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.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
7th Edmonton International-Gardner needs a point for norm
Is this a trick question? The answer if fairly obvious, to discourage draws. As for the scoring system, it is also used in some silly sport called soccer.
If you were putting up a ton of money to host an international tournament, would you want to see a bunch of short draws? I think not. If the participants didn't like the rules they shouldn't have joined the tournament. Some guy named Magnus Carlsen seems to take the same view of anti-draw rules and he tweeted this during the Anand-Gelfand match: "Seriously though, I don't blame the players for agreeing to all those early draws, it's just appalling that the rules allow them to"
Nicolas,
Your overuse of sarcasm (which I have underlined above) was neither necessary nor well received. I was not being sarcastic in my post, so I find your reply rather offensive.
I never thought to compare a chess tournament to a major soccer league since the two have absolutely nothing to do with each other. I also never thought to compare a tournament to the World Chess Championships. Maybe I lack the same vision as the organizers, however double-punishing short draws is beyond my understanding. To restrict the points is one thing, but then to fine the players is going overboard IMHO.
You can discourage draws all you want... the fact is, they are a part of the game, and you can't avoid them unless you play draw odds in every game.
Jordan
No matter how big and bad you are, when a two-year-old hands you a toy phone, you answer it.
Your overuse of sarcasm (which I have underlined above) was neither necessary nor well received. I was not being sarcastic in my post, so I find your reply rather offensive.
I never thought to compare a chess tournament to a major soccer league since the two have absolutely nothing to do with each other. I also never thought to compare a tournament to the World Chess Championships. Maybe I lack the same vision as the organizers, however double-punishing short draws is beyond my understanding. To restrict the points is one thing, but then to fine the players is going overboard IMHO.
You can discourage draws all you want... the fact is, they are a part of the game, and you can't avoid them unless you play draw odds in every game.
Jordan
The players accepted the conditions of the tournament. Apparently the ones who are actually playing in the tournament object less to it than you do.
A major upset occurred in the 5th round of the 7th Edmonton International as NM Rob Gardner (2202) had his first ever GM scalp against GM Anton Kovalyov (2619). Rob already played his 9th round game thus for him this was round 6. He now needs to score one more point (according to the traditional scoring system) to earn an IM norm.
The tournament is lead by GM Victor Mikhalevski with 13 points (4.5/5 traditional) followed by GM Nigel Short with 12 points (4/5) and NM Rob Gardner (11 points) 4/6
Follow the action including live and played games, pictures, standings at: http://albertachess.org/2012EICF.html (click the different tabs at the top).
The players accepted the conditions of the tournament. Apparently the ones who are actually playing in the tournament object less to it than you do.
Zeljko,
I fail to see your point.
Are you trying to say that because none of the players objected on Chesstalk that the rules must be valid? Or are you trying to say that because none of the players objected means that I cannot question the reasoning of some of the rules?
By the way, I did not object to anything, I asked a question. There is a big difference.
Jordan
No matter how big and bad you are, when a two-year-old hands you a toy phone, you answer it.
Are you trying to say that because none of the players objected on Chesstalk that the rules must be valid? Or are you trying to say that because none of the players objected means that I cannot question the reasoning of some of the rules?
By the way, I did not object to anything, I asked a question. There is a big difference.
Jordan
No I am saying the players are playing in the tournament and would have been aware of the conditions before hand. Whether they post on chesstalk is irrelevant. I am pointing out that you are not playing in the tournament and therefore have little say in what the rules are or are not. The organizers do not need to satisfy you as to what the coniditions are.
If that's your usual way of just asking a question then I don't think you have a good grasp on the difference between simply asking a question and asking a question in a confrontational manner? Or do you????? Not from your original statement you don't?????? As has been pointed out the obvious answer to your just a question is to discourage draws especially one presumes what are known as 'grandmaster draws' ie quick, agreed to draws without a real game being played. It's interesting that you decided to give the person who answered a lesson on the overuse of sarcasm but I think he would have learned all he needed to know using your original just a question as a model example:
So it's bad enough they went with a silly 3-1-0 scoring system, which already punishes draws, but they're going to further punish draws of less than 30 moves by deducting prize money? Why exactly????
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Tuesday, 3rd July, 2012, 03:20 PM.
...I am pointing out that you are not playing in the tournament and therefore have little say in what the rules are or are not. The organizers do not need to satisfy you as to what the coniditions are.
Zeljko,
So if I have "little say in what the rules are or not," then please tell me what the little say is that I have. Apparently my little say has nothing to do with the draw rules, otherwise you wouldn't be spewing all this rhetoric. Also, I'll repeat to you again that I never said anything about what the rules are, I asked a question.
If that's your usual way of just asking a question then I don't think you have a good grasp on the difference between simply asking a question and asking a question in a confrontational manner? Or do you????? Not from your original statement you don't?????? As has been pointed out the obvious answer to your just a question is to discourage draws especially one presumes what are known as 'grandmaster draws' ie quick, agreed to draws without a real game being played. It's interesting that you decided to give the person who answered a lesson on the overuse of sarcasm but I think he would have learned all he needed to know using your original just a question as a model example:
So it's bad enough they went with a silly 3-1-0 scoring system, which already punishes draws, but they're going to further punish draws of less than 30 moves by deducting prize money? Why exactly????
If you concluded that my adding extra three unnecessary extra question marks (not four or five as you did ;)) at the end of a question renders it "confrontational", then that's a communication error on my part. It was not meant to be confrontational.
Anyway, I already got the point from the very beginning that the organizers were trying to discourage draws, especially short draws. I also realize that the players knew what the rules were before the tournament started. However, the question was more asking if it is really fair or necessary to fine a player for agreeing to a short draw. Simply not re-inviting a player who agrees to too many draws would seem more appropriate.
Jordan
No matter how big and bad you are, when a two-year-old hands you a toy phone, you answer it.
So if I have "little say in what the rules are or not," then please tell me what the little say is that I have. Apparently my little say has nothing to do with the draw rules, otherwise you wouldn't be spewing all this rhetoric. Also, I'll repeat to you again that I never said anything about what the rules are, I asked a question.
If you concluded that my adding extra three unnecessary extra question marks (not four or five as you did ;)) at the end of a question renders it "confrontational", then that's a communication error on my part. It was not meant to be confrontational.
Anyway, I already got the point from the very beginning that the organizers were trying to discourage draws, especially short draws. I also realize that the players knew what the rules were before the tournament started. However, the question was more asking if it is really fair or necessary to fine a player for agreeing to a short draw. Simply not re-inviting a player who agrees to too many draws would seem more appropriate.
Jordan
If you can't even read your own initial statement and see the sacrastic tone and confrontation behind it then there's not much hope for you. If you can't see that you have nowhere as much say about the rules as the people playing in the tournament then abandon all hope ye who enter into conversation with this guy.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Tuesday, 3rd July, 2012, 05:44 PM.
Re: 7th Edmonton International-Gardner needs a point for norm
Ok Zeljko, you win.
Although there was no sarcasm or confrontation in my original message, obviously yours is the only opinion that matters, and rather than discussing the actual issues, you prefer to get stuck on punctuation. Therfore, I'll bow out of this conversation since it leads to nowhere except to fulfil your dream of filling cyberspace with garbage.
No matter how big and bad you are, when a two-year-old hands you a toy phone, you answer it.
Although there was no sarcasm or confrontation in my original message, obviously yours is the only opinion that matters, and rather than discussing the actual issues, you prefer to get stuck on punctuation. Therfore, I'll bow out of this conversation since it leads to nowhere except to fulfil your dream of filling cyberspace with garbage.
Don't worry I'm only partially filling the internet with garbage. There will still be plenty of room for your silly, sarcastic dumps.
Tweet
Comment