Chess Forum
legalserv.com << online chess - < chess - chess > - chess online >>
| From | Message | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Posted by tag1153 legalserv.com 6/01/2008 01:23:21 Play online chess |  Subject: Controversy in U.S. Women's ChampionshipMessage:  main.uschess.org
Be sure to view the Armageddon game in question. Irina has a point (although I agree she should have said something right then and there....) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Posted by kansaspatzer legalserv.com 6/01/2008 04:01:08 Play online chess | Message: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Posted by heinzkat legalserv.com 6/01/2008 05:21:51 Play online chess | Happy times behind the chess board Message: www.youtube.com ——— Chess piece value — When I teach a class of beginning players, it is customary to explain the “value” of the chess pieces. If both sides exchange pieces, knowing their approximate value will help explain who gets the better deal. Some things are pretty obvious, like if I capture a queen and my opponent captures a bishop, we both know who is doing better. But some things are not so clear. I try to make analogies when I teach. Some hit the mark, and some confuse the student even more! But before I try to confuse my readers, let us look at standard values: Queen = 9, Rook = 5, Bishop = 3, Knight = 3, Pawn = 1. The king does not have a capture value, since we do not capture the king. (You can’t say, “I captured his knight and two pawns for... Posted by ganstaman | legalserv.com 6/01/2008 09:55:05 Play online chess Message: The only part I don't like is when she 'explains' her own throwing of the chess piece at the end of the game. She basically says "It's not as bad as what Anna did, so you shouldn't care about it." Saying sorry with one sentence to explain that she was more fustrated than normal would have been ten times better. ——— Chess: Karpov turns the screw — Karpov-Smyslov, Moscow 1972. White has come out of the opening with a certain spatial advantage. Now he has to find a plan. Warning: you're not looking for a sacrificial combination – this is Karpovian, it's all about subtlety and strategy. RB: I've nominated Karpov's Strategic Wins 1: The Making of a Champion by Tibor Karolyi (Quality Chess) for our book of the year award. It's a year-on-year account of Karpov's career from 1961 to 1985, nicely laid out and well annotated. Karpov's style is positional, unhurried and exceptionally deep. Constantly alert to the counter-stroke, he likes to make small improving moves. Some of Karpov's choices remain, even with the help of a chess computer, mysterious, as ... Posted by heinzkat | legalserv.com 6/01/2008 10:49:51 Play online chess That was just an alternative wayMessage: ——— Winning in long run requires motivation — Chess is a worthy pursuit for all seasons of life; 6- and 7-year-olds can play a pretty good game. In recent years, chess players in their early teens have become grandmasters. And a 20-year-old, Magnus Carlsen, is the highest-rated chess player in the world. Meanwhile, 82-year-old Viktor Korchnoi is still capable of winning tournaments, though not at the same level as before. When do chess grandmasters reach their peak? The ballpark figure used to be 35. But two chess players in their early 40s — the champion, Viswanathan Anand; and the challenger, Boris Gelfand — will face off for the world title in the summer. Gelfand embraces the age factor. He sees no decline in his ... Posted by tim_b | legalserv.com 6/01/2008 11:00:55 Play online chess Message: ——— Chess: European Players Are Well Paid for Team Play — The difference between the game in the United States and Europe is easy to illustrate by comparing two team competitions currently under way. The European Club Cup, which ends Sunday in Slovenia, features many of the world’s best chess players, among them Boris Gelfand, Peter Svidler, Teimour Radjabov and Ruslan Ponomariov. They have no particular loyalty to their chess clubs. They are playing because they are being paid, often quite well. And the clubs with the deepest pockets, like OSG Baden Baden in Germany and Tomsk-400 in Russia, are the only ones with a legitimate chance to win the chess tournament. Compare that to the setup of the United States Chess League, which just finished its fifth week of ... Posted by chessnovice | legalserv.com 6/01/2008 12:11:49 Play online chess ...Message: ——— Rule change raises hopes of Vishy Anand meeting Magnus Carlsen — A change to the world chess championship candidates rules has raised hopes that India's Vishy Anand, the holder, will meet Norway's Magnus Carlsen, 20, who tops the chess rankings, in a 2012 or 2013 title match. The 2011 candidates in Kazan was settled by knock-out, where Russia's Alex Grischuk controversially made quick draws in the long classical games to reach the final via blitz tie-breaks. Subsequently, elite chess grandmasters voted for an all-play-all format. APAs were used from 1950 until 1962, when Bobby Fischer claimed that his Soviet rivals had arranged results to minimise the American's chances. The chess tournament was replaced by matches, in which Fischer famously destroyed ... Posted by scarper | legalserv.com 6/01/2008 14:03:59 Play online chess Message: Posted by ionadowman | legalserv.com 6/01/2008 16:16:34 Play online chess Fascinating...Message: Consider: you are sitting at the board, the enemy makes a move and forgets to punch his clock. Are you entiotled to make your move? Well, according to the USCF Official rules of 35 years ago, one would have to infer yes. The rules actually talk about whether the arbiter, noticing the omission ought to warn the player. The Rules come down against the arbiter doing any such thing. Which suggests to me that the opponent doesn't have to wait until the enemy punches the clock in order to make a move. The Rules do state that (14.4) "When determining whether the prescribed number of moves has been made in the given time, the last move is not considered as completed until after the player has stopped his clock." Given the time control in the "Armageddon Match" this doesn't apply. From that perspective, I incline to the view that Irina Krush doesn't really have a case. But I do sympathise. Look where the clocks are placed: as is standard, to the right of the Black pieces. Playing right-handed, Black's hand has less distance to travel to the clock; White has to reach right across her body to reach the clock. Simply: the physical placing of the clocks confers an advantage to a right-handed player of Black, or a left-handed player of White. We might decide this is unfair, but look at the time control: 6 minutes for White; 4 and a half for Black, who gets the margin of draw. I think the extra 90 seconds ought to subsume any slight disadvantage to White owing to the physical placing of the clocks. The problem I have with this whole affair is the problem I have with a good many sports events: this stupid insistence that there has to be a sole winner. I quite fail to understand what is so bad about joint winners of a sporting event; why a draw/tie/dead heat is to be avoided at all cost. This insane stampede for determining the winner of a competition leads to some peculiar results: The UEFA Champions' League being determined by a penalty shootout; the "Golden Point" in Rugby League; even the toss of a coin on one or two occasions I've seen. The "Golden Point", or sudden death in some sporting events makes a certain degree of sense, but even then it might be a matter of luck who begins the period of sudden death with possession of the initiative (i.e. the ball, in ball games, say). But others strike me as entirely arbitrary, including the method used in US Chess Championship. The two protagonists ought to have shared the title. If there had to be a winner, the process by which it is determined has to be entirely symmetrical: keep playing pairs of games under whatever time control you choose until one side is a clear point ahead after an even number of games. That final game was asymmetrical, and therefore biased. I'm not saying it's biased against White, be it noted: for all I know it may be biased against Black (however, it became pretty clear that the advantage of one minute was't enough to offset Black's margin of draw!).The fact that the bias exists is in my view sufficient to disqualify it as a fair means of determining a winner. It would have been fairer to have played a second game under the same time control having swapped colours. But doesn't this game strike you as arbitrary anyway? Where is the quality of chess? The whole concept of blitz emphasises one skill over others - the ability to play fairly well quickly over accuracy of analysis, endgame skill, strategic planning, tactical vision... Well, when all's said and done, I can't see the USCF overturning the decision, and, on balance, it probably ought not. But, if there absolutely must be a single Champion or the world will explode, then do it by fair and symmetrical means. Cheers, Ion Posted by cascadejames | legalserv.com 6/01/2008 18:17:25 Play online chess Avoiding blitzMessage: own. Posted by ionadowman | legalserv.com 6/02/2008 04:24:30 Play online chess Before anyone comments on it...Message: Don't make the process a fair one, though... Cheers, Ion Posted by pgroenborg | legalserv.com 6/02/2008 06:53:25 Play online chess holding down the clockMessage: Do you see the same thing? I love blitz and am perhaps too familiar with the thing. I'm with Irena. Posted by bucklehead | legalserv.com 6/02/2008 11:23:38 Play online chess It's a tough call. Message: Posted by tag1153 | legalserv.com 6/02/2008 14:23:28 Play online chess response to I.K.'s letterMessage: main.uschess.org Posted by ionadowman | legalserv.com 6/02/2008 15:18:00 Play online chess response to I.K.'s letter... Message: It does indicate that not a lot has changed since the publication of my own copy of the USCF/FIDE Official Rule Book of 1974. Neither player played strictly illegally in the time scramble (give or take I.K.'s failure to restore the rook she knocked over - had she done so she would have lost the sooner). It is sad, I think, to see an important event like this settled in such a fashion, not only by a means that can be described justly as arbitrary; but also end in such ... well, not acrimony exactly, but not a particularly savoury taste in one's mouth. I go back to my earlier idea. If you can't settle the contest in satisfactory manner, then accept the notion of a joint winner. Cheers, Ion |