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.
...
But Beckwith claims my rating has ALWAYS exceeded my true abilities. I doubt anyone else can match that!
This does sound like quite a significant accomplishment! :)
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Peter, it is very simple for a persons rating to exceed their true abilities. All they need to do is win several games by complete luck; for example with their higher rated opponent self-imploding a few times. For example, with Bonham, any time that he played someone who used chesstalk regularly and read most of his postings this would apply. Such an opponent would probably be unable to stop laughing upon meeting him in person and would thus lose irrespective of how much higher their rating was...
Peter, it is very simple for a persons rating to exceed their true abilities. All they need to do is win several games by complete luck; for example with their higher rated opponent self-imploding a few times. For example, with Bonham, any time that he played someone who used chesstalk regularly and read most of his postings this would apply. Such an opponent would probably be unable to stop laughing upon meeting him in person and would thus lose irrespective of how much higher their rating was...
On a purely scientific basis there is a major flaw in your theory. A constantly laughing opponent would be removed from the playing hall by the TD. As well the set of those Paul B. plays and the set of those who read chesstalk and the set of those who share your viewpoint are mutually exclusive. Simply put just the set of those who share your views and everyone else on the planet are mutually exclusive as well. If you like I can draw the Venn diagram for you.
As well even given that your theory is with some basis, one would think higher rated players don't see chess as a personality contest ala Paul Beckwith. Or at least they would smarten up next time after losing.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Monday, 9th January, 2012, 03:17 AM.
Peter, it is very simple for a persons rating to exceed their true abilities. All they need to do is win several games by complete luck; for example with their higher rated opponent self-imploding a few times. For example, with Bonham, any time that he played someone who used chesstalk regularly and read most of his postings this would apply. Such an opponent would probably be unable to stop laughing upon meeting him in person and would thus lose irrespective of how much higher their rating was...
So then my "true abilities" include getting people to laugh so hard they lose their game to me! All part of the skill set. It's so easy to burst your balloon, Paul!
Guess how I got them to laugh so hard, all those 16 years ago when Chesstalk didn't even exist (ooops! another blunder, Mr. Beckwith!)?
I told them in about 15 years, Beckwith would be out of chess and would be reduced to being one of those guys wearing the sandwich boards, "The End Is Near, Dumb Ass Humans!"
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
I fear Bob G has sort of hijacked the thread here, which was on chess games and ratings, etc. But his comment did jog a thought in this rather murky brain.
Speaking of " snow ", I have a problem here.
All Canadians ( most, many, some ? ) are happy to have a milder winter.
So when they are told its due to climate change, they say " great " ! And I think they'll live with the extreme weather events that also accompany climate change, in order to get the overall milder winter.
So where does that leave the climate change educators?? And can they convince Canadians that there are larger problems affecting the planet due to climate change, that they should be weighing against the better winter? Will the response be: " Well, those won't happen in my lifetime! "
Bob A
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Tuesday, 10th January, 2012, 12:43 PM.
I'm glad to see the thread focused on interesting topics instead of some guy who plays a dying form of chess making an attention whore post about how he's not going to play anymore. Hint: the thread should make it clear to you that no one really cares.
I'm glad to see the thread focused on interesting topics instead of some guy who plays a dying form of chess making an attention whore post about how he's not going to play anymore. Hint: the thread should make it clear to you that no one really cares.
Well, I just have one question for the climate change skeptics:
It is January, where is the snow?
Perhaps, we should listen to the sandwich boards guys, once in a while.
That would be anecdotal and unscientific evidence. You might as well rely on Uncle Joe's trick knee to tell you when it's going to rain.
The correct basis of evidence would be to study snowfall patterns back as far as the record goes (recognizing that this itself may be a limited amount of evidence) to determine whether no snowfall yet this year is an anomoly. Of course you would first have to define what part of Canada you are talking about. You would then need to determine if it's cold enough to have snowed but just not snowed yet due to rain patterns. I can tell you snow used to be up to my waist when I was a child walking to school but that
doesn't happen these days. Can you spot the flaw in my reasoning - I knew you could :)
Sometimes the guy with the sandwhich board needs to do more than just shoot from the lip.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Tuesday, 10th January, 2012, 03:57 PM.
I can tell you snow used to be up to my waist when I was a child walking to school but that
doesn't happen these days. Can you spot the flaw in my reasoning - I knew you could :)
You are taller now? :D
When I was a child, there was always snow on the ground in January!
Yes, I know it's anecdotal, but what of it. You want me to study snowfall patterns? That ain't gonna happen.
ps. You need one more edit. Check the spelling of sandwich.
Last edited by Bob Gillanders; Tuesday, 10th January, 2012, 04:17 PM.
When I was a child, there was always snow on the ground in January!
Yes, I know it's anecdotal, but what of it. You want me to study snowfall patterns? That ain't gonna happen.
Then I ain't gonna believe you pardner. Especially because you ain't anywhere near 150 years old. Even assuming your misty coloured memories of growing up at the north pole are 20/20. Now my having been born in early January can tell you there wasn't always snow on the ground for my birthday. Sometimes I had to walk 3 miles to school and ski 2 miles back just to get back in time to open my presents. But hey if the sandwhich board fits, wear it.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Tuesday, 10th January, 2012, 04:20 PM.
Then I ain't gonna believe you pardner. Especially because you ain't anywhere near 150 years old. Even assuming your misty coloured memories of growing up at the north pole are 20/20. Now my having been born in early January can tell you there wasn't always snow on the ground for my birthday. Sometimes I had to walk 3 miles to school and ski 2 miles back just to get back in time to open my presents. But hey if the sandwhich board fits, wear it.
Well, I just have one question for the climate change skeptics:
It is January, where is the snow?
Perhaps, we should listen to the sandwich boards guys, once in a while.
Climate changes all the time. The skepticism deals with man's role and ability to change it. In interglacial warming periods there is usually some global warming and hence less snow hence the hysterical need for the chicken little crowd to pretend that previous interglacial warming periods didn't happen since if primitive man was able to survive them, a few degrees Celsius wouldn't matter now either.
Why is this thread being hijacked? The chicken little crowd is getting their butts handed to them on a platter over there so the contagion must spread further? Is that the deal?
If so, don't expect the arguments to work on a new thread either.
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Tuesday, 10th January, 2012, 05:23 PM.
Tweet
Comment