Unless that's a trick question, I would guess the answer is because you scare them away. Have I won some kind of prize for supplying a correct reply?
Posted by Bob Gillanders on the CFC Board ... (what a coincidence?):
The role of gender stereotypes in chess
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I received a fascinating paper on a research study on the role of gender stereotypes in chess. The research was conducted at the University of Padova, Italy.
The researchers carried out a scientific study to understand the influence of gender stereotypes and how it may explain why women are so surprisingly underrepresented in the chess world. Agree or not, it is an interesting read.
The entire paper can be found on the CFC website in the news articles.
Quite objectively there is a lot of potential with the current women's group and not yet a lot of back up from the junior ranks other then the girls already on the team. So it truly is time to get behind these players ride out the rough spots and aim for doing really well as a team by 2010. Irina earned her spot there wasn't a lot of alternatives really the other junior girls are too lowly rated to merit a "youth movement" type selection and Dinara we're not sure if she's playing any chess right now.
A lot of potential? :') How many of the women do you think will even obtain an FM title? If you think players like Barron, Smith and Kagramanov have potential, then surely you think that I have potential, as well?
Last edited by Ben Daswani; Friday, 5th September, 2008, 06:08 PM.
Reason: Typo
everytime it hurts, it hurts just like the first (and then you cry till there's no more tears)
click on the first news item (it is first at the moment...)
Thank you so much, Mr Liles.
Copy and Paste :
X X X X X X X
Women are surprisingly underrepresented in the chess world, representing less that 5% of registered tournament players worldwide and only 1% of the world’s grand masters. In this paper it is argued that gender stereotypes are mainly responsible for the underperformance of women in chess. Forty-two male–female pairs, matched for ability, played two chess games via Internet. When players were unaware of the sex of opponent (control condition), females played approximately as well as males. When the gender stereotype was activated (experimental condition), women showed a drastic performance drop, but only when they were aware that they were playing against a male opponent. When they (falsely) believed to be playing against a woman, they performed as well as their male opponents. In addition, our findings suggest that women show lower chess-specific self-esteem and a weaker promotion focus, which are predictive of poorer chess performance. Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Read the entire article: Maass et al Women and chess.pdf
Tweet
, while others simple 
. According to FIDE federations ranking list, CAN stand at ~40 (men) and ~60 (women). If you do not like that, stop 
and start 
. Then we will have what to 
or 
. Ok I just 
but I think you got an idea that the boards are not the best place to make things work.
Comment