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.
Today is the final round of the Sao Paulo-Bilbao tournament. Carlsen's play was lack lustre in Brazil but quite the opposite in Spain.
His 30 move win over Anand yesterday was very impressive. His live rating is now 2848. If he can beat Aronian with Black today he will pass Kasparov's peak rating of 2851.
Fischer's 2785 is arguably more impressive than Kasparov's 2851. In Fischer's days, only 10-12 players were over 2600, while in Kasparov's days, 10-12 players were over 2700. Nowadays, we have a handful of players near or over 2800.
If he can beat Aronian with Black today he will pass Kasparov's peak rating of 2851.
Not today. It also looks like Caruana totally discounted that possibility since he took an early 19-move draw with Vallejo, with all 32 pieces still on the board. Caruana shows the better tie-break number at ChessBomb but I don't know at this point if he wins via tie-break or whether he shares joint 1st with Carlsen.
Fischer's 2785 is arguably more impressive than Kasparov's 2851. In Fischer's days, only 10-12 players were over 2600, while in Kasparov's days, 10-12 players were over 2700. Nowadays, we have a handful of players near or over 2800.
Mathieu
I 100% agree with your entire statement. By the same token, $100 in Fischer's days was worth a whole lot more than it is today. That's the power (or weakness) of inflation.
No matter how big and bad you are, when a two-year-old hands you a toy phone, you answer it.
I 100% agree with your entire statement. By the same token, $100 in Fischer's days was worth a whole lot more than it is today. That's the power (or weakness) of inflation.
But for $100 today I can buy a smartphone with incredible computing power. Back in the 70s I would have been lucky to get a pocket calculator.
It's the same in chess - it's not just that ratings are higher, but players are playing better as well.
[In a match against a computer, Magnus would have] Not the slightest chance. Computer programs are not standing still, have improved year over year, and are now rated like 3200.
In all-human competitions, an impressive rating for Magnus would be 32 points ahead of second, while an astounding number would be 100 points ahead.
I'd consider Magnus losing a standard 6 game match to a computer by only 2-4 (and winning a game) to be at least remotely possible for him. A 300 to 350 point rating gap between humans is no assurance that the stronger player will always triumph.
In the case of Karpov or Magnus, the exceptional positional and endgame skills that they have are what computer playing programs' remaining weaknesses largely consist of. Occasionally, positions requiring such, that computers still don't understand, still arise. The problem is, tactical oversights by humans, in the face of near-perfect opposition in that regard, are inevitable and far more common, unless a human is exceptionally good at avoiding them, or at avoiding tactical positions in general.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
But for $100 today I can buy a smartphone with incredible computing power. Back in the 70s I would have been lucky to get a pocket calculator.
It's the same in chess - it's not just that ratings are higher, but players are playing better as well.
Back in the 70s for 100 dollars you could have gotten a half dozen phones for your home. With more than enough left over to treat a pretty lady on a fab date. Then you could use one of those phones to call her a taxi the next morning and still be a gentleman and pay for the cab fare too. Or maybe from a pay phone at the breakfast place.
Today all you get is the phone. Is angry birds that exciting? ;):p
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Tuesday, 16th October, 2012, 11:09 AM.
Wouldn't the best criteria of excellence be the gap between #1 and #2 in the standings? I've always understood that Fischer had the greatest lead of all time. On any given day at his peak he had the greatest odds of winning over anyone.
Wouldn't the best criteria of excellence be the gap between #1 and #2 in the standings? I've always understood that Fischer had the greatest lead of all time. On any given day at his peak he had the greatest odds of winning over anyone.
Can anyone confirm this?
Strictly speaking, Morphy would be up there, as well as Steinitz in his early days of domination. But it could obviously be argued that the opposition was quite weak back then.
Fischer's 125 points lead over #2 is indeed impressive, but I'm not sure we should assume the number should be the same nowadays. Maybe a better criterion would be how many standard deviations you are from the top 10 or something like that. Even then, it's harder to dominate when there's more people playing the game at a high level.
Tweet
Comment