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.
Gary: You should consider playing in the World Senior sometime. Hal runs the Canadian Senior on the August long weekend and raises money for the winner's airfare.
To put your rough equity with Lipnowski (ca.1961) in perspective, two years later he came 6th in the Canadian Closed ahead of Suttles, Witt, Vaitonis, and Allan. His CFC high was 2400+ and could probably still be 2300+, if he was active.
It's something to think about, Fred. That was actually a pretty strong Manitoba Junior event. Jack Woodbury directed. John Burstow played but didn't figure in the placings. He did, however, win the Canadian junior.
After that I only played sporadically as women and work took up a lot of time. Back then chess wasn't as glamerous as it is these days. I can recall one girl dumping me for a musician. Guitar player in some band which was unknown to me. She said a musician was a better prospect than a chess player. Can you imagine that?
Anyhow, when I got back to chess I gravitated more to organizing than playing. My kids were young and I had other obligations.
I have been playing competitive chess, on and off, since the Canadian Open in 1964. In the mid 1990s, due to a career change, I again dropped out of tournament chess until a couple of years ago. Upon returning, I noticed that a lot of familiar faces and names were no longer involved with chess. Why are some of these people not playing competitive chess any more? I think it’s because of the present rating system. If you happen to play lower rated players and win your games, why should you lose rating points? Doesn’t that just discourage people from playing? Some die-hards stick it out because they “love” playing chess and will continue to play no matter what. But for some others, having a rating heading south is hard on the ego, the legacy, pride, dignity, or whatever, and they have chosen not to play. The old rating system was not this hard on people. Sure, according to statistics, we all will drop in ratings as we age, but I think it was a more gradual decline compared to being thrust down a flight of stairs as the present system tends to do. This brings about another point to mention. During a recent discussion when I inquired why the rating system changed, it was mentioned that the CFC wanted to align themselves closer to FIDE ratings, thus the change. If this is true, it’s a poor reason for destroying something that was quite satisfactory. Sort of reminds me of the cliché, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!” I think we should consider returning to the older rating system and let this one go.
I have been playing competitive chess, on and off, since the Canadian Open in 1964. In the mid 1990s, due to a career change, I again dropped out of tournament chess until a couple of years ago. Upon returning, I noticed that a lot of familiar faces and names were no longer involved with chess. Why are some of these people not playing competitive chess any more? I think it’s because of the present rating system. If you happen to play lower rated players and win your games, why should you lose rating points? Doesn’t that just discourage people from playing? Some die-hards stick it out because they “love” playing chess and will continue to play no matter what. But for some others, having a rating heading south is hard on the ego, the legacy, pride, dignity, or whatever, and they have chosen not to play. The old rating system was not this hard on people. Sure, according to statistics, we all will drop in ratings as we age, but I think it was a more gradual decline compared to being thrust down a flight of stairs as the present system tends to do. This brings about another point to mention. During a recent discussion when I inquired why the rating system changed, it was mentioned that the CFC wanted to align themselves closer to FIDE ratings, thus the change. If this is true, it’s a poor reason for destroying something that was quite satisfactory. Sort of reminds me of the cliché, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!” I think we should consider returning to the older rating system and let this one go.
The current rating system has existed with just minor alterations for at least 40-45 years.
What did change is that players used to gain 2 rating points for beating players 350 points and lower. That number is now smaller and eventually becomes 0 at 750 point difference. You never lose rating points for a win (as long as you have and established rating).
Tweet
Comment