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.
According to grandmaster Kevin Spraggett on his blog, the game Plotkin-Calugar is the "MOST ''DUBIOUS'' GAME OF THE CHAMPIONSHIP (When is it better to lose than to draw?)".
As I understand from his explanations, a draw (the natural outcome) would give "only" a FM title to Calugar and nothing to Plotkin, while a loss by White (Plotkin) was giving an IM title to Calugar and a possible FM title to Plotkin.
Would it be possible that Plotkin lost on purpose to get a title that would have otherwise eluded him? At any rate, this is what Grandmaster Spraggett seems to think. Strangely enough, there is still nothing on Chesstalk about this potential cheating scandal.
My personal feeling is that Larry should set some kind of rule about what kind of trash is allowed and not allowed to be imported from KS's blog.
The same comes up in a combined section. Say there's a $500 U2000 prize and a $300 U1900 prize, both in a U2000 section. Two 1890 players have 6.5 and 6.0, and are paired last round.
The latter resigns prematurely, resulting in a 7.5 score and victory for the former, and a 6.0 score nets a top U1900 prize (due to the one prize per player rule).
Good example, Alan. So if in addition one player ends up with 7, in the case of a draw the two winners on 7 get $400 each, while in the case of a loss, the winner gets $500 while the loser gets $300. That's $300 more he gets by losing than by drawing! Blows my no-cigar examples out of the water. Hypothetical, or has it happened? It suggests that our 30+ -year-old prize division rules might need tweaking.
AFAIR, what usually happens is that the top underdog player (U1900 in your example) does not win the event, but rather is involved in the top placings, and thus brings up his class prize with him. Which suggests that if a class player wins more than his class prize, maybe the rules should be changed that he takes the class prize with him, then takes enough from one of the place prizes (but which one?) to give him the correct $ amount. That would give full payout of the class prize, and also correct the anomaly you point out. What I have just described is not the procedure now; it would require a rule change.
As per CFC rules, players are supposed to win only one prize.
So if someone finishes tied for 3rd-6th in a section and also wins a class prize, they would get whichever would be higher on its own, a quarter-share of the 3rd-6th prizes or the class prize.
If the class prize is higher, the remaining three in the tie get a three-way split of that prize while the first player wins the class prize only. If the class prize is lower, the section prize is split 4 ways, and the next person down wins the class prize.
Re : Re: Cheating at Canadian Closed? Another FALSE accusation from the BS (adult) b
Originally posted by Mark S. Dutton, I.A.View Post
Inappropriate ADULT content -- not for anyone under the age of 19.
Thanks for the warning Jonathan. Concerned parents, and Canadian "youngsters" (as Larry Bevand often describes his clientele) should be warned in no uncertain terms that the site you are referring to is pornographic with very disturbing misogynist content. Further it is written by a complete megalomaniac (...)
What I find disturbing and inappropriate is that several individuals here on Chesstalk used my post as an excuse for spitting their venom on a person they love to hate. As far as I can see, most of them did not even bother to check what Kevin actually wrote on his blog. What can be found there is a long and interesting article on the Canadian Closed, plus lots of praise on the style of Sambuev, Hansen and Panjwani, as well as detailed analysis of several key games. How many grandmasters would do that for free? At the very end he mentions the Plotkin-Calugar incident, carefully analyzing the endgame to show not only how easy it was to draw for White, but also the absurdity of any winning attempts, unless of course one realizes that (thanks to the peculiar way FIDE gives away its FM and IM titles in this particular competition) a loss was worth way more than a draw.
I would like to thank the few people who managed to discuss the issue while keeping their calm and self-control, and would like to mention that actually Kevin never used the word "cheating" on his blog... His final conclusion was: "The outrage is that Potkin was able to get his FM-title by losing; drawing would not have been good enough!!"
I can't see how anyone could read it and not assume that KS was calling someone a cheater... Maybe a little introspection would be good right about now. You were very suggestive about the fact that there was a suggestion/accusation of cheating in KS' website. Maybe you were the one suggesting it, but I can see how anyone could think that.
Like myself, many do not visit KS' website, so they took your "word" for it.
I would like to thank the few people who managed to discuss the issue while keeping their calm and self-control, and would like to mention that actually Kevin never used the word "cheating" on his blog... His final conclusion was: "The outrage is that Potkin was able to get his FM-title by losing; drawing would not have been good enough!!"
Victor Plotkin is a strong enough player that he would have got the FM title not too far down the road just by playing as much as he normally plays. Isn't the only requirement for that to happen achieving a 2300 FIDE rating? Most of the big Toronto vicinity tournaments are FIDE rated. The only reason he hadn't already obtained the title is that the pool of competitors that he typically plays in is full of juniors who are rapidly improving and whose FIDE ratings are not keeping up. There may be a legitimate 100 point gap between typical FIDE ratings and typical Canadian ratings for stabilized ratings but I suspect that the gap is smaller than that (probably in the 50 to 70 point range). In either case Victor's 2400+ CFC playing strength should soon translate into a 2300+ FIDE rating.
The real story here is that Canada seems to be blessed with a great mix of promising young players and veterans who are all striving to improve or maintain their game and seem to be decent individuals who are fun to be around and generous with advice and especially enjoyable to analyse with.
Hal did a great job of organizing and directing with the able assistance of Michael and Aris. As usual Zjelka was a bundle of energy and greatly contributed to documenting the tournament and disseminating the games from this event.
Congratulations to Bator and Eric for playing some great chess. Congratulations to Arthur on his IM title and Victor, Miladin, Morgon, David for their FM worthy performances. Congratulations to all of the players and arbiters who made this a special and enjoyable event.
Yup, it's back again, wasn't there this morning. I see there is a note on the site:
"Just a short note to my readers that blogger has had maintenance problems this week and that everything since Wednesday has been temporarily ''erased''."
Victor Plotkin is a strong enough player that he would have got the FM title not too far down the road just by playing as much as he normally plays. Isn't the only requirement for that to happen achieving a 2300 FIDE rating? Most of the big Toronto vicinity tournaments are FIDE rated. The only reason he hadn't already obtained the title is that the pool of competitors that he typically plays in is full of juniors who are rapidly improving and whose FIDE ratings are not keeping up. There may be a legitimate 100 point gap between typical FIDE ratings and typical Canadian ratings for stabilized ratings but I suspect that the gap is smaller than that (probably in the 50 to 70 point range). In either case Victor's 2400+ CFC playing strength should soon translate into a 2300+ FIDE rating.
The real story here is that Canada seems to be blessed with a great mix of promising young players and veterans who are all striving to improve or maintain their game and seem to be decent individuals who are fun to be around and generous with advice and especially enjoyable to analyse with.
Hal did a great job of organizing and directing with the able assistance of Michael and Aris. As usual Zjelka was a bundle of energy and greatly contributed to documenting the tournament and disseminating the games from this event.
Congratulations to Bator and Eric for playing some great chess. Congratulations to Arthur on his IM title and Victor, Miladin, Morgon, David for their FM worthy performances. Congratulations to all of the players and arbiters who made this a special and enjoyable event.
Thank you for good words about me, but I believe you just overestimate my chess level. I am not a 2300 FIDE-rated player. My rating fluctuates between 2200 and 2250 last few years, that means 2250 is very close to my top.
More important, I even don't know how I can play better. My opening knowledge is below zero and I don't plan to make any significant effort to improve it. I believe almost every 2000+ CFC-rated player knows openings better than me. In my last 4 games against higher-rated opponents I made mistake on move 7 (Hamilton), 5 !!! (Gerzhoy), 9 (Panjwani) and 6 !! (Samsonkin). Pretty impressive numbers, right?
Of course I try to compensate it with hard work during the game, competiveness, logic and may be some chess factors, but looks like I cann't do any better.
Last edited by Victor Plotkin; Saturday, 14th May, 2011, 01:38 PM.
Please, if you quote me don't stop in the middle of the sentence. I posted "More important, I even don't know how I can play better. My opening knowledge is below zero and I don't plan to make any significant effort to improve it. " I don't see any contradictory here.
Thank you for congrats.
I think Victor is a very Modest chess player..A trait that is very desirable in my opinion. I have played Victor in a few events and have always found him to be a fierce competitor. He feels 2300 FIDE to me ! Congrats on a fine tournament and a well deserved FM title..
Please, if you quote me don't stop in the middle of the sentence. I posted "More important, I even don't know how I can play better. My opening knowledge is below zero and I don't plan to make any significant effort to improve it. " I don't see any contradictory here.
Thank you for congrats.
Congratulations from me as well and we will have to agree to disagree on your abilities. I think that if you were playing in New York or Chicago or Europe on a regular basis you would have no problem getting to 2300 FIDE. Eventually these wunderkids FIDE ratings will rise and catch up to their true level as they compete outside of Toronto and it won't be so hard to get over 2250 FIDE.
Tweet
Comment