PDA

View Full Version : The Unthinkable . . . and the Mundane



arosar
15-10-2004, 02:28 PM
In the September 04 issue of Fast Company - world numero uno, Kasparov gives us some insights into making a success in both chess and business. His message is straightfoward. Never underestimate the opponent, be bold and pay attention to even the most mundane detail.

"Smart executives, correspondingly, must understand that their competitors are at least as smart as they are. Only the most arrogant fail to acknowledge that they do not have a monopoly on brainpower, ideas, or will. In chess, I know that my rival sees everything I see. Even if I do the unthinkable -- a bold, unprecedented move calculated to leave him gasping -- I must assume he has anticipated it and will have an equally daring answer. Call it the courage to accept humility".

Enjoy: http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/86/kasparov.html

AR

Rhubarb
15-10-2004, 02:38 PM
"Call it the courage to accept humility."

Hahahahahahahaaaaaaaar. Fathead really cracks me up sometimes.

Edit: Hey what happened to your next post AR? Of course I knew it was Kasparov's quote, not you, hence the quote marks (you didn't really think I'd call you Fathead, did you?) Anyway, I've taken your name out of the quote now.

P.S. I really like the blurb at the end:

"Garry Kasparov has been the number-one-ranked chess player in the world since he won the world championship from Anatoly Karpov in 1985."

How else to make people believe you're the world champion without actually saying so?

arosar
15-10-2004, 02:58 PM
FMD Greg man, I wish you go back to your real name. It's so disconcerting this kegless.

AR

Rhubarb
15-10-2004, 03:20 PM
FMD Greg man, I wish you go back to your real name. It's so disconcerting this kegless.

AR
Yeah okay, I'll see if Jeo'll field another change-handle request.

BTW, as I recall, Kasparov was rated higher than Karpov at least a year before he became World Champion, but somehow that doesn't fit neatly into this particular marketing puff.

ursogr8
15-10-2004, 04:15 PM
BTW, as I recall, Kasparov was rated higher than Karpov at least a year before he became World Champion, but somehow that doesn't fit neatly into this particular marketing puff.


Ooo.
How quickly marketing puff. enters the chess BB lexicon.

I wonder if there are grades of 'spin'?
Expect Amiel to lodge a URL on this I guess.

starter

arosar
15-10-2004, 04:22 PM
How quickly marketing puff. enters the chess BB lexicon.

Yes, but you still don't get it. And you'll never get it.

AR

ursogr8
15-10-2004, 04:37 PM
Yes, but you still don't get it. And you'll never get it.

AR
hi Amiel

You know, you have become very judgemental and policing this week.
Is everything OK?
No after-shocks of your car accident?

Now, gg'' is doing his best.

That is constructive feedback for you my friend.

starter

arosar
15-10-2004, 04:43 PM
You know, you have become very judgemental and policing this week.

Nah mate, naah...We've all just about had it with you slipping in your continual support for the unmentionable. It ain't gettin' up anymore, 'right?

You never got 'puff' then - you'll never get it now.

AR

ursogr8
15-10-2004, 09:02 PM
Nah mate, naah...We've all just about had it with you slipping in your continual support for the unmentionable. It ain't gettin' up anymore, 'right?

You never got 'puff' then - you'll never get it now.

AR
Yeh, yar' right Amiel

It was a lost cause wasn't it.

Horatio on the bridge stuff, right.

Listen could you tell your mates that it is all over, and not to be slipping puffery into the conversation. I mean..like..its knee-jerk for me every time it comes up.

That's it. I am finished with the topic. No more from me.
It was an easy win for you'all wasn't it; against the reputation of the young colt who is not to be named. :silenced:

starter


Btw, who are you voting for in the ACF Presidency? :uhoh:

Bill Gletsos
15-10-2004, 10:34 PM
Btw, who are you voting for in the ACF Presidency? :uhoh:
Only the state association appointed delegates get a vote so unless AR finds himself appointed he wont get a vote.
Now considering AR has indicated he wont be going to Mt. Buller then I dont see that happening.

ursogr8
15-10-2004, 10:59 PM
Only the state association appointed delegates get a vote so unless AR finds himself appointed he wont get a vote.
Now xonsidering AR has indicated he wont be going to Mt. Buller then I dont see that happening.

Yes Bill; I knew all that.
But of course NSW being democratic obviously instructs its appointed delegates in such an open and shut motion. And of course, Amiel, as a member of a Club gets to vote on how his Club delegate advises the state delegate. Tell me it is all true and mature to this level, Bill.

The State delegates don't just rock up to Mt B. without Club input do they.

I mean if there is no instructing going on then delegates could be relying on other sources of information. Why; they might even read this BB. :eek: :uhoh:

starter

Bill Gletsos
15-10-2004, 11:05 PM
BTW, as I recall, Kasparov was rated higher than Karpov at least a year before he became World Champion, but somehow that doesn't fit neatly into this particular marketing puff.
Kasparov's rating exceeded Karpov's for the first time in the Jan 1984 list when he hit 2710 whilst Karpov was 2700. Karpov however reversed this in the July 1985 list when Karpov hit 2720 whilst Kasparov slumped to 2700. Kasparov regained the lead in the next list (Jan 1986) when he was 2720 and Karpov now 2700. This was the list immediately following Kasparov becoming World Champion.
Of course Kasparov at this stage was only the highest rated active player as Fischer was still on the FIDE list at 2780 five points behind his highest rating of 2785 in Jul 1972. It would not be until Jan 1990 that Kasparov would exceed Fischer's 2780 when his rating hit 2800.

Bill Gletsos
15-10-2004, 11:09 PM
Yes Bill; I knew all that.
But of course NSW being democratic obviously instructs its appointed delegates in such an open and shut motion. And of course, Amiel, as a member of a Club gets to vote on how his Club delegate advises the state delegate. Tell me it is all true and mature to this level, Bill.
The delegates are appointed by the NSWCA Council.


The State delegates don't just rock up to Mt B. without Club input do they.
Of course they do.
The NSWCA is an association of members not clubs. You Mexicans should try it.


I mean if there is no instructing going on then delegates could be relying on other sources of information. Why; they might even read this BB. :eek: :uhoh:
The NSWCA Council instructs its delegates how to vote.

ursogr8
15-10-2004, 11:28 PM
The delegates are appointed by the NSWCA Council.


Of course they do.
The NSWCA is an association of members not clubs. You Mexicans should try it.


The NSWCA Council instructs its delegates how to vote.

All fine words of yours Bill; except it looks to me as though Amiel is disenfranchised for the upcoming decision. I mean, an important vote like the ACF President....how does Amiel formally show his voting preference?

And if not Amiel, who may be someone that you could read his mind, how do represent Matt Sweeney, whose mind you don't seem to be in synch. with?
starter

arosar
16-10-2004, 01:24 PM
In my day-to-day competitive chess existence since '96 I've never really given a flyin' F**K about who the ACF prez is. What is important to me are NSW matters.

AR

ursogr8
16-10-2004, 01:47 PM
In my day-to-day competitive chess existence since '96 I've never really given a flyin' F**K about who the ACF prez is. What is important to me are NSW matters.
AR

In all the dozens of posts about whether CHESSLOVER was a single poster or a consortia of posters there was never a clue so strong as the Sydney-centric remark "What is important to me are NSW matters." which clears you of any involvement since CL showed he was a true international.

starter

Bill Gletsos
16-10-2004, 03:26 PM
All fine words of yours Bill; except it looks to me as though Amiel is disenfranchised for the upcoming decision. I mean, an important vote like the ACF President....how does Amiel formally show his voting preference?
He isnt disenfranchised at all. He can express his view directly to any member of council. If there is any disenfranchising it would have to be down Mexico way where it is the Club view that is important at the apparent expense of the individuals opinion.


And if not Amiel, who may be someone that you could read his mind, how do represent Matt Sweeney, whose mind you don't seem to be in synch. with?
starter
The NSWCA Constitution puts the decision making power into the hands of the NSWCA Council and not the clubs or individual members.
As such the Council gets to decide. If the members are sufficiently unhappy with their decisions they can always vote them out of office at the next AGM.

In Mexico I might be unhappy with a CV decision but I have no way of expressing this if my club happens to have a majority that supports the CV decision.

Will Box Hill be actively approaching its members to determine who they want to be the ACF President and voting accordingly or will it just come down to the Box Hill Committee unilaterally deciding who they wish to support and having their club delegates informing CV of this.

ursogr8
16-10-2004, 07:57 PM
He isnt disenfranchised at all. He can express his view directly to any member of council. If there is any disenfranchising it would have to be down Mexico way where it is the Club view that is important at the apparent expense of the individuals opinion.


The NSWCA Constitution puts the decision making power into the hands of the NSWCA Council and not the clubs or individual members.
As such the Council gets to decide. If the members are sufficiently unhappy with their decisions they can always vote them out of office at the next AGM.

Just as I suspected Bill. Disenfranchised. Expressing an opinion to an official is not the same as voting on an important motion. If you don't have a vote then you are disenfranchised. Amiel does not get to vote; stop.
And it is disengenuous of you to drag in the AGM vote as that occurs after the ACF President vote.


In Mexico I might be unhappy with a CV decision but I have no way of expressing this if my club happens to have a majority that supports the CV decision.
Incorrect assumption of yours at work here. First, you do get to vote at Club level, and the Club delegate then gets to vote at the Executive and CV level. Your opinion may be in the minority and not carry forward, but you do get to vote. Second, BH may be entitled to 5 or 6 delegates (to the CV AGM) and each of these may carry forward different instructions, thus representing the votes of members.


Will Box Hill be actively approaching its members to determine who they want to be the ACF President and voting accordingly or will it just come down to the Box Hill Committee unilaterally deciding who they wish to support and having their club delegates informing CV of this.

Nothing unilateral about the BH Committee mate. It is often split down a fault-line on most key issues. Large Committee of 9 represents many facets of the Club. Each view-point in the Club has an outlet through the Committee. If felt the issue was important enough we would hold a plebiscite as well. Of course this time it is rather cut and dried.


starter

Kevin Bonham
16-10-2004, 08:36 PM
And if not Amiel, who may be someone that you could read his mind, how do represent Matt Sweeney, whose mind you don't seem to be in synch. with?

Remember that Sweeney disenfranchised himself by failing to even apologise for his absence from NSWCA meetings and therefore has only himself to blame for any lack of a vote. Had he not done this he would have had a direct vote on NSWCA over which way they voted.

ursogr8
16-10-2004, 09:04 PM
Remember that Sweeney disenfranchised himself by failing to even apologise for his absence from NSWCA meetings and therefore has only himself to blame for any lack of a vote. Had he not done this he would have had a direct vote on NSWCA over which way they voted.

Kevin
Yes I remember.
But so what.
Surely you are not willing to argue that most Club members in NSW are franchised on this issue.
Even Bill has only claimed that an individual can 'gossip with his rep.', but can't vote.

starter

Bill Gletsos
16-10-2004, 09:35 PM
Just as I suspected Bill. Disenfranchised. Expressing an opinion to an official is not the same as voting on an important motion. If you don't have a vote then you are disenfranchised. Amiel does not get to vote; stop.
And it is disengenuous of you to drag in the AGM vote as that occurs after the ACF President vote.
This is all rubbish.
The NSWCA members get to vote for the members of NSWCA Council.
The NSWCA Constitution places the responsability for managing the NSWCA with the NSWCA Council.
The NSWCA Council is responsible for voting on ACF issues as it sees fit.

This is in fact no different from any state government.
Once you vote in the government, the individual voters dont get to have a say on individual issues.
If enough voters dont like how the government is acting then they will remove them at the next election.

Bill Gletsos
16-10-2004, 09:58 PM
Incorrect assumption of yours at work here. First, you do get to vote at Club level, and the Club delegate then gets to vote at the Executive and CV level. Your opinion may be in the minority and not carry forward, but you do get to vote.
If my vote ends up not counting then it is no different to me not having a vote in the first place.


Second, BH may be entitled to 5 or 6 delegates (to the CV AGM) and each of these may carry forward different instructions, thus representing the votes of members.

Nothing unilateral about the BH Committee mate. It is often split down a fault-line on most key issues. Large Committee of 9 represents many facets of the Club. Each view-point in the Club has an outlet through the Committee. If felt the issue was important enough we would hold a plebiscite as well. Of course this time it is rather cut and dried.
So what. If my vote is in the minority my view may well not be represented. If thats the case then my having only a vote at club level is useless.

Now you would argue that I am not disenfranchised because I got to vote but in reality I am just as much disenfranchised as AR supposedly is in NSW because my vote at club level really does not count.

However if I am to accept your view that I really am not dienfranchised then neither is AR.
He directly has a vote on who is on the NSWCA Council.
The NSWCA Council is going to vote on issues based on what it sees is in the interest of NSW and Australian Chess.
If a majority of members dont like this then they can remove the council members at the next AGM.

Rhubarb
16-10-2004, 11:08 PM
Kasparov's rating exceeded Karpov's for the first time in the Jan 1984 list when he hit 2710 whilst Karpov was 2700. Karpov however reversed this in the July 1985 list when Karpov hit 2720 whilst Kasparov slumped to 2700.
Good point.

Kasparov regained the lead in the next list (Jan 1986) when he was 2720 and Karpov now 2700. This was the list immediately following Kasparov becoming World Champion.

So in other words, for a matter of some months Kasparov was World Champion but not No.1, meaning his blurb is factually incorrect. (To be fair to Kasparov, he didn't necessarily write that part.)

Spiny Norman
17-10-2004, 07:59 AM
So in other words, for a matter of some months Kasparov was World Champion but not No.1, meaning his blurb is factually incorrect. (To be fair to Kasparov, he didn't necessarily write that part.)

Surely not another example of "puff"? :whistle:

arosar
18-10-2004, 10:02 AM
Two threads. And in both starter really doesn't have a clue about what he's yappin' on about.

AR

ursogr8
18-10-2004, 10:29 AM
Two threads. And in both starter really doesn't have a clue about what he's yappin' on about.

AR

Only two threads my didactic friend?

I guess that means Amiel, you will not be voting for me as poster-of-the-year?

starter