14 Aug 06
Originally posted by z00tMost of my games are 7 day timeout or longer (I have 50 in my 14 day timeout folder currently). So I don't even make one move a week in most of them. I've made 260 moves so far this month. But I guess that would be impossible wouldn't it.
I'm not against anyone subscriber or non-subscriber playing more than 100 simultaneous games. If you have ever seen a grandmaster simul you will note they take on much lower opposition and then play many games bashing them easily. However GM vs. GM contests are different and you never see real GMs taking on more than one serious opponent. The amount of planning ...[text shortened]... wever 100 simul games given your opposition are within 100 Elo points of you is an eye-raiser.
16 Aug 06
Originally posted by z00tcc is different, however I would not say cc players are necessarily weak at otb chess! Personally I use cc chess to assist in my otb games. Is David Tebb (one of the better players on this site) weak? if so how come he managed to beat Kasparov in an otb game?
Yup one more reason for me not to subscribe. If you read an article on Chessbase not long ago it showed how people :-
- play in OTB chess (slow as well as blitz)
- play against their computers and fiddle settings or press pause
- play online blitz
- play correspondence chess
While correspondence chess is "on the menu", it is a low priority for reasons ...[text shortened]... s/analysis boards (allowed on this site) and engines(disallowed here but allowed by the ICC).
16 Aug 06
1 edit
Originally posted by stevetoddWho is David Tebb? Show me his games at any British Championship or several games versus recognised players. His game against Kasparov could have been a simul so I cannot comment on that.
cc is different, however I would not say cc players are necessarily weak at otb chess! Personally I use cc chess to assist in my otb games. Is David Tebb (one of the better players on this site) weak? if so how come he managed to beat Kasparov in an otb game?
With the hospitality available to CC players such as
- ability to consult opening books and opening databases
- analysis board
- loads of time per move
Joe Public ranked 2100 at CC would be no better than 1900 Elo OTB or 1700 at speed chess. The hospitality available to him in CC are serious handicaps at OTB/speed chess. That is why some highly ranked CC players call knights "horsies" as they have learnt there trade in the shortcut school of chess.
You will note that the likes of Kasparov and Karpov are strong at all types of chess including rapid chess/blitz. You would be cheating yourself if you were a master at CC chess but an unknown in other forms of chess, like a bodybuilder with hulk biceps and twigs for legs.
16 Aug 06
Originally posted by z00tThere a several other games involving David Tebb at chessgames.com.
Who is David Tebb? Show me his games at any British Championship or several games versus recognised players. His game against Kasparov could have been a simul so I cannot comment on that.
With the [b]hospitality available to CC players such as
- ability to consult opening books and opening databases
- analysis board
- loads of time per move
Joe Pu ...[text shortened]... ut an unknown in other forms of chess, like a bodybuilder with hulk biceps and twigs for legs.[/b]
http://tinyurl.com/k4e9k
16 Aug 06
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveI'm not trying to belittle any CC players but Tebb's victory over Kasparov in a simul illustrates perfectly why I think it is out of order for a mere mortal to take on 100 or more opponents ranked within 100 Elo points of him/herself on a daily basis in CC. Grandmasters in simuls take on juniors or beginners and they are usually 100s of points below them.
There a several other games involving David Tebb at chessgames.com.
http://tinyurl.com/k4e9k
If you can show me a few dozen CC players with a say 2300 rating and a similar one or better at OTB chess and rapid chess/blitz I could fathom the argument that CC chess despite its concessions is as good as other forms of chess.
16 Aug 06
Originally posted by z00tHere's the thing. We don't care what you think. We don't have to prove anything to you.
I'm not trying to belittle any CC players but Tebb's victory over Kasparov in a simul [b]illustrates perfectly why I think it is out of order for a mere mortal to take on 100 or more opponents ranked within 100 Elo points of him/herself on a daily basis in CC. Grandmasters in simuls take on juniors or beginners and they are usually 100s of points bel ...[text shortened]... fathom the argument that CC chess despite its concessions is as good as other forms of chess.[/b]
16 Aug 06
Originally posted by XanthosNZThanks luv you've just proved my point. This would be very handy for a Wikipedia/Encyclopaedia Britannica Article on CC chess :- its merits and the supposed feats of some of its exponents. The lack of evidence of CC players being as good as or better than OTB players is a bit worrying though. Kinda gives that sinking feeling. I would have expected all of that activity to produce OTB stars.
Here's the thing. We don't care what you think. We don't have to prove anything to you.
Any other takers? Can anyone show me a few dozen CC players with a say a 2300 CC rating and a similar one or better at OTB chess and rapid chess/blitz?
z00t! z00t!
16 Aug 06
Originally posted by z00tNo one should really be 'worried' about any of this; you're comparing apples to oranges. You might as well criticize a sprinter for failing to beat a marathon runner.
[b]Thanks luv you've just proved my point. This would be very handy for a Wikipedia/Encyclopaedia Britannica Article on CC chess :- its merits and the supposed feats of some of its exponents. The lack of evidence of CC players being as good as or better than OTB players is a bit worrying though. Kinda gives that sinking feeling. I would have e ...[text shortened]... 2300 CC rating and a similar one or better at OTB chess and rapid chess/blitz?
z00t! z00t![/b]
17 Aug 06
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemOr complaining that polevaulters are cheating compared to high jumpers? They are two different disciplines. One can be good at one and not as good at the other.
No one should really be 'worried' about any of this; you're comparing apples to oranges. You might as well criticize a sprinter for failing to beat a marathon runner.
17 Aug 06
Then why are top chessmasters like the KKs or even Fischer strong at OTB slowchess as well as rapid chess? Fischer played Short on a rapid chess site and he still displayed the "steel".
It may be that the hospitality available in CC defeats the purposes of chess - sportsmanship and gamesmanship resulting in weak/underpar perfomances in OTB chess.
I heard a top CC player defeated HYDRA at CC chess but I have not seen any similar OTB perfomances from him. Now that is a bit of a shame really.
Gens una sumus?
17 Aug 06
Originally posted by z00tWhy don't Kasparov, Karpov and Fischer play correspondence chess? You must admit it's a bit disturbing that they allow other (obviously inferior) players to claim the top spots on the CC rating lists. 🙄
Then why are top chessmasters like the KKs or even Fischer strong at OTB slowchess as well as rapid chess? Fischer played Short on a rapid chess site and he still displayed the "steel".
It may be that the hospitality available in CC defeats the purposes of chess - sportsmanship and gamesmanship resulting in weak/underpar perfomances in OTB chess.
I heard ...[text shortened]... milar OTB perfomances from him. Now that is a bit of a shame really.
[b]Gens una sumus?[/b]
17 Aug 06
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemSince CC has not produced any great OTB players, they would not be interested. However if the guy who beat Hydra in CC could reproduce the same prowess in OTB chess and win opens/matches vs esatblished pros then the world would sit up and notice.
Why don't Kasparov, Karpov and Fischer play correspondence chess? You must admit it's a bit disturbing that they allow other (obviously inferior) players to claim the top spots on the CC rating lists. 🙄
I don't think any sponsor worth his salt would invest the kind of money put into OTB chess to see players consulting databases and opening books. Neither would any paying spectators.
17 Aug 06
Originally posted by z00tThe difference between Kasparov and a correspondence master is that Kasparov consults his books and databases a few minutes before the games, whereas the corr. guy can do it during the games.
Since CC has not produced any great OTB players, they would not be interested. However if the guy who beat Hydra in CC could reproduce the same prowess in OTB chess and win opens/matches vs esatblished pros then the world would sit up and notice.
I don't think any sponsor worth his salt would invest the kind of money put into OTB chess to see players consulting databases and opening books. Neither would any paying spectators.
Funny how you won't criticize Hydra for accessing books and databases during the game. Seriously, how well do you think it would manage the opening without its opening book?
Once Kasparov wins a CC match against a top CC player, I'll concede that he is superior in every form of the game.
Finally, I love the comment about sponsorship. If only the sponsors knew how top GM's employ "seconds" to analyze for them at tournaments! If only they could see the GM's preparing with their laptops with complete ChessBase DVD sets of all the important games and openings used in the last century (purchased with your dollars, Mr. John Q. Spectator). OTB chess is soooo much purer than CC. 🙄🙄🙄