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.
Board 2 has to play board 1 when they rest the top board. Gerzhoy and Porper should be able to handle the lower boards and the one above them when they have to move up for rested players. Noritsyn should do just fine on playing board 4 when one of the others is rested. We need 2 1/2 points to win a match and it looks like we'll need to pile up wins on boards 3 and 4.
I've noticed a lot of teams are good on board 1 and 2 but thin lower down (the powerhouse teams excepted). We are strong on boards 3 to 5 and decent on boards 1 and 2.
I hope the player don't find this offensive. It's not meant to be.
You are right, this is "fantasy guessing" which is fun to do but no more. In real life this kind of "planning" doesn't work. It's like betting on horse races. Regardless of the way you switch people around, the odds remain exactly the same, but sometimes one (team captain) can get lucky.
You are right, this is "fantasy guessing" which is fun to do but no more. In real life this kind of "planning" doesn't work. It's like betting on horse races. Regardless of the way you switch people around, the odds remain exactly the same, but sometimes one (team captain) can get lucky.
How would you line up the team? The players have to be comfortable and agreeable to play the board so it's simply fantasy.
Board order is decided by the Team Captain, who is selected by the players.
I'm not master strength, but I think I would put Porper on Board two, not because I feel he is 2nd best, but because I think his performance rating is higher against higher rated opposition (you can check out results on the FIDE website) than against lower rated opposition. I think after that, Gerzhoy followed by Noritsyn and Hansen (or vice-versa) would yield the best results.
You beat me to it Fred, as this is exactly what I was going to write:-) I think that with ample preparation time Porper can play at approximately 2550 level when faced against 2500+ opposition, but his level would go down quite a bit when facing sub 2350 opposition, so he could be good on board 2 or 3. I would put Gerzhoy on board 3 with either one of Noritsyn or Hansen on boards 4-5.
But that all would of course be up to the captain.
How would you line up the team? The players have to be comfortable and agreeable to play the board so it's simply fantasy.
interesting speculation even though it is 'fantasy' ...
the longer this thread goes, the more inclined I am to think that there *isn't* an error in the thread Title: roaster seems more appropriate than 'roster'
It is a measure of a player that he or she is willing and able to adjust to the requirements of the team, but it is even more the measure of the captain that he or she knows the limits outside of which the team must not be f*ed. With.
Recall the 1984 US team board order controversy. The board one choice turned out to be brilliant, but at the same time dubious because the star player decided not to take part because of it.
Other things being equal, each player would expect to play about 80% of the games, with an equal balance of White and Black. But things are rarely equal. If you have on the team players who are willing and able to take on a role, that might affect your board order. Major roles include "drawing with Black", "winning with White". A possible minor role is "drawing with White against very strong opposition". A player who specializes in the role "drawing with Black" (a role Lawrence Day was inveigled into at least once in thirteen appearances on Canada Olympic teams) must obviously content himself with playing more Blacks than Whites, and earns the appreciation and gratitude of the coach and other players. If he draws every game, that is not a lacklustre performance, but a runaway success. It is easy to see that not every player is happy (or able) to accept such a task.
Anyway, the major role players would be on boards 2, 3, or 4. Putting a major role player on board 1 or 5 means that either (s)he has the wrong colour or doesn't play, half the games.
Canada has a lot of experience in putting a young strong but relatively inexperienced player on first board, in part because past Olympic regulations required it (e.g., Hebert in 1978 scored "only" 4-7, against the toughest opposition, but the team result of 11th was excellent. After Canada beat France 4-0 (a result to dream about in 2012!) in Round 12, Jean even got to play the immortal Spassky, playing for USSR, in the 13th round). For Jean, I'm sure this was an invaluable experience that has stood him in good stead throughout his chess career, but I suppose he can speak for himself, eh Jean?.
Or maybe other considerations are paramount. They come to play chess, and maybe putting them in a role, whether it is colour- or board- related, will reduce the package of results. New wine in old wineskins, like that. It's all something for the skilled, diplomatic, charming and authoritative team captain to figure.
interesting speculation even though it is 'fantasy' ...
the longer this thread goes, the more inclined I am to think that there *isn't* an error in the thread Title: roaster seems more appropriate than 'roster'
:)
I don't think anyone is being roasted. I picked my dream team before the invitations went out and I picked my board order. I don't know if it's the official team but suspect it might well be.
If it is the team, others should counter with their board order.
So far, I think I've even been on topic in this discussion. :)
How would you line up the team? The players have to be comfortable and agreeable to play the board so it's simply fantasy.
If you can meet the players wishes, fine. But generally they are flexible and quite happy with the board they get. You know, the difference between playing board 3 instead of board 4, for example, is quite subtle... Personally I would line up players in alphabetical order on odd days and in reverse order on even days. :) I have just realized that this could rule me out as team captain...
Last edited by Jean Hébert; Thursday, 22nd March, 2012, 05:28 PM.
Canada has a lot of experience in putting a young strong but relatively inexperienced player on first board, in part because past Olympic regulations required it (e.g., Hebert in 1978 scored "only" 4-7, against the toughest opposition, but the team result of 11th was excellent. After Canada beat France 4-0 (a result to dream about in 2012!) in Round 12, Jean even got to play the immortal Spassky, playing for USSR, in the 13th round). For Jean, I'm sure this was an invaluable experience that has stood him in good stead throughout his chess career, but I suppose he can speak for himself, eh Jean?
Of course that is the point in playing board one : to get a chance to play a legend. But the game itself vs Spassky was quite poor from my point of view and thus totally unmemorable. I would like my chances better today. :)
Of course that is the point in playing board one : to get a chance to play a legend. But the game itself vs Spassky was quite poor from my point of view and thus totally unmemorable. I would like my chances better today. :)
Yeah, OK, maybe I was playing up the Spassky thing. But the chance to play top opponents such as Gheorghiu, Kavalek, Dzindzi, Miles ... did that toughen you for future challenges?
Yeah, OK, maybe I was playing up the Spassky thing. But the chance to play top opponents such as Gheorghiu, Kavalek, Dzindzi, Miles ... did that toughen you for future challenges?
Yes but. :) If I had played one or two boards lower do you think that it would have made me significantly less tough today ? Possibly we make too much out of individual events or individidual games. In the long run what goes on in between events is probably more decisive. I think that the olympiads are a chance for each country to see where it stands compared to other countries and to recognize and reward its best players. When Canada does not manage to have its best team and reward them financially, it does not manage properly either of these goals.
Chesswise olympiads are just like any other high level competitions when it comes to "toughen up" players. And for the record, if I could erase the Spassky game I could boast a 50% record vs world champions (draw vs Petrosian). What a pity. :D
Tweet
Comment