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.
Happy New Year, and would it be possible to get the
2012 Calendar for IGCF events? I have 2 teams from
2MCL (Martian Chess League) interested in competition.
BTW, what planetary currency 2012 IGCF membership?
Gary, no need to throw in the towel, I am sure that you are still much better at chess than Vlad Drkulec will ever be; even with your occasional lapses.
We all go through slumps from time to time, just look at Paul Bonham's rating which has always exceeded his true abilities. Or consider Mr. Kitich's attempts to stay above 1600 (if he spent half the time that he does correcting posts on ChessTalk to actually study the game I am confident that he would reach 1650). Alternately, look at the yo-yo like oscillations of enormous magnitude exhibited in the rating of Bob Gillanders; his rating reflects his employment state. When his rating is above 1800 he is unemployed and when it is less then he is in a state of fulltime employment. When he reached 2000 you know that it was time for him to get full-time work. So what if you are not as good as you used to be; just play for the moment. Perhaps your are spending too much time in your study of climate change?? Of course you could always start up a non-profit chess teaching and supply business like Larry Bevand did when he realized that he would never reach 2000. Alternatively, consider Robert Hamilton as a source of inspiration. I remember when he lost in the Canadian Closed years ago in Hamilton (the city, not the player) in about 12 moves or so to Rob Gardner (I believe), Hamilton (the player, not the city) moved a knight and then got mated on d8 or d1 with the queen protected by the bishop that had been pinning the knight. Perhaps Hugh Brodie can track down the moves of the game and David Cohen can consider the game for the Hall of Shame. I remember that the game was over in about 15 minutes and the two players analyzed the dozen opening moves for about 2 hours. Perhaps Hamilton (the player, not the city) was hoping that the audience would think that they were still playing the tournament game? Or consider the actions of Kevin Spraggett when he realized that Canadians no longer liked him; he started a vindictive soft-porn blog under the guise of a chess blog with the main purpose of slagging the CFC; he thinks people read the blog for the chess analysis but it is just for the humor and the women.
In summary: Gary, how can you possibly abandon chess? It is such an important part of who you are; of your core being...
Last edited by Paul Beckwith; Tuesday, 3rd January, 2012, 08:59 PM.
Gary, no need to throw in the towel, I am sure that you are still much better at chess than Vlad Drkulec will ever be; even with your occasional lapses.
We all go through slumps from time to time, just look at Paul Bonham's rating which has always exceeded his true abilities. Or consider Mr. Kitich's attempts to stay above 1600 (if he spent half the time that he does correcting posts on ChessTalk to actually study the game I am confident that he would reach 1650). Alternately, look at the yo-yo like oscillations of enormous magnitude exhibited in the rating of Bob Gillanders; his rating reflects his employment state. When his rating is above 1800 he is unemployed and when it is less then he is in a state of fulltime employment. When he reached 2000 you know that it was time for him to get full-time work. So what if you are not as good as you used to be; just play for the moment. Perhaps your are spending too much time in your study of climate change?? Of course you could always start up a non-profit chess teaching and supply business like Larry Bevand did when he realized that he would never reach 2000. Alternatively, consider Robert Hamilton as a source of inspiration. I remember when he lost in the Canadian Closed years ago in Hamilton (the city, not the player) in about 12 moves or so to Rob Gardner (I believe), Hamilton (the player, not the city) moved a knight and then got mated on d8 or d1 with the queen protected by the bishop that had been pinning the knight. Perhaps Hugh Brodie can track down the moves of the game and David Cohen can consider the game for the Hall of Shame. I remember that the game was over in about 15 minutes and the two players analyzed the dozen opening moves for about 2 hours. Perhaps Hamilton (the player, not the city) was hoping that the audience would think that they were still playing the tournament game? Or consider the actions of Kevin Spraggett when he realized that Canadians no longer liked him; he started a vindictive soft-porn blog under the guise of a chess blog with the main purpose of slagging the CFC; he thinks people read the blog for the chess analysis but it is just for the humor and the women.
In summary: Gary, how can you possibly abandon chess? It is such an important part of who you are; of your core being...
everytime it hurts, it hurts just like the first (and then you cry till there's no more tears)
Gary, no need to throw in the towel, I am sure that you are still much better at chess than Vlad Drkulec will ever be; even with your occasional lapses.
We all go through slumps from time to time, just look at Paul Bonham's rating which has always exceeded his true abilities. Or consider Mr. Kitich's attempts to stay above 1600 (if he spent half the time that he does correcting posts on ChessTalk to actually study the game I am confident that he would reach 1650). Alternately, look at the yo-yo like oscillations of enormous magnitude exhibited in the rating of Bob Gillanders; his rating reflects his employment state. When his rating is above 1800 he is unemployed and when it is less then he is in a state of fulltime employment. When he reached 2000 you know that it was time for him to get full-time work. So what if you are not as good as you used to be; just play for the moment. Perhaps your are spending too much time in your study of climate change?? Of course you could always start up a non-profit chess teaching and supply business like Larry Bevand did when he realized that he would never reach 2000. Alternatively, consider Robert Hamilton as a source of inspiration. I remember when he lost in the Canadian Closed years ago in Hamilton (the city, not the player) in about 12 moves or so to Rob Gardner (I believe), Hamilton (the player, not the city) moved a knight and then got mated on d8 or d1 with the queen protected by the bishop that had been pinning the knight. Perhaps Hugh Brodie can track down the moves of the game and David Cohen can consider the game for the Hall of Shame. I remember that the game was over in about 15 minutes and the two players analyzed the dozen opening moves for about 2 hours. Perhaps Hamilton (the player, not the city) was hoping that the audience would think that they were still playing the tournament game? Or consider the actions of Kevin Spraggett when he realized that Canadians no longer liked him; he started a vindictive soft-porn blog under the guise of a chess blog with the main purpose of slagging the CFC; he thinks people read the blog for the chess analysis but it is just for the humor and the women.
In summary: Gary, how can you possibly abandon chess? It is such an important part of who you are; of your core being...
Hello Garvin,
I do not play much these days apart from some games with Fritz 13 on my laptop, Shredder on my iPhone (amazing how strong it is on the phone), and occasionally I go the RA club in Ottawa, although that has not happened for a while, maybe I'll go tomorrow. Occasionaly I will play on FICS. I enjoy following some of the analysis on Kevin Spraggetts blog; I find it excellent chessically speaking, and the perks are also good on his site. I also do a little bit of teaching to my kids and their friends.
I know that you are doing some organizing; do you get a chance to play much.
Paul, those events take about 2 1/2 years each. I don't really want to be playing high level chess at an age greater than 70. Beside my waning skills, when I accept and invitation it takes an opportunity away from someone else who would likely get more benefit and maybe a norm.
In sport there's little which is sadder than someone who stays at the party too long.
I might play the thematic events like the King's Gambit or Evans Gambit or that sort of thing. It's not even for rating points at ICCF. Simply for fun.
Or consider Mr. Kitich's attempts to stay above 1600 (if he spent half the time that he does correcting posts on ChessTalk to actually study the game I am confident that he would reach 1650). ...
I think I can help you out Paul. Your inability to get an engineering job for years may lie in your inability to process numbers. For example, I am currently 1655 (and yes I had to look that up) which you don't seem to realize is above 1650. However, I play chess for fun much as I post on chesstalk for the same reason. I don't play chess or post on chesstalk to make up for a small mind, small body parts or to boost my ego. I play chess well enough to enter tournaments or to have fun playing socially with the majority of people I may run into out there.
It may surprise you but not all of us think we are going to be the next Bobby Fischer nor would we care to be. I think that's the realization that Gary is coming to. That chess can be played for fun and social reasons without it being a serious time drain on teh rest of our lives. There are more inactive GM's and IM's out there who have made that same decision to give up on serious competition than your imagination can hold.
But sure go ahead and put down my chess playing ability. That's the best way to grow the game in Canada, if those with higher ratings start to disparage those with lower ratings. Whatever gets you through the day. I seem to be occupying permanent space in your thoughts. Maybe you can get a research grant to study the affects of my chess rating on climate change. There is obviously a link there and you are just the mental case I mean scientist to prove it.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Thursday, 5th January, 2012, 08:40 PM.
Reason: Paul, Paul, Paul
I think I can help you out Paul. Your inability to get an engineering job for years may lie in your inability to process numbers. For example, I am currently 1655 (and yes I had to look that up) which you don't seem to realize is above 1650.
He always did seem mathematically challenged judging from his comments on the economic side of things that usually just make him look kind of dim most of the time.
But sure go ahead and put down my chess playing ability. That's the best way to grow the game in Canada, if those with higher ratings start to disparage those with lower ratings. Whatever gets you through the day. I seem to be occupying permanent space in your thoughts. Maybe you can get a research grant to study the affects of my chess rating on climate change. There is obviously a link there and you are just the mental case I mean scientist to prove it.
Well to be fair he did put down my chess playing ability, as well, and it is clear that I am a much better player than he is even when I am having a bad day.
... just look at Paul Bonham's rating which has always exceeded his true abilities....
Which makes me the smartest person in chess, because I learned how to GAME THE ELO RATING SYSTEM!
Can anybody else make this claim? To do so, you'd have to get the eminent Beckwith to produce a number that is your true ability, because only he knows this, just as only he knows to what degree man is affecting climate, and only he knows to what extent you are a "dumb ass" human (the more you agree with his opinions, the less "dumb ass" you are).
If your rating ever surpassed Beckwith's conclusion of your true abilities by any significant amount, you too can claim to have gamed the rating system.
But Beckwith claims my rating has ALWAYS exceeded my true abilities. I doubt anyone else can match that!
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
It seems to me that a chess rating is not an indication of how good you are, but of how consistent you are. Almost anyone can play a good chess game, few can play nothing but good games. The same applies to golf. Any hack can hit a good shot now and then, but the low handicappers and scratch players are those who hit 69 good shots, maybe one or two bad shots, and then walk off the course.
Tweet
Comment