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.
Re: London Classic - GM Magnus Carlsen the highest rated EVER!
I am not sure what this graph really tells us when it is extended across different eras. Fischer in his day, and Karpov in his, were arguably more dominant than Carlsen is today by quite a margin but their ratings are pre-inflation and thus much lower. Even Kasparov although closer in time to the present was arguably at least as dominant as Carlsen today. Does anyone seriously believe that, say, Radjabov, is by any measure a greater player than these?
I place more store in relativities. Each era has had one truly dominant player. Enough said.
Suppose Fischer entered a time machine in 1973 to visit 2013, and then met up with Carlsen for a match, lost, went crazy, and returned to 1973. Most likely Carlsen would win. Why? Because Carlsen lives in an environment where players have greater knowledge of the game. Databases, engines, online play, and general experience all contribute to more awareness of what best play looks like, and that knowledge is channeled into decision making.
So what does this prove? Carlsen is better informed than Fischer was. That says nothing about their intelligence or competitive ability.
The difference now between first and second is smaller than then, but what does that prove? The competitive pool has grown, and there are more outstanding players because there are more players with access to quality material. So still nothing is proved.
The only thing we can prove is that Fischer was better than Spassky, and Carlsen is presently a little better than Nakamura.
Suppose Fischer entered a time machine in 1973 to visit 2013, and then met up with Carlsen for a match, lost, went crazy, and returned to 1973. Most likely Carlsen would win. Why? Because Carlsen lives in an environment where players have greater knowledge of the game. Databases, engines, online play, and general experience all contribute to more awareness of what best play looks like, and that knowledge is channeled into decision making.
So what does this prove? Carlsen is better informed than Fischer was. That says nothing about their intelligence or competitive ability.
The difference now between first and second is smaller than then, but what does that prove? The competitive pool has grown, and there are more outstanding players because there are more players with access to quality material. So still nothing is proved.
The only thing we can prove is that Fischer was better than Spassky, and Carlsen is presently a little better than Nakamura.
Carlsen is a "little better" than Nakamura? No offense to H.N. but I think Carlsen is presently a lot better and much more consistent than any of the other top players with the possible exception (in consistency) of Kramnik
Re: London Classic - GM Magnus Carlsen the highest rated EVER!
I find chess at the top not so exciting as before. Does anybody understand Aronian's play with White? The second-third ranked player in the world plays totally uninspired for some years now. How many games can be classified as "memorable"?
Carlsen is best in today's chess environment due to his determination and motivation. Impossible to compare him with Fischer or even Kasparov. Rating does not say the whole story, he must pass 3000 to be really relevant. Which I wish he will, as with no doubt he is the best player of the "New Age".
Re: London Classic - GM Magnus Carlsen the highest rated EVER!
Originally posted by Laurentiu GrigorescuView Post
I find chess at the top not so exciting as before. Does anybody understand Aronian's play with White? The second-third ranked player in the world plays totally uninspired for some years now. How many games can be classified as "memorable"?
Carlsen is best in today's chess environment due to his determination and motivation. Impossible to compare him with Fischer or even Kasparov. Rating does not say the whole story, he must pass 3000 to be really relevant. Which I wish he will, as with no doubt he is the best player of the "New Age".
I think 3000 is a bit steep but I think this way of thinking is correct.
There was a time when Kasparov was the only 2800, Karpov the only 2700 and the rest of the 'super' gms were in the 2600s. For Carlsen's rating and overall performance to be as impressive as Kasparov's he will need to reach at least 2900 (since there are only a couple players in the 2800s), also I believe it was between 1981-1990 that Kasparov won every single major tournament he entered (15 or so) in a row, until something like that comes from Carlsen I don't think it is reasonable to call him the best player ever.
Tweet
Comment