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.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
Looking for one good reason to renew my CFC annual membership
Re: Looking for one good reason to renew my CFC annual membership
LOL!
Duncan Suttles in not Finnish, as far as I know!
But I guess he's one of those rare OTB players who understands something about chess.
He also likes s-chess, which I guess makes him a fairy (presumably the Peter Pan kind?)
One of the funniest reactions to s-chess is from people who have never played it and who say "I only play real chess!" When you look at their games, of course, it's clear they only think they play real chess. And coming from a correspondence player, that's even better.
"But I guess he's one of those rare OTB players who understands something about chess."
Where did this come from?
It was sarcasm. Brought on, no doubt, by the current back and forth between Bruce and Gary about the relevance of correspondence chess (I guess). Too bad there isnt a [sarcasm] tag. on the other hand...
Last edited by Kerry Liles; Saturday, 20th September, 2008, 12:27 PM.
Reason: correspon-dance is rong
But I guess he's one of those rare OTB players who understands something about chess.
He also likes s-chess, which I guess makes him a fairy (presumably the Peter Pan kind?)
One of the funniest reactions to s-chess is from people who have never played it and who say "I only play real chess!" When you look at their games, of course, it's clear they only think they play real chess. And coming from a correspondence player, that's even better.
To each his own. Chess is a broad tent.
Yes. HE knows something about chess. He knew when to retire.
"Fairy Chess" is the name which was given to a wide variety of chess variants. S-chess would fall into that category from your description.
I guess the correspondence player you refer to is little old me. ME, ME, ME. I really don't undestand why you don't write it to me because I don't mind as long as you spell "correspondence" and my name correctly. The way you write it sounds like you're addressing a jury.
I know. Correspondence Chess is boring. Memorizing the Income Tax Act is interesting. Chess is indeed a broad tent.
Why don't we create a Provincial/ Territory rating system on the same lines as the CFC . Then we just pay our Provincial /Territory membership dues (in ONT right now is $7 in think may change in 2009) The Provincial and Territory can set up websites and have bulletins that report Local and Regional events. (This is already done by some people ie Mr Wright in BC and Mr Armstrong in Ontario.) Have the games rated for a fee. Then we can play rated chess within our own areas and if we want to play in a different area we just have to come up with the Provincial / Territory membership fee.
Much smaller than joining the CFC and much more practical.
If we want to play in the National Championship then we pay the CFC Membership fees. This will tell the CFC that the Provinces/Territories want their memberships to stay in their areas and not let them hold back our memberships dues to pay for debits that the Provinces/Territories did not create.
If the Provincial/Territory Organizations join together and not let the CFC push them around, then we the little chess players will have a vote that will allow our governors to go to the CFC and voice a membership opinion not a puppet group with proxies.
The CFC should run Chess for the better of Chess . Provinical/Territory Organizations should run chess for the goodness of the players instead of the other way around.
John R. Brown
Personally, I like big. Many solutions which simply address the present neglect the future. Not that I can see how the CFC is preparing the organization for a bright future.
The provincial organizations being able to tag along and add a fee to the CFC dues has gotten out of hand. Ontario charging 7 dollars a member for what we got the last couple of years is nonsense. I was a member one of those years and would like to know how they spent my 7 dollars.
If the CFC is completely starved for money as in your proposal, I would imagine a national championship from a qualifier like FIDE holds would suffice. Simply invite players from the Olympics from the FIDE rating list and on the condition they can pay their own way. Get rid of paid staff and run the organization like the OCA has been run. What gets done, gets done and what doesn't get done, doesn't get done.
There seems to be some bad feeling because I used the term "Rinky Dink" to describe the B.C. publication. In view of this I had a look at the latest one on the B.C. web site. Bulletin 149.
There are 13 games in the publication with strong players. Normally that would be a plus. In this case not. There isn't one single note in any of the games. How they can publish games by a 2700 player like Hikaru Nakamura without notes is a complete mystery for me. Their membership consists of players whose classes range to beginner. I understand it might not be possible to write down to beginner level but certainly they could annotate down to class a and b.
An assortment of results and upcoming events not all from B.C.
One of the 7 pages was about a couple of guys who died before I was born. I have to admit I don't remember them.
Why in the world would so many of the games they publish be from the 1800's and early 1900's. Odds games as well. I don't get it. Do you?
No theory section. Nothing much that could pass for a column on youth chess.
Maybe others are better but I've seen enough.
My review of the publication is from someone who edited a national publication for 5 years. My review is also kinder than some of the comments I got the times I blew it. :)
I think we need a national organization and publication. The form it takes probably has to change from what we have now.
Re: Looking for one good reason to renew my CFC annual membership
Gary Ruben clearly has more free time that everyone else who posts on ChessTalk combined. It's impossible to discuss any topic without him hijacking it.
Gary Ruben clearly has more free time that everyone else who posts on ChessTalk combined. It's impossible to discuss any topic without him hijacking it.
Unmoderated boards have their disadvantages.
I don't know how much a moderator would help you out. Clearly, this is an anti-CFC thread and I'm trying to provide some balance. What's impossible to do is to come up with ideas which will leave the CFC virtually useless and not have differing views. A strong national organization is to the benefit of the current and future players.
We all know your views of correspondence chess. You've mentioned them enough times. After 40 years or more of playing and administering CC I've heard it all. You're revelations of cheating or using outside sources is as amusing to me as listening to someone who has recently found Gawd. You've also found a way to introduce fairy chess into the thread with S-chess. Then after all that you want a moderator to help you out. Who will save the thread from you?
You're comments on my play don't bother me either. I couldn't possibly comment on your play. The only games of yours I can recall seeing were very short draws.
There seems to be some bad feeling because I used the term "Rinky Dink" to describe the B.C. publication. In view of this I had a look at the latest one on the B.C. web site. Bulletin 149.
There are 13 games in the publication with strong players. Normally that would be a plus. In this case not. There isn't one single note in any of the games. How they can publish games by a 2700 player like Hikaru Nakamura without notes is a complete mystery for me. Their membership consists of players whose classes range to beginner. I understand it might not be possible to write down to beginner level but certainly they could annotate down to class a and b.
An assortment of results and upcoming events not all from B.C.
One of the 7 pages was about a couple of guys who died before I was born. I have to admit I don't remember them.
Why in the world would so many of the games they publish be from the 1800's and early 1900's. Odds games as well. I don't get it. Do you?
No theory section. Nothing much that could pass for a column on youth chess.
Maybe others are better but I've seen enough.
My review of the publication is from someone who edited a national publication for 5 years. My review is also kinder than some of the comments I got the times I blew it. :)
I think we need a national organization and publication. The form it takes probably has to change from what we have now.
The latest bulletin has
- News from the latest BC tournament (Langley open) with 2 games attached
- News on how BC players are doing in various tournaments (3 different tournaments reported)
- News on how Nakamura did in Montreal and how that ties to BC Chess (considering how he has stated that he is looking to move to Vancouver)
Including 5 of his games.
- News on upcoming events
- Historical story on BC Player with 7 games included.
All this on a regular basis emailed to whoever wants it. There have been 15 of these emailed to me this year. This plus a web page that is more relevant to BC players than the CFC web page. These are services that the average chess player in BC appreciates. This is what I get for $12/year
My CFC membership includes
- rate games at $3 an event
- a website that can't even stay current with what a CFC membership includes.
- NOTHING ELSE
all for the grand total of $36/year...
You might need the CFC but the vast majority of chess playing Canadians don't, and the declining numbers are proof of this.
My apologies, Ken. My post was in reply and directed to Ken Craft who is a Life Member.
By the way, I am toally enjoying your book on Canadian CC. It rests beside my display board in my living room which I use to replay the games (I picked up the set in San Marino -- a beautiful metal lathed set with leather board).
If by elite you mean FIDE titled, then my experience is that almost no Canadian elite player cares about their CFC rating.
But they do care about their FIDE rating, correct? Ergo they do care that we all be members of the CFC in order to pay the FIDE dues which appear to be more than $10K. So assuming that there are 1500 active members, then almost $7 of my membership fee goes towards something they do care about, correct?
But they do care about their FIDE rating, correct? Ergo they do care that we all be members of the CFC in order to pay the FIDE dues which appear to be more than $10K. So assuming that there are 1500 active members, then almost $7 of my membership fee goes towards something they do care about, correct?
Garland, I may be mistaken, but it seems to me that the $10K you mention is for more things than ratings. I believe one question is, can we let any of those things slip away?
Re: Looking for one good reason to renew my CFC annual membership
I hope, and expect, that eventually there are two sets of ratings in Canada:
1) Regional ratings - ratings that apply to 90+% of tournament players. They are administered locally (so, for example, Alberta might have one, while Eastern Ontario has another), recognized only locally, and are pretty low-key and unofficial, except in their region. Most tournaments will be rated this way for either very cheap or free. Membership dues will be very low as there will be almost no staff overhead, just some guy running SwissSys, Swiss Perfect, or something like that (just google "rating pairing program chess" or simlar) and posting a list on a website (e.g. Hugh Brodie's blitz ratings in Montreal), and/or emailing the list and local reports (e.g. the BCCF bulletin).
2) FIDE ratings - FIDE continues to lower the bar for its range of ratings; now almost any player could get a FIDE rating. In Ottawa there must be dozens of players who either have, or are about to have, FIDE ratings. Those ratings are recognized worldwide as the standard. When you go to some tournament in country X, they are not going to care about your CFC rating if you have a FIDE rating, that's for sure. A few events in each region will get rated FIDE, and players probably will demand more and more events be rated that way so they can compare themselves with Anand and Kramnik. ;-) I predict that at least in Ottawa it is only a matter of time before every section (excepting the bottom one) in every "major" Ottawa event is FIDE rated.
The CFC's job in all this will be to collect fees from FIDE tournaments, take their cut, and then submit the events with the proper format to FIDE. A national chess organization with a population as spread as Canada cannot do more than that.
"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.
Re: Looking for one good reason to renew my CFC annual membership
Hi Joe,
A good question which is hard to answer because it is counterfactual. I had decided to become a Life Member in my late thirties but waited to 41 because of the formula used to calculate life member fees. Despite my complaints about executive secrecy, I think David Lavin will probably get the CFC back on a stable financial footing. I think the appointment of Lawrence Day as editor was an excellent one. Discussion on the private Governors forum has been lively under the new regime. I think things are going in the right direction, Joe.
Cheers,
Ken
Tweet
Comment