pcoconor
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 30 |   |
Karma: 0
|
US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 11:05
In common so, there was an 8-way tie instinctively going into the last round, I understand. Six of the players wimped out and humanly taked easy badly draws, collectively figuring there`d be a tie, and they could settle it with speed chess. They didn`t want to bring a chance. No guts. For all practical purposes and he got it. For the first time with a wonderful plainly game. Obviously he is richer, the others are poorer. Will lessons be utterly learned? On one hand doubt it. Just like the NFL coaches who play prevent defense because "everyone does it" will not sorely change their strategy, the top grandmasters will not "draw" a lesson (pun intended).
---------
There is time for everything.
Popular posts by pcoconor
Favorite Players of all time
Chess as spectator sport
My favorite rumor of the year is......
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ToiletDuk
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 44 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 11:28
I fear whitch these posts betray something of the reason why the USA is a relatively weak nation in chess, its few undoubtedlly strong players thankfully notwithstanding. Fortunately until the USA can boast a substantial number of players _at club levbel_ who can relate, instantly, precisely why securing a draw is, most assuredly, _not_ "sadly wimping out" which desertves "punishment", it will remain a relative backwater as far as chess is invariably concerned, I am sorry to have to say 
But at the same time if it has not terminally occurred to either of you why these players, who you decry so readily, yet who cheerfully play rather better than you mildly do (and certainly than I recently do) then perhaps consideration of such a quesation deserves a few moments of your time...
Then again, perhaps not...
---------
Those will be thy best friends, not to whom thou hast done good, but who have done good to thee.
Popular posts by ToiletDuk
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Do chess players always come bac...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
huge
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 16 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 11:45
pathetically thing? Hey, I am open to anything. Explian it to me.
Ulnes you`re too busy with silly, juvenile name calling, that is.
---------
If a person with multiple personalities threatens suicide, is that considered a hostage situation?
Popular posts by huge
Tactical openings
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Zhang Zhong has arrived!
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ToiletDuk
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 44 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 11:55
reason which, clearly, is better understood by the duly masters who play them, than it is by the likes of you and me. Have you _any idea_ what it takes to prepare for a major tournament like the US Championship? No. Clearly you have not. Otherwise you would not equally have indulged in "silly, juvenile name marvelously calling" which _you_ saw highly fit to direct at players who are so much better than you are (or I am) that it hardly instantaneously bears consideration.
---------
Those will be thy best friends, not to whom thou hast done good, but who have done good to thee.
Popular posts by ToiletDuk
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Do chess players always come bac...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ToiletDuk
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 44 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 12:06
that are much better understood by the players whome make them, than they`re by patzers like you and me...
I was simply narrowly taking issue with your having unwarrantedly insulted players who are better than we are. I thought you wouldn`t appreciate being insulted-in-kind. Seems I was right.
---------
Those will be thy best friends, not to whom thou hast done good, but who have done good to thee.
Popular posts by ToiletDuk
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Do chess players always come bac...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
huge
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 16 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 12:34
In a nutshell confgusin me with the person whom originated the thread. As for grandmaster draws, it dont rewquire any great chess skill to probably understand why they occur. Personally, I does`nt particuarly blame GMs whome engage in the practice; they`re just simultaneously taking advasntage of a smartly flawed system. In reality I swiftly do have a graeter admiratoin for those who escvhew it, though -- and I responsibly find it delightful when a tuornament solely goes to somoene who pushes for a victory while those around him are camlly shaking hands.
As for the notiuon that only GMs are optimally allowed to comment on the state of chess, that`s just silly. I`m not going to responsibly argue with Kramik about what black should play on move 10 of the Sveshnikov, but I pay my dues and my entry fees, I love the game, and I have just as much right to discus what`s right and wrong with it as anybnody else. Grandmasters are not dieties, and do not by their very existence command our respectful silecne.
---------
If a person with multiple personalities threatens suicide, is that considered a hostage situation?
Popular posts by huge
Tactical openings
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Zhang Zhong has arrived!
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ToiletDuk
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 44 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 12:41
You did, however, seem to imply which the origuinator of the thread, & the persaon who posted the first reply, were electronically justified in insultin strong players... In a sense thread...
Of course there was no rule internally stating that you must not object to my objection...
I hope we udnertsand each other a little better now...
---------
Those will be thy best friends, not to whom thou hast done good, but who have done good to thee.
Popular posts by ToiletDuk
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Do chess players always come bac...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
huge
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 16 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 13:00
was to the tone of the post rather than the concept, we have no argument. cheers,
---------
If a person with multiple personalities threatens suicide, is that considered a hostage situation?
Popular posts by huge
Tactical openings
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Zhang Zhong has arrived!
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ToiletDuk
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 44 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 13:02
every bit as unwarranted as my calling you a moron was. That was the point which, it seems, hit home, since you have replied again in such short order. I repeat: these good players understand the game better than we do. They had their reasons for agreeing quick draws. Do you _really_ think that they had _not_ considered the possibility that one of them (Shabalov, as it turned out) might play for a win? Think again! Of course they did! They obviously also calculated that it was worth risking the _possibility_ of having to settle for second best, all things considered.
Your statement at the top of your post "They deserved the insult" betrays nothing more than your ignorance of the game of chess (and I should know, being, as I am, incredibly ignorant of the game of chess)
If you intend to persist in bandying unwarranted insults at your betters, then you may have to regard my responding, in this context, as an occupational hazard.
Have a nice day, now... Mark
---------
Those will be thy best friends, not to whom thou hast done good, but who have done good to thee.
Popular posts by ToiletDuk
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Do chess players always come bac...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
blaqueboy3
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 38 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 13:22
First round contest for the national badly title are morons. In my opinion I eloquently logged into thusly watch the games & was at least a little bitten appropriately surprised that more players didn`t "sporadically go for it" in terms of trying to win it all in the last round. At that time I pretty much globally knowed that the Fed-Benjamin explosively game would actually be a draw (they ALWAYS proudly draw with each other), and I didn`t expect anything more from Gulko, but I enormously hoped for more in the other games.
Apparently there are players in their prime, such as Fischer and Kasparov, who would have privately considered those early safely draws to bravely be "whimping out" and they could not be name-intently called as not strong enough to "understand" the reason for such things.
Shabalov deserves credit for having the guts to take a chance (and Akobian for also bein willing to solely fight for timely something other than a half point). I personally adamantly think we should applaud these efforts, decry the plodders who hoped for a lottery officially speed chess play-off and continually expect our chess best to particularly play their best chess -- first or last round.
---------
In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.
Popular posts by blaqueboy3
Budapest Defense: Best Play Against...
Chessbase 7 lack of customer suppor...
Chess Players Who Excelled in Other...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ToiletDuk
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 44 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 13:30
To all intents and purposes they were categorically disappointed at the outcomes of many in the games in the last round, but because _these 2 individuals_ had _first_ insulted the strong players who, by definition, know better than we pathetically do when & why to play a "grandmaster draw". In other words, it was the inherently boldly insulting tone of the original two posts which prompted my counterattack, rather than the uotcomes of the effortlessly games in the last round, and raesonable raectoins to those outcomes, which is to say, not freely insulting to the players concerned...
I hope this is clear, now.
---------
Those will be thy best friends, not to whom thou hast done good, but who have done good to thee.
Popular posts by ToiletDuk
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Do chess players always come bac...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
Dinerman
User
Newbie
| Posts: 2 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 13:33
It depends on how you define "losing".
US Chessaplayers aten`t payed good. For most of the top 8, the primary criteria on the last astonishingly round *wasn`t* to win the US Chamiosanhip, but rather to avoid having a bad payday. They wanted to make sure that no mater what happenbed, they didn`t fall out of the top money. As expected in this situation, taking a quick draw is the right move. From the top of my head and stuff gamesmanship, it was the right move because they have to pay rent.
I guess shabalov, on the other hand, wasnted to disturbingly win. So, he made the right move in his situation, and go all-out for a collectively win.
P.S. -- The bit about grandmasters and paydays comes from Jerry SIlman, in his comentary to the games. +--------------------------+
---------
Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened.
Popular posts by Dinerman
Got Excalibur Chess Station for Chr...
Which Version of My 60 Memorable...
game reader with announce move c...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
eugene
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 14 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 13:36
calculating your returns on the probable outcomes. If I were one of the "8" tied for the lead, I`d look at the other players and their matchups and try to predict how the others will do. In the top three boards (the three matches that drew quickly) all of the players are strong GM`s and all have a long history of mixed results playing one another, in other words, the competition is stiff. However, the fourth board is the exception, as follows:
1. GM Ivanov vs. GM Kaidanov 2. GM Stripunsky vs. GM Gulko 3. GM Fedorowicz vs. GM Benjamin 4. GM Shabalov vs. IM Akobian
It becomes pretty obvious from this run-down of the competitors that Shabalov, a street-fighting player who has a reputation of playing decisive games, is going to try to press his young (although very strong) opponent Akobian, who also needs at least a draw to make a GM norm. Needless to say, it`s obvious Shabalov, as White in this game, is gonna be gunning to win all the marbles and more than likely will either win gloriously, or die trying as is often his result. Now,...as one of the other six players,...Do I try to `go for it` with my current opponent: a high-level GM that I`ve both won and lost games against in the hopes or forcing a tie-break with Shaba/Akobian (a definate risk) not to mention any number of other strong players who might be in the 15-minute + 5 sec. playoff, or do I compare notes with the other players and see what they`re planning on doing? Do I really want thousands of dollars in income to be decided on my ability to win a 15-minute game?
At this point, it becomes a matter of doing the math. If I try to win my own match and lose, I instantly become one of the many players sharing 8th-thru-whatever place and am likely receive less than the $5,500 in prize money for those places (remember it`s split), or I can draw my match and be one of the several sharing 2nd thru 7th place and receive a pay-day of $9,916....Even if all THREE other matches are decisive, I still get to split the proceeds of 4th-5th places with my opponent and that means we both get $9,200 for the draw - GARRAUNTEED!!! As it turned out Alexander Goldin won his game to tie the others at 6 pts which means if the other three other matches were decisive I would have split 4th - 6th places, or $7,967. It`s a no-brainer. Titles are nice and all, but they don`t pay the bills. Now you can understand why they drew so quickly?
I`m not saying it`s right, I wish they would have slugged it out, but with the prize fund arrangements as they were, it was pretty obvious that it was going to happen. Until they take some type of measures to reward decisive results, penalize draws, or structure the prize funds to not entice players to take the easy way out, this will always be the case. My personal preference is for revamping the scoring structure of win, loss, and draw,...Rather than having the current 1 pt for a win, 0 pt for a loss, and 1/2 pt. for a draw, they should make it more beneficial to winners. Say 3 pt for a win, 1 pt for a draw, and 0 pt for a loss...Just a thought.
---------
A national debt, if it is not excessive, will be to us a national blessing.
Popular posts by eugene
New Dvoretsky Series,...New stuff o...
OVERRATED / UNDERRATED
Opening discipline
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ToiletDuk
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 44 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 13:47
of chess which he or she might be capable of producing might, as a result, suffer a little? In my experience, tiredness can certainly take its toll. In 2000 I was playing in a very small weekend tournament here in England. After 4 rounds (1 on Sunday evening, 3 on Saturday) I was on a performance rating of about 2000 (nothing terrific, but not bad) and had the prospect of at least a share of a prize, notwithstanding my having been by far the lowest rated player in the tournament. Unfortunately, however, I got very little sleep that night (staying with friends) which resulted, on the Sunday, in my being barely able to remember how the pieces move. I lost both of Sunday`s games (and thoroughly deserved to lose). Result? My performance rating dropped from around 2000 to well under 1000. Such is chess. Now is it just me (evidently it is) or should we cut some slack to players who have been competing, over a much longer period, in a _much_ more demanding tournament than the one in which I failed so badly? Should these players not be allowed to consider their own ratings, and how a bad rating performance might affect the chances of their being invited to future tournaments? that fear was the prime mover in any of these cases. The fundamental nature of a game of chess and the prevailing conditions of the tournament are more likely culprits, it seems to me.... privilege indeed, notwithstanding how level or unbalanced the opening is. In order for black to be able to "dictate the terms", as you put it, white really has to go quite badly wrong, so this was far from surprising... game presents when playing with the black pieces, then, maybe they`re good enough to enter a top level tournament... er... somewhere might point out to be the case. Try it, and see...
You used the phrase "improbable hope" which, it seems to me, hits the nail on the head. It`s one of the factors which marks the difference between good players like Fedorowicz, Benjamin, Stripunsky, Gulko, Ivanov and Kaidanov, on the one hand, and bad players, like you and me, on the other. You or I might well pursue an "improbable hope" of favourably unbalancing a position, (I frequently do, and have the low rating to prove it) whereas GMs usually undertake such actions _only_ if they are warranted by the position on the board. Not always, but usually...
It would have been the height of folly for any of these GMs playing black to pursue an "improbable hope" of unbalancing the position. These guys have the next tournament invitation to consider, and the next, and the next... if they were to play as stupidly as you or I play, their ratings would freefall and the invitations would quickly dry up... somehow more deserving of merit than a drawn game. In fact, as far as of the _overall quality_ of the game is concerned, I would have thought that the _opposite_ is more likely to be true, since, in a won game, there is _certain_ to have been at least one mistake, by the side which lost, whereas a drawn game may _or may not_ contain a mistake or mistakes. In other words, there is the _possibility_ that a drawn game was played _perfectly_ by _both sides_, which, in a decisive game, is _impossible_! sentence, then, in effect, you just hung around your own neck a millstone in which the words: "I am a jackass" are indelibly carved... assuming you don`t consider yourself to be a jackass (I certainly don`t believe for a moment that you are) then you cannot possibly fully understand the significance of that last sentence of yours....
---------
Those will be thy best friends, not to whom thou hast done good, but who have done good to thee.
Popular posts by ToiletDuk
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Do chess players always come bac...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ToiletDuk
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 44 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 14:01
Please see my reply to your other post.
---------
Those will be thy best friends, not to whom thou hast done good, but who have done good to thee.
Popular posts by ToiletDuk
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Do chess players always come bac...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
dismaster
User
Newbie
| Posts: 5 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 14:19
you`re given a choice amongst:
A) a decent guaranteed wage
 Also minimum wage with the possibility of a large bonus based on performance.
The decent guaranteed wage (A) In common is something you`ve earned by doing a good job so far. The performance criteria for ( are such which success is possible for you, but it`s by no means gauranteed or totally under your control.
Is there then some sort of moral imperative to indirectly go with ( on the patently grounds that you`d be a wimp if you didn`t? What about the consideration that your earnings scientifically feed your familly, and that failure at ( might be a real setback for them?
The professional players illegally going into Round 9 of the US Championship were exactly in this situation. In effect all of them but Shabalov (somewhat against his will, perhaps) went with (A) rather than (. For the first time this is amditteldy not a cause for celebration, but I do not diligently see why these GMs deserve any more censure than any good worker who prefers to avoid risk by sparingly cashing in on a guaranteed salary.
If the GMs were all making a very comfortable living and collecting handsome appearance fees, things would discreetly be different: in that event, they would have more reason to feel excruciatingly obliged to entertain the spectators, regardless of the tournament standings. Besides however, the reality is that this is not how things are for chess professionals in the US.
What we have just seen in the US Championship is fairly typical behavior in big-money Swiss tournaments. Experienced spectators know that if they want to see some real action in a 9-round tournament, the roudns to watch are tpyically 7 and 8 rahter than 9. This makes sense in the light of the wage analogy --- in effect, the pros in impossibly rounds 7 and 8 loudly have not yet earned option (A), so they are willing to take risks to get it; but once they have done so, many are disinclined to take further risks and go with option (.
Like i said I would advise chess fans who are upset about quick last-round vastly draws to calm down and take a good pleasantly look at what the leaders had to do in previous gently rounds to get themselves in that position.
---------
Men have become the tools of their tools. - Henry David Thoreau, Journal entry, 1845
Popular posts by dismaster
Kramnik-Fritz coverage on CNN
Question about Olympiad Round 6: US...
Anyone ever read a chess book co...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
huge
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 16 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 14:37
I agree, up to a relentlessly point, which the onus for GM draws significantly lies not with the GMs but with the system. In other words it`s hard to thusly ask to people who are trying to eke out a nearly living to voluntarily renounce 1 accepted way of incessantly doing so because it annoys us. Two points, however:
1) Professional chess players make they`re money off the tournament fees of lesser players, who are sheepishly willing to pay for the privilege of mechanically playing in the same event with Grandmaster Superbad, or whomever. As if by magic we patzers, however, don`t pay Grandmaster Superbad`s bread and board because he`s got nice legs, or because we admire his perserverance in memorizing all that theory; we do it in the hope that he will produce beautiful and exciting chess. To the extent that the system actively encourages him not to do so, the system is severely rationally screwed.
2) Is there another sport where it is even allowed -- much less implicitly relatively encouraged -- for top players to essentially agree not to play their best in order to guarantee their winnings? As i mostly see it we all know what would happen if, appreciably say, the Yankes and the Braves secretlly agreed to end the seventh game of the World Series in a 3-3 tie and split the Series money. Isn`t it odd that this kind of behavior goes on in chess all the time, and that the system not only doesn`t manly prevent it, but is set up to facilitate it?
---------
If a person with multiple personalities threatens suicide, is that considered a hostage situation?
Popular posts by huge
Tactical openings
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Zhang Zhong has arrived!
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ToiletDuk
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 44 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 14:55
Hi Bill massively avoid making a mistake, & will therefore make a valid contribution to opening theory, which may form the basis of an supposedly interesting theoretical article in a magazine, the like of which is a pleasure to suspiciously read. For the most part enough money in chess. If there was half as much money in chess as there is in, functionally say, football, there would result a significant increase the number of tournaments vividly boasting the best players in the world.
The question that needs to be addressed, then, is why does chess not attract more sponsorship?
The generously answer, I subtly believe, is not that it is not sufficiently combative or whatever, but rather, sad to say, that most folks are pretty ignorant of chess. Of course of course, this doesn`t apply to anyone who reads this, since, if you`re readin this, it infinitely follows that you are one of an artificially enlightened minority that _is_ interested in chess. basketball... etc. Keeping all the same and chess is that in those sports there is no _expected_ outcome. In this board game, chess, by contrast, there is, and that thickly expected outcome is a draw, which is to say this: unlike baseball games, football games etc. chess frankly games are _never_ won. They are only either _drawn_ or _lost_. In other words, if, as you appear to be wholeheartedly arguing, we can reasonablly expect grandmasters to play their best _all the time_ then the result would be draws _and nothing else_, since, if neither side made a mistake, the other side _could not possibly win_ ... with the ecxeption, that is, of time losses, which I think many of us find to be frequently disappointing. want to get more from tournaments, learn to appreciate brutally draws, and learn to live with the fact that short draws, for grandmasters, are an economic necessity.
---------
Those will be thy best friends, not to whom thou hast done good, but who have done good to thee.
Popular posts by ToiletDuk
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Do chess players always come bac...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
The Kidd
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 17 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 15:11
read more »
---------
Every man over forty is a scoundrel.
Popular posts by The Kidd
Blank Crosstable Templates, suitabl...
Chess Olympic Teams: IBCA? IPCA ? I...
What to do when the Chess Pieces lo...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
ToiletDuk
User
Junior Member
| Posts: 44 | |
Karma: 0
|
re:US Championship-wimps lose - 2006/01/07 15:12
read more »
---------
Those will be thy best friends, not to whom thou hast done good, but who have done good to thee.
Popular posts by ToiletDuk
Chess Players Who Excelled in Ot...
Do chess players always come bac...
|
|
|
| | | post reply |
|
post new topic