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.
GM Lubomir Kavalek writing in The Huffington Post:
Magnus Carlsen doesn't have to worry. According to the rules set up by the London organizers, the 20-year-old grandmaster from Norway finished first and will collect 50,000 Euros for his efforts. He benefited from the soccer scoring system – 3 points for a win, 1 point for a draw and no points for a loss – favoring players who fight and win. Carlsen scored 13 points, two points ahead of the world champion Vishy Anand of India and Luke McShane of England. It was a great recovery by Magnus who started with two loses in the first three games.
But ask the traditionalists, who for several centuries counted one point for a win and a half point for a draw, and they will tell you that in the year 2010 three players shared first place in London: McShane, Anand and Carlsen.
In the annals of chess history the final results will be noted as follows:
Carlsen, Anand, Luke McShane - 4.5 points in 7 games
Vladimir Kramnik (Russia) and Hikaru Nakamura (USA) - 4 points
Michael Adams (England) - 3.5 points
David Howell (England) - 2 points
Nigel Short (England) - 1 point
I must respectfully disagree with the famous grandmaster. The scoring system was known to the players in advance, and they played to that system. In particular Magnus Carlsen played for a win in every game. Had the traditional scoring system been in effect, he surely would have taken a different approach.
GM Lubomir Kavalek writing in The Huffington Post:
I must respectfully disagree with the famous grandmaster. The scoring system was known to the players in advance, and they played to that system. In particular Magnus Carlsen played for a win in every game. Had the traditional scoring system been in effect, he surely would have taken a different approach.
Well.... Yes and no. The person who wins the tournament should be the player who played the best. Kavalek is simply making the argument that Carlsen did not play better then Anand or McShane, he only had more decisive results. The organizers are rewarding aggression, but don't mistake that as any sort of cogent arguement that Carlsen played better then the other players with the same number of points (under the conventional scoring).
It seems a bit silly that Anand and McShane both beat Carlsen and finished with the same number of points as him (once again, under the normal scoring system), but Carlsen wins the tournament.
Well.... Yes and no. The person who wins the tournament should be the player who played the best. Kavalek is simply making the argument that Carlsen did not play better then Anand or McShane, he only had more decisive results.
carlsen did play the best as (in this particular tournament) a win and a loss is better than two draws
everytime it hurts, it hurts just like the first (and then you cry till there's no more tears)
Best is defined by the rules of the tournament, not by the rules of the 10000 tournaments that preceded it. Carlsen played to win the tournament by risking more than his opponents. He succeeded.
Carlsen is persistent, well prepared, motivated...and a notch down from Anand. Really he plays computer-like and I highly doubt that 10 years from now he will be playing chess at the highest level.
Best is defined by the rules of the tournament, not by the rules of the 10000 tournaments that preceded it.
"Best" is a subjective assessment. We often see reports stating that player X played the best chess but came second or even further down. Getting the most points is objective. Sure Carlsen won according to the man made rules in this tournament. The question is about the wisdom of that special 3-1 rule. In a short 7 round tournament with a few outsiders (Short, Howell and McShane) it is hard not to produce fighting chess, whatever the scoring system.
Tweet
Comment