PDA

View Full Version : FIDE Title Envy



Garvinator
02-09-2005, 12:36 AM
narelle the wim title :hmm: :hmm:

eclectic
02-09-2005, 01:33 AM
narelle the wim title :hmm: :hmm:

were it you being awarded it there'd be a reason to go :hmm: :hmm:

eclectic

Garvinator
02-09-2005, 01:44 AM
were it you being awarded it there'd be a reason to go :hmm: :hmm:

eclectic
if i got the wim title i think we should do more than just :hmm: :hmm: :whistle: ;)

jenni
02-09-2005, 09:27 AM
narelle the wim title :hmm: :hmm:

Narelle is one of the few women in Australia who bothers to play chess regularly. She deserves it. :clap: :clap:

One might argue that there are other women in Australia who are stronger then Narelle and should get it before her (e.g. the person who was working with her at the zonals ;) ), however Narelle played, the others either didn't play or played worse than her, so she won it fair and square under the rules.

Garvinator
02-09-2005, 11:48 AM
Narelle is one of the few women in Australia who bothers to play chess regularly. She deserves it. :clap: :clap:

One might argue that there are other women in Australia who are stronger then Narelle and should get it before her (e.g. the person who was working with her at the zonals ;) ), however Narelle played, the others either didn't play or played worse than her, so she won it fair and square under the rules.
and as i have said many times before :uhoh: it is the rules that i believe are at fault. Will this mean she gets free entry to tournaments?

Bill Gletsos
02-09-2005, 12:21 PM
and as i have said many times before :uhoh: it is the rules that i believe are at fault. Will this mean she gets free entry to tournaments?Given other WIM's get free entry then I think the answer is obvious.

Libby
03-09-2005, 07:02 PM
and as i have said many times before :uhoh: it is the rules that i believe are at fault. Will this mean she gets free entry to tournaments?

My goodness - free entry to tournaments ....

Before we know it, we will be going bust on the strength of these undeserved awards being thrown about!

Pull your head in Garvin. Maybe you can arrange to ship Steve Bradbury's Winter Olympics Gold Medal back as well????

Can't we just be gracious enough to congratulate a player who competes within the rules and achieves something as a consequence?

Garvinator
03-09-2005, 07:08 PM
My goodness - free entry to tournaments ....

Before we know it, we will be going bust on the strength of these undeserved awards being thrown about!

Pull your head in Garvin. Maybe you can arrange to ship Steve Bradbury's Winter Olympics Gold Medal back as well????

Can't we just be gracious enough to congratulate a player who competes within the rules and achieves something as a consequence?
my problem is not with the player, my problem is with the rules. You are telling me to pull my head in here, but you arent doing the same in the mt buller thread and it is getting really tiresome.

Bereaved
03-09-2005, 11:17 PM
Play nicely both of you!!
Garvin; failure to provide service = dissatisfied customers
Libby: Female titled players = threat to some men's egos

Garvin, Libby may be justified, and Libby, Garvin may not be, or vice versa, but let us not just snipe at each other?
I actually will reiterate well done Narelle, and of course she gets free Entry
Take care and God Bless, Macavity

Garvinator
03-09-2005, 11:24 PM
Female titled players = threat to some men's egos
please dont misrepresent my position. My position is not in relation to egos at all. I have a big problem with a player who has an acf rating of 1700 getting free entry to tournaments when a 2100 player does not. Maybe if this is going to continue, the free entry for titled players needs to change to giving free entry based on ratings instead of titles.

eclectic
03-09-2005, 11:31 PM
please dont misrepresent my position. My position is not in relation to egos at all. I have a big problem with a player who has an acf rating of 1700 getting free entry to tournaments when a 2100 player does not. Maybe if this is going to continue, the free entry for titled players needs to change to giving free entry based on ratings instead of titles.

sorry,

but aren't fide titles based on fide ratings?

:whistle:

eclectic

jenni
03-09-2005, 11:38 PM
sorry,

but aren't fide titles based on fide ratings?

:whistle:

eclectic

Not for the zonals, which is what GG is whining about. Maybe he is a misogynist, as well as a miso-junior-ist. (although of course you are right - their FIDE ratings are much more respectable than the ACF ones. :) )

eclectic
03-09-2005, 11:48 PM
Not for the zonals, which is what GG is whining about. Maybe he is a misogynist, s well as a miso-junior-ist.

jenni,

i'm merely saying that the local acf ratings have nothing to do with titles and that gg has no grounds for attempting to "enterprise bargain" a free entry deal for anyone who has a better rating than what narelle has

i sense a few too many behind the scenes feel they have carte blanche to deride her

i say good on her and well done!!

eclectic

Bereaved
04-09-2005, 12:51 AM
Divergent tastes, but good heart, and good sense,
hear hear Eclectic,!!!
Take care and God Bless, Macavity

Garvinator
04-09-2005, 12:59 AM
Maybe he is a misogynist, as well as a miso-junior-ist.
Hello Jenni,

Can you please define what you mean by both these terms?

Mischa
04-09-2005, 01:44 AM
hello?

Mischa
04-09-2005, 01:46 AM
this means you like older men

PHAT
04-09-2005, 07:49 AM
I actually will reiterate well done Narelle,

How many of us feel uncomfortable when the BB hacks into non BBers, belittling their acheivments. It is mean.

Narelle got it fair and square, good on her :clap:

If you want to debate the process, OK, but keep the personal stuff out.


While I am at it, let me personally comiserate with our own Wollongong girl, Vaness Reid, who missed out on a title by some countback anomaly. Better luck next time!

Dozy
04-09-2005, 08:23 AM
this means you like older men
Hey, Mischa, that's a back down isn't it? I liked your original implication.

I can be a bit misojunioristic sometimes and yet, comically, I've been backed into a corner where I'll be organising a junior tournament myself early next year. (The situation is unusual and I'll put up a thread when the preliminaries have been sorted out.)

Still, it's nice of you to like us older men -- even if we're over the hill.

antichrist
04-09-2005, 09:24 AM
..........
If you want to debate the process, OK, but keep the personal stuff out...


And Matt's wife turned to a pillar of salt when she turned to see if it was really her hubbie uttering those words.

Rincewind
04-09-2005, 09:25 AM
Still, it's nice of you to like us older men -- even if we're over the hill.

Dozy, I think you missed the point. Perhaps you should be talking to Garvin. :)

antichrist
04-09-2005, 09:45 AM
My goodness - free entry to tournaments ....

Before we know it, we will be going bust on the strength of these undeserved awards being thrown about!

Pull your head in Garvin. Maybe you can arrange to ship Steve Bradbury's Winter Olympics Gold Medal back as well????

Can't we just be gracious enough to congratulate a player who competes within the rules and achieves something as a consequence?

Exactly, not like that St George Comp - and what is GG's rating by the way? Sour bananas I would say!

jenni
04-09-2005, 12:09 PM
Hello Jenni,

Can you please define what you mean by both these terms?

It is teasing you GG. But effectively you are not wildly keen on juniors, so I have coined the term, miso-junior-ist. and given your rants about Narelle (and presumably the other females as well), I do not think misogynist would go astray. (although maybe not - you were always a Petra fan).

Garvinator
04-09-2005, 12:14 PM
It is teasing you GG. But effectively you are not wildly keen on juniors, so I have coined the term, miso-junior-ist. and given your rants about Narelle (and presumably the other females as well), I do not think misogynist would go astray. (although maybe not - you were always a Petra fan).
replying by pm

jenni
04-09-2005, 12:17 PM
I think it is worth commenting at this point that it is not only Australia who is getting soft titles out of the zonals. You see this at the World Youth e.g. there is a girl the same age as Tamzin, from another country, who has a WFM title - she is slightly better than Tamzin, but not a lot and she has had the WFM title for about 3 years. Given that Tamzin has an ACF of 1242 (although it would be higher if she didn't live in Canberra :) ), it makes the latest 3 Aussie female titles look positively respectable.

jenni
04-09-2005, 12:17 PM
replying by pm

Ouch - I think I am in trouble.

Thunderspirit
07-09-2005, 08:23 PM
Narelle is one of the few women in Australia who bothers to play chess regularly. She deserves it. :clap: :clap:

One might argue that there are other women in Australia who are stronger then Narelle and should get it before her (e.g. the person who was working with her at the zonals ;) ), however Narelle played, the others either didn't play or played worse than her, so she won it fair and square under the rules.

While I agree Narelle plays more than most, being active does not give a player the right to a title. Narelle is a friend of mine but she clearly weaker than her collegues.

BTW I should let everyone know that Narelle has a 4-0 on me, which proves I'm a rabbit... (But we all knew that....)

Libby
07-09-2005, 09:03 PM
While I agree Narelle plays more than most, being active does not give a player the right to a title. Narelle is a friend of mine but she clearly weaker than her collegues.

I don't believe Narelle obtained her title through activity alone. Wasn't there some requirement to play in a particular event and achieve a particular result?

Wasn't that same opportunity available to her "colleagues" should they choose to take it up?

I think Jenni's point was that Narelle put herself out there and played the event. She was active in the event and just plain active overall. And that certainly puts her ahead of many of her colleagues, title or no. That works in the interest of Australian chess a lot more than sitting pretty and inactively on a higher rating and better reputation.

If people have a problem with the achievement of titles in this way they need to write to FIDE and lobby for change.

And whilst we wait for FIDE to make the change some are after (just to ensure no more undeserving Aussies dare take a title), we could be a bit more productive and look instead to the way such titles can be exploited in publicity & media to attract attention to our events, activities & achievements.

Occasionally it does good to play such things up - you know, instead of telling the papers "Oh yes, there is this WIM coming to play but she really shouldn't have that title because she's not all that good. Come along and interview instead these untitled, more deserving players as they watch from the sidelines."

Thunderspirit
07-09-2005, 09:07 PM
I don't believe Narelle obtained her title through activity alone. Wasn't there some requirement to play in a particular event and achieve a particular result?

Wasn't that same opportunity available to her "colleagues" should they choose to take it up?

I think Jenni's point was that Narelle put herself out there and played the event. She was active in the event and just plain active overall. And that certainly puts her ahead of many of her colleagues, title or no. That works in the interest of Australian chess a lot more than sitting pretty and inactively on a higher rating and better reputation.

If people have a problem with the achievement of titles in this way they need to write to FIDE and lobby for change.

And whilst we wait for FIDE to make the change some are after (just to ensure no more undeserving Aussies dare take a title), we could be a bit more productive and look instead to the way such titles can be exploited in publicity & media to attract attention to our events, activities & achievements.

Occasionally it does good to play such things up - you know, instead of telling the papers "Oh yes, there is this WIM coming to play but she really shouldn't have that title because she's not all that good. Come along and interview instead these untitled, more deserving players as they watch from the sidelines."

Sure Narelle earned her titles under the guidelines of the event, but compared to other WIM's in Australian chess she is much weaker. To be fair, she played, did what she had to and is now a WIM.

Libby
07-09-2005, 09:17 PM
Sure Narelle earned her titles under the guidelines of the event, but compared to other WIM's in Australian chess she is much weaker. To be fair, she played, did what she had to and is now a WIM.

I think, no matter how or why anyone earns their title, some people with that title will be stronger than others.

Are all GMs of identical strength?

Is it impossible for people to just say "Congratulations Narelle?" That was the intention of this thread. Arguments with FIDE and their qualification standards belong with FIDE. Narelle's playing strength is unchanged but Australian chess has gained another titled player. What's bad about that?

At least she had a set of criteria to meet and met that. I've found everything from "marketing puff" to "arranged telephone draws" a lot more disturbing and damaging to the credibility of Australian chess than this will be.

jenni
07-09-2005, 09:33 PM
Sure Narelle earned her titles under the guidelines of the event, but compared to other WIM's in Australian chess she is much weaker. To be fair, she played, did what she had to and is now a WIM.

So why aren't we laying into some of the male IM's in Australia who are demonstrably weaker than others with the title? I mean Rujevic isn't as strong as Gary Lane, but i don't see personal attacks on him.

I just think it is fine to attack the system and fine to put something forward to the ACF to put forward to FIDE (who won't give a stuff), but the whole thing has been raised as "look at Narelle - such a bad player why should she have a WIM." She did draw with Sorokina in the Zonals, so how bad is she?

I would like to point out that I do not consider myself a mate of Narelle's (I am not even sure we speak to each other - there was some seriously bad blood between us over a DD match some years ago), however I don't like to see these sorts of personal attacks.

It's typical Australian meaness (otherwise known as the tall poppy syndrome). Instead of celebrating an achievement we try and pull the person down.

PHAT
08-09-2005, 06:50 AM
It's typical Australian meaness (otherwise known as the tall poppy syndrome). Instead of celebrating an achievement we try and pull the person down.

Not quite. The young woman in question is not a tall poppy. She simply received a WIM according to the rules. She has done nothing wrong. She deserves a :clap: and then we move on to hammer some wrong doers, which she is not.

I would remind all, that titles of many types, are things that happen to people. Some people are near the boarderline, above or below it. In chess, there are players who are IM level, without a title, and vica versa.

I feel distinctly uncomfortable when I read this thread. The meaness of some of you is very disappointing. :thumdown:

Rincewind
08-09-2005, 07:51 AM
I feel distinctly uncomfortable when I read this thread. The meaness of some of you is very disappointing. :thumdown:

I agree.

:clap: Congratulations to all the title recipients. :clap:

Garvinator
08-09-2005, 09:47 AM
I dont recall saying anything bad or mean about Narelle at all. My point all along has been about the title and the continual devaluing of titles, be they IM, FM or WIM titles. It just happened to be the title awarded to Narelle in this case.

Rincewind
08-09-2005, 10:18 AM
I dont recall saying anything bad or mean about Narelle at all.

Must be a memory problem. Go back and read the posts in this thread. Particularly #5 and #10.

Libby
08-09-2005, 11:11 AM
It just happened to be the title awarded to Narelle in this case.

When several titles were awarded, and you continually single out one example, it's quite easy to draw an inference from that.

Possibly unintended :hmm: but seemingly an inference drawn by a number of readers of the thread. Maybe you need to look at the way you are presenting your case for change?

Garvinator
08-09-2005, 11:20 AM
When several titles were awarded, and you continually single out one example, it's quite easy to draw an inference from that.
I 'singled out' the one award that actually gets a player something from organisers for having the title. The 'devaluation' of the other titles has been happening for a while now. As far as I can tell, without much research admittedly, is that the WIM title hasnt had as much 'devaluation'.


Possibly unintended :hmm:

My criticism of the procedure for awarding the title is not unintended, but if people believe I am attacking Narelle personally, that is certainly not the case. The person who could have received the title could have been anyone (if that helps matters :uhoh: ).


but seemingly an inference drawn by a number of readers of the thread. Maybe you need to look at the way you are presenting your case for change?
Also ppl should look at how they jump to conclusions and get on a bandwagon. Maybe asking more questions to clear up a position about what the poster really means would help too. Not the first time this has happened on this bb :evil:

Garvinator
08-09-2005, 11:24 AM
Must be a memory problem. Go back and read the posts in this thread. Particularly #5 and #10.
Post 10 in this thread, made by me:


and as i have said many times before it is the rules that i believe are at fault. Will this mean she gets free entry to tournaments?

I have highlighted (now) exactly the part that I had a problem with, right back then. That seems to have been missed by posters wanting to criticise my position :( .

The second part was showing the implication of the first part.

Libby
08-09-2005, 11:27 AM
Garvin - clarify for me. What was meant by this?


narelle the wim title :hmm: :hmm:

and this


Will this mean she gets free entry to tournaments?

and what does that have to do with the value of the title, other than to suggest the recipient is undeserving of either the honour of the title or the benefit of free entry?

It all very well to feel misquoted, taken out of context, exaggerated, misrepresented etc but (as I challenged you unsuccessfully on other unmentionable topics) sometimes you have to be responsible for what you have said.

If that isn't what you meant, I do think you need to take care - yourself - with how you further your argument on the devaluing of titles. You are using a very specific example, of an individual player, to illustrate your argument. An individual Australian player.

Ever the bandwagon-hopper

Libby

arosar
08-09-2005, 11:31 AM
OK, so there's 2 issues OK. The (i) 'devaluing' of titles and (ii) whether or not Narelle deserves it. On the former, I reckon gray has a case; on the latter, let's all just say congrats.

End of story. That's it! FMD.

Now I have to get back to study. Cheers.

AR

Libby
08-09-2005, 11:32 AM
OK, so there's 2 issues OK. The (i) 'devaluing' of titles and (ii) whether or not Narelle deserves it. On the former, I reckon gray has a case; on the latter, let's all just say congrats.

End of story. That's it! FMD.

AR

That's why there are two threads.

This one.

And this one http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=2867

Garvinator
08-09-2005, 11:42 AM
Regarding the parts you quoted, I have answered the second one in a reply to Barry. If you are going to quote, please quote in the entirety, especially when selective quoting is used, because it is the entire post of number 10 in this thread that makes my position clear.

Regarding my post 5 on this thread, while I can see where ppl might have got the conclusion my 'attack' was single person based. My apologies, but that was not my intention. I will admit that I had thought that most posters would already have known from previous discussions about my thoughts on devaluing of titles.


and what does that have to do with the value of the title, other than to suggest the recipient is undeserving of either the honour of the title or the benefit of free entry?

Devaluing the title with regards to the ones who already hold the title.


It all very well to feel misquoted, taken out of context, exaggerated, misrepresented etc but (as I challenged you unsuccessfully on other unmentionable topics) sometimes you have to be responsible for what you have said. and replyers are also responsible for how they view posts made without clarifying points first.


If that isn't what you meant, I do think you need to take care - yourself - with how you further your argument on the devaluing of titles. You are using a very specific example, of an individual player, to illustrate your argument. An individual Australian player.
Latest example, nothing more.

Garvinator
08-09-2005, 11:43 AM
That's why there are two threads.

This one.

And this one http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=2867
and i am rabbiting :hmm: a similiar position in both threads, well i think so anyways :eek:

Rincewind
08-09-2005, 11:58 AM
Post 10 in this thread, made by me:

I have highlighted (now) exactly the part that I had a problem with, right back then. That seems to have been missed by posters wanting to criticise my position :( .

The second part was showing the implication of the first part.

I think I agree with Libby on this one (sorry Libby). Your comments are likely to be interpreted as criticisisms of an individual chess player. Someone who plays a lot of chess domestically and represented Australia at considerable personal expense.

You may not have meant to sound mean-spirited. If that is true, I suggest you think about what you write a little more because quite a few people read them as such.

As a footnote I think it would be very useful to avoid mixing the themes of the two threads to avoid this sort of problem. It is 'trouble brewing' to bring up title devaluation points in a thread created to congratulate the new recipients of said titles.

Libby
08-09-2005, 12:01 PM
I think I agree with Libby on this one (sorry Libby).

Now we aren't looking to start more post-ANU rumours are we :lol:

Are our respective reputations damaged by agreement? :hmm:

When Garvin talks about missing the point, he several times missed mine. If direct criticism of an individual was not intended, perhaps things need to be expressed differently to make that less likely to appear to be the case.

Garvinator
08-09-2005, 12:04 PM
You may not have meant to sound mean-spirited. If that is true, I suggest you think about what you write a little more because quite a few people read them as such. I have a better idea, I dont post at all.

WhiteElephant
08-09-2005, 12:07 PM
I have a better idea, I dont post at all.

If you can't post anything nice about a fantastic achievement than perhaps it is better you don't post.

I hope Narelle doesn't read some of your posts on this thread. They are disgraceful.

Garvinator
08-09-2005, 12:10 PM
If you can't post anything nice about a fantastic achievement than perhaps it is better you don't post.

I hope Narelle doesn't read some of your posts on this thread. They are disgraceful.
Have you read anything I have posted on this page lately?

Libby
08-09-2005, 12:12 PM
I have a better idea, I dont post at all.

No. Who could I annoy then? ;)

We all blunder occasionally, on and off the board. I can be taken aback by the continuation of a thread on which I've commented but reading back, can admit that it's possible I made my point less tactfully or less clearly than I meant to. Or that I posted when particularly p.issed off with totally unrelated issues.

You just have to be able to acknowledge the blunder when you make it.

Garvinator
08-09-2005, 12:16 PM
No. Who could I annoy then? ;) It wasnt a flippant remark by me actually :(


We all blunder occasionally, on and off the board. I can be taken aback by the continuation of a thread on which I've commented but reading back, can admit that it's possible I made my point less tactfully or less clearly than I meant to. Or that I posted when particularly p.issed off with totally unrelated issues.

You just have to be able to acknowledge the blunder when you make it.
and I apologised if any poster believed that I was attacking Narelle personally.

WhiteElephant
08-09-2005, 12:23 PM
No. Who could I annoy then? ;)

We all blunder occasionally, on and off the board. I can be taken aback by the continuation of a thread on which I've commented but reading back, can admit that it's possible I made my point less tactfully or less clearly than I meant to. Or that I posted when particularly p.issed off with totally unrelated issues.

You just have to be able to acknowledge the blunder when you make it.

Libby, Garvin is trying to bait us into feeling sorry for him but I do not believe he should get away with it.

Usually when I disagree with someone on this BB I just let it go. However, I feel very strongly about this one.

We are all working to promote chess as a community in different ways, from different geographical locations. Garvin's comments are taking us ALL a step backwards - belittling the success of one of our hardest working chessplayers and also probably hurting her feelings in the process - did you consider that, Garvin?

Regardless of whether you meant it or not, quite a few people have taken offence at what you said. Grow some balls, retract the comments and congratulate Narelle on her achievement.

Garvinator
08-09-2005, 12:32 PM
Regardless of whether you meant it or not, quite a few people have taken offence at what you said. Grow some balls, retract the comments and congratulate Narelle on her achievement.
and i would say that quite a few ppl also agree with my comments that the titles are being devalued. I am not going to retract my comments that I believe that the titles are being devalued for the worse and that this is the latest example.

i have apologised to those who have believed that my comments were directly attacking Narelle. I am not going to do it again.

Thunderspirit
08-09-2005, 05:20 PM
So why aren't we laying into some of the male IM's in Australia who are demonstrably weaker than others with the title? I mean Rujevic isn't as strong as Gary Lane, but i don't see personal attacks on him.

I just think it is fine to attack the system and fine to put something forward to the ACF to put forward to FIDE (who won't give a stuff), but the whole thing has been raised as "look at Narelle - such a bad player why should she have a WIM." She did draw with Sorokina in the Zonals, so how bad is she?

I would like to point out that I do not consider myself a mate of Narelle's (I am not even sure we speak to each other - there was some seriously bad blood between us over a DD match some years ago), however I don't like to see these sorts of personal attacks.

It's typical Australian meaness (otherwise known as the tall poppy syndrome). Instead of celebrating an achievement we try and pull the person down.


Jenny, you make a good point. Australia has 16 IM's (not including WIM's) and some are far weaker than those at the top of Aussie Chess such as Gary Lane and John-Paul Wallace.

If this seemed like an attack just to belittle Narelle that was wrong. Narelle is a great girl, she's a good mate.

I'll put it this way... If I could get the WIM title, I would. Sadly I'm too weak... ;)

arosar
08-09-2005, 05:26 PM
I'll put it this way... If I could get the WIM title, I would. Sadly I'm too weak... ;)

Mate, first you'll need your bits lopped off.

AR

Rincewind
08-09-2005, 05:50 PM
Mate, first you'll need your bits lopped off.

I thought that is what he meant. "I'm too weak" as in member of the weaker sex.

jenni
08-09-2005, 06:04 PM
and i would say that quite a few ppl also agree with my comments that the titles are being devalued. I am not going to retract my comments that I believe that the titles are being devalued for the worse and that this is the latest example.


.

Ok if you believe that (and I guess you do, as you have said it a numberof times), why don't you do something, rather than complaining here. I mean no-one of any importance reads this BB (sorry Denis :) . Why don't you start an international campaign? Start in Australia and start a petition of people to the ACF asking for a change. Get enough signatures (particularly from people with titles and high ratings), and ACF has to take notice. Make contact with other federations and get them onside. Get Ian and Darryl and Gary Lane to support you - they have contacts all over the world.

Then you are actually doing something, not just sounding off uselessly.

Even if you don't succeed, at least you will know how many people support you and that you have tried. Whinging on the BB just looks silly.

Oepty
08-09-2005, 06:34 PM
Narelle has recieved alot of criticism over time and it seems to me it is only because she actually plays chess and plays alot more chess than her stronger female colleagues. This is a very poor attitude to have. If the other holders of the WIM title, or any title in fact want to stop players who are weaker than them getting the same title, play, beat them and cause them to fail to meet the requirements for the title.
Scott

Rincewind
08-09-2005, 06:49 PM
Narelle has recieved alot of criticism over time and it seems to me it is only because she actually plays chess and plays alot more chess than her stronger female colleagues. This is a very poor attitude to have. If the other holders of the WIM title, or any title in fact want to stop players who are weaker than them getting the same title, play, beat them and cause them to fail to meet the requirements for the title.
Scott

As far as I can tell they are not complaining - Garvin and Lee are. :)

PHAT
08-09-2005, 09:30 PM
Mate, first you'll [Liberace] need your bits lopped off.

AR

Not all of them. He has big man boobs than me :eek:

jay_vee
09-09-2005, 07:47 AM
It's typical Australian meaness (otherwise known as the tall poppy syndrome). Instead of celebrating an achievement we try and pull the person down.
Not really typically Australian at all, more like chess players in general. I recall a very similar discussion in a different country, where a 15 y/o girl rated in the 1600s received the impressive title of WCM for finishing 3rd in the WCh of the ICSC (the organisation of hearing-impaired players, I believe, though I have no idea what the acronym stands for).

Oepty
10-09-2005, 12:36 PM
As far as I can tell they are not complaining - Garvin and Lee are. :)

I never said they were compaining.
Scott

Rincewind
10-09-2005, 03:13 PM
I never said they were compaining.

No, I know.

four four two
12-09-2005, 12:27 PM
You people are missing a crucial point here ,no player who is under 1900 australian strength ,whether they are male or female , should have the word MASTER anywhere near their name! These people havnt even mastered endgame technique let alone 1 opening system or middlegame tactics/positional structures! Female chess titles are at best condescending,and at worst a slap in the face to womens integrity.There is no reason why women cant play chess as well as men , there are currently 12 women besides the Polgars who have a higher FIDE rating than GM Darryl Johansen. If you consider the participation rates of female chess players throughout the world they are actualling performing well,and getting better by the day! :whistle:

Rincewind
12-09-2005, 01:05 PM
To reiterate...


It is 'trouble brewing' to bring up title devaluation points in a thread created to congratulate the new recipients of said titles.

arosar
12-09-2005, 01:15 PM
Keeping Men in Check: http://www.thechessdrum.net/65thSquare/65_sepoct05.html

AR

antichrist
12-09-2005, 01:40 PM
You people are missing a crucial point here ,no player who is under 1900 australian strength ,whether they are male or female , should have the word MASTER anywhere near their name! These people havnt even mastered endgame technique let alone 1 opening system or middlegame tactics/positional structures! Female chess titles are at best condescending,and at worst a slap in the face to womens integrity.There is no reason why women cant play chess as well as men , there are currently 12 women besides the Polgars who have a higher FIDE rating than GM Darryl Johansen. If you consider the participation rates of female chess players throughout the world they are actualling performing well,and getting better by the day! :whistle:

Now Mr Crawler, how many men are there rated above D Johansen excluding Kasparov? And what percentage of the population are women?

jenni
12-09-2005, 04:12 PM
Female chess titles are at best condescending,and at worst a slap in the face to womens integrity.
Speaking as a woman I get bloody tired of men telling us what we should or shouldn't feel.

If the Aussie girls don't find them condescending who cares what you think. :evil:

four four two
12-09-2005, 05:43 PM
I wasnt telling you or any of our female players how to think. If you had bothered to read what i wrote you would have understood the point i was tring to make,that women are no less capable of playing chess than men.
Can u justify giving a chess title to someone on the basis of their gender?
I think titles should only be awarded on actual playing strength,not gender.
The fact FIDE has historically chosen to award titles to women on the basis of their gender CLEARLY shows that they consider women to be inherently inferior at chess,and that is condescending!

In regards to ac's question, GM johansen is currently ranked 924 in the world, with 14 women ranked above him.Considering that at best 5% of all professionally active chess players[2150elo+] are women,the women are performing well and are getting significantly better all the time. Twenty years ago there would have been maybe 5 female players in the world with an elo above 2400,today its very different. The standard of female chess players isnt stagnant ac,and if u think Judit Polgar got where she is because shes some freak/aberration than why arnt here sisters top 20 players?
She got where she is through HARD WORK. Are u going to tell me Kasparov,Kramnik,Anand,etc dont work extremely hard? :hand:

jenni
12-09-2005, 05:49 PM
I wasnt telling you or any of our female players how to think. If you had bothered to read what i wrote you would have understood the point i was tring to make,that women are no less capable of playing chess than men.

You are not related to David Beaumont are you? You write just like him. :(



Can u justify giving a chess title to someone on the basis of their gender?


do we still have goose norms? This guy deserves a zonal goose title.

firegoat7
12-09-2005, 06:26 PM
You are not related to David Beaumont are you? You write just like him. :(

do we still have goose norms? This guy deserves a zonal goose title.

I can confirm that 4-4-2 is not me. Nevertheless, 4-4-2 I will let you into a little secret, Jenni is the cheesecrap queen of the upper middle class hypocrisy circuit. She will talk all day about gender then turn around and argue that girls are superior to boys. When it comes to some non-descript ill informed gender stereotype that she herself has categorised for the rest of humanity she scores 10 out of 10, and as you are undoubtly aware is still stuck in the 70s vacumn of gender being a biological construct.

I have little doubt that when her yuppie spawn have finished their brilliant junior chess careers, that she will disappear into the kingdom of clouds, notably reserved for those suffering from ugly chess parent syndrome. I hasten to add, don't expect to much common sense on adult chess discussions from her, like most overbearing chess parents, she subsribes to the view juniors first adults never. :hand:

cheers Fg7

antichrist
12-09-2005, 06:27 PM
Terrific post FG, that is going in Classic Stirs.

If it is any consolation I consider Jenni's and Libby's the two best avatars.

Kevin Bonham
12-09-2005, 07:19 PM
The standard of female chess players isnt stagnant ac,and if u think Judit Polgar got where she is because shes some freak/aberration than why arnt here sisters top 20 players?
She got where she is through HARD WORK. Are u going to tell me Kasparov,Kramnik,Anand,etc dont work extremely hard? :hand:

Are you saying Judit's sisters didn't work as hard at their game as she did? I would be surprised if that is true.

All three Polgar sisters were home-educated and given chess training from a very early age. This makes it possible that Judit is indeed a freak case.

four four two
12-09-2005, 07:37 PM
Once they were in their early twenties Sofia and Susan definitely didnt have the same drive as Judit,would you move to the USA and settle down if you were trying to become a top 10 player? Kamsky was pretty much at full strength when he went there,and his father dragged him there due to his pyschotic paranoia... the rest is history. :paranoid: ;)

jenni
12-09-2005, 07:43 PM
Terrific post FG, that is going in Classic Stirs.



Nope - in order to be annoyed by something, you have to be insecure enough to worry there is any truth in it and also to have some respect for the person concerned. I have to say I have more respect for you and your views than for his. :lol:

He is just vomiting forth his usual non-constructive rubbish.

jenni
12-09-2005, 07:47 PM
I have little doubt that when her yuppie spawn have finished their brilliant junior chess careers, that she will disappear into the kingdom of clouds, notably reserved for those suffering from ugly chess parent syndrome. cheers Fg7

I hate to disappoint you, but I am not planning to vanish - I have every intention as the spawn get older and organising junior things takes less of my time, to play more and more chess, so you are unfortunately going to have me around for a long time. I am already planning chess holidays based around Ballarat and Coffs Harbour and the Gold Coast. I hope I will continue to irritate you until I am laid to rest....

Bill Gletsos
12-09-2005, 07:54 PM
I hope I will continue to irritate you until I am laid to rest....And God willing possibly even after that. ;)

jenni
12-09-2005, 07:55 PM
And God willing possibly even after that. ;)

Hmm - I have always fancied a second career as a poltergeist.

Kevin Bonham
12-09-2005, 07:56 PM
Once they were in their early twenties Sofia and Susan definitely didnt have the same drive as Judit,would you move to the USA and settle down if you were trying to become a top 10 player?

According to chessmetrics, Judit at 20 was already much stronger than either sister at the same age. Also both other sisters were still increasing in strength until their mid-20s, but declined since then.

four four two
12-09-2005, 07:59 PM
I see you havnt been willing to justify why female players need seperate titles Jenni? Titles shouldnt be trinkets,they should be earned with blood sweat and tears. When Keg gets his IM title as i have no doubt he will,he will treasure it, sorry you missed out last year against bobby1972 Keg. :(

arosar
12-09-2005, 08:10 PM
And God willing possibly even after that. ;)

"God willing"? That's a new and interesting phrase coming from you Bill.

You're not influenced by that Al-Qaeda bloke who's threatened to blow up Mexico, are you?

AR

four four two
12-09-2005, 08:12 PM
KB , Susan is currently 2557,can you tell me when she was higher rated?
My understanding is her chess dropped a little for a few years,due to her starting a family and being inactive as a player... only in the last couple of years has she been more active over the board. :hmm:

Bill Gletsos
12-09-2005, 08:27 PM
"God willing"? That's a new and interesting phrase coming from you Bill.It seemed appropraite in the circumstances.

You're not influenced by that Al-Qaeda bloke who's threatened to blow up Mexico, are you?Not in the slightest.

Kevin Bonham
12-09-2005, 08:28 PM
KB , Susan is currently 2557,can you tell me when she was higher rated?

FIDE ratings are inflationary - the chessmetrics system is a good one for comparing players' strengths at different ages because it is adjusted to avoid inflation. Career trajectories for Judit here (http://chessmetrics.com/CM2/PlayerProfile.asp?Params=199510SSSSS3S102713000000 111000000000000010100) and Susan here (http://chessmetrics.com/CM2/PlayerProfile.asp?Params=199510SSSSS3S102715000000 111000000000024610100). According to these Susan peaked age 24 and had about five years off in her early 30s as you mention.

Bill Gletsos
12-09-2005, 08:28 PM
KB , Susan is currently 2557,can you tell me when she was higher rated?I think you mean 2577.

four four two
12-09-2005, 08:33 PM
Slip of the keyboard Bill ;)

Bill Gletsos
12-09-2005, 08:34 PM
Slip of the keyboard Bill ;)
We all have those. ;)

jenni
12-09-2005, 08:36 PM
I see you havnt been willing to justify why female players need seperate titles Jenni? Titles shouldnt be trinkets,they should be earned with blood sweat and tears. When Keg gets his IM title as i have no doubt he will,he will treasure it, sorry you missed out last year against bobby1972 Keg. :(

When I see the strong players like Ian Rogers or Gary Lane resentful of zonal titles, I will consider it a problem.

When I hear the Aussie female players saying they are insulted by having separate titles, I will consider it a problem.

Until then I don't have an issue. After all why should a nonentity like me, a silly useless parent, dare to criticise something FIDE has put in place?

I will ask you some questions - how many active female players does a strong state like Victoria have? How many girls' titles did Victoria win last year?

I am pragmatic - I don't like people who rabbit on endlessly about how many angels can fit on the head of a pin. I like to see action and results and when it comes to females. I don't see too much in Victoria.....

four four two
12-09-2005, 10:54 PM
I wasnt asking for Ians or Garys opinions,i was however asking you to explain to me why females NEED seperate titles,something you have failed to do. :wall:

Womens titles can be awarded in many ways,not just zonals. :whistle:



The only female players in Australia of any interest to me are the ones who made it into the top 100 rated players,juniors are irrelevant as is state of origin. You are still missing the big picture,when it comes to titles it is the world scene im interested in, not just Australia.

As for FIDE, all chess players are entitled to criticise their practices, especially with Kirsan in power. :hand:

pax
13-09-2005, 12:05 AM
According to chessmetrics, Judit at 20 was already much stronger than either sister at the same age. Also both other sisters were still increasing in strength until their mid-20s, but declined since then.

Hell, Judit was stronger at 14 than either of them have ever been!

pax
13-09-2005, 12:27 AM
KB , Susan is currently 2557,can you tell me when she was higher rated?

She was over 2600 a few times, the longest being about 2 years. Highest rating 2633.

Bill Gletsos
13-09-2005, 12:30 AM
She was over 2600 a few times, the longest being about 2 years. Highest rating 2633.I think you are looking at the chessmetrics ratings. I dont believe she has ever been higher than 2577 on the FIDE list.

pax
13-09-2005, 12:37 AM
I think you are looking at the chessmetrics ratings. I dont believe she has ever been higher than 2577 on the FIDE list.

Oops, yes you are quite right. Still, he didn't specify FIDE ratings :lol:

jenni
13-09-2005, 10:22 AM
I wasnt asking for Ians or Garys opinions,i was however asking you to explain to me why females NEED seperate titles,something you have failed to do. :wall:

Womens titles can be awarded in many ways,not just zonals. :whistle:



The only female players in Australia of any interest to me are the ones who made it into the top 100 rated players,juniors are irrelevant as is state of origin. You are still missing the big picture,when it comes to titles it is the world scene im interested in, not just Australia.

As for FIDE, all chess players are entitled to criticise their practices, especially with Kirsan in power. :hand:

I don't argue with FG7 or FG7 clones - it is too much of a waste of my time. If you have been a frequent reader of the BB (and are FG7, or FG7's band mate), then you would know my views on females and female nurturing.

I am more interested in generating future players than suffering from colonial cringe over the strength of the players overseas, or from overseas.

You may not be interested in Gary or Ian's opinions, but I am and they have been expressed to me often.

Watto
13-09-2005, 10:30 AM
Just going back a couple of pages...

About the question of Polgar being a freak or not…
If we look at the world’s great players from all eras, many have had a freakish exposure to chess from an early age (either self imposed or by a parent or mentor). She clearly is hugely talented. The very low participation rate of women in chess makes it extremely difficult to know whether she’ll prove to be a female freak or just a chess freak among other great freaks. I’ll revisit this question in 50 years time (or whenever the participation rates go up! If they do) Anyway, like that Zambian girl from arosar’s link I’m thrilled she exists. It’s just good.

Bereaved
13-09-2005, 12:05 PM
I don't argue with FG7 or FG7 clones - it is too much of a waste of my time. If you have been a frequent reader of the BB (and are FG7, or FG7's band mate), then you would know my views on females and female nurturing.

I am more interested in generating future players than suffering from colonial cringe over the strength of the players overseas, or from overseas.

You may not be interested in Gary or Ian's opinions, but I am and they have been expressed to me often.

Hi Jenni,

I'm not sure that the topic that 442 and yourself are discussing is the same one.

He seems to be suggesting that to offer a female title, irrespective of the time frame such things have existed for, is in extent a sexist attitude because the suggestion is that women are unable to achieve the same level of performance as men.

I agree that titles such as these do go a long way towards helping promote chess among women, and as I have previously said Well done to Narelle.

I think that within this discussion you have not addressed the issue of why there needs to be Female titles. A comment perhaps could be helpful?

If I have missed your comment on this matter, my apologies, perhaps you would be kind enough to point it out for me,

Take care and God bless, Macavity

PS would you share Ian's and Gary's opinion's with us here?

jenni
13-09-2005, 02:40 PM
Hi Jenni,

I'm not sure that the topic that 442 and yourself are discussing is the same one.

He seems to be suggesting that to offer a female title, irrespective of the time frame such things have existed for, is in extent a sexist attitude because the suggestion is that women are unable to achieve the same level of performance as men.

I agree that titles such as these do go a long way towards helping promote chess among women, and as I have previously said Well done to Narelle.

I think that within this discussion you have not addressed the issue of why there needs to be Female titles. A comment perhaps could be helpful?

If I have missed your comment on this matter, my apologies, perhaps you would be kind enough to point it out for me,

Take care and God bless, Macavity

PS would you share Ian's and Gary's opinion's with us here?

Actually I have been trying to avoid any discussion with him and just posting a few brief remarks.

Given that I have on numerous occasions posted my views on why there needs to be separate girls/womens competitions (titles are just an extension of that), I didn't really feel like repeating my views - particularly as they would be attacked by FG7 (as he has done in the past) and by the FG7 clone.

If you would like to pop into Box Hill Town Hall anytime from the 27th September to the 1st October or to Box Hill Chess Club on the 2nd October, I would be delighted to share my views and experience in girls chess with you.

I am sure they exist somewhere on this BB, but I really don't have the time to look for them.

Gary and Ian are very much in favour of promoting girls chess and in fact when I attempted to restrict the number of girls in the NECG squad last year, as I felt members should be picked on merit and go head on with boys, I found myself in a major fight with them. (Try arguing with an IM and a GM when you are rated 700 :) ). Both were strongly of the opinion that more girls had to be added - even at one time wanting a 50/50 representation.

I have never in my many discussions ever heard them derogatory about zonal titles generally or girls or female competitions or titles and in fact Ian was very supportive of Gareth and Shannon playing in the zonals and pointed out that Shannon would probably pick up a title.

It is interesting that it is often the weaker players who are the most elitist. In my experience the stronger the player the more generous they are and they more they wish to pormote chess at all levels.

arosar
13-09-2005, 02:51 PM
Look, at the end of the day, I don't have a particular problem with them young sheilas getting such titles. I mean, who knows, maybe they'll be encouraged enough to follow in the footsteps of that old bird, Nona (http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2621).

AR

jenni
13-09-2005, 04:03 PM
Look, at the end of the day, I don't have a particular problem with them young sheilas getting such titles. I mean, who knows, maybe they'll be encouraged enough to follow in the footsteps of that old bird, Nona (http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2621).

AR

Quite right AR - that's what it is all about - encouragement and trying to keep women/girls playing. Excellence follows in the long term.

Garvinator
13-09-2005, 04:26 PM
Lets see if i can unintentionally get another personally offensive spray for making some kind of statement :( :

Jenni, you seem to take the opinions of those who agree with you quite easily, but as soon as someone disagrees with you, you take the attitude of they must be wrong.

I think your position is fundamentally wrong on the issue of titles. Players who reach any kind of standard that would get them a title under the current system dont need any encouragement to keep playing by awarding a title.

Please dont take this as attacking anyone, because as I have said before, my problem is with the awarding of the titles, not to the person who received them.

Interesting that no person has actually asked what I believe the title award system should be? This is not an invitation to ask me now as the opportunity for genuine debate has been lost.

Rincewind
13-09-2005, 04:35 PM
I think your position is fundamentally wrong on the issue of titles. Players who reach any kind of standard that would get them a title under the current system dont need any encouragement to keep playing by awarding a title.

I think the encouragement Jenni refers to is that to those who are still aspiring. Of course those awarded the lower echelon of titles would still aspire to higher titles.

jenni
13-09-2005, 04:41 PM
Lets see if i can unintentionally get another personally offensive spray for making some kind of statement :( :

Jenni, you seem to take the opinions of those who agree with you quite easily, but as soon as someone disagrees with you, you take the attitude of they must be wrong.

I think your position is fundamentally wrong on the issue of titles. Players who reach any kind of standard that would get them a title under the current system dont need any encouragement to keep playing by awarding a title.

Please dont take this as attacking anyone, because as I have said before, my problem is with the awarding of the titles, not to the person who received them.

Interesting that no person has actually asked what I believe the title award system should be? This is not an invitation to ask me now as the opportunity for genuine debate has been lost.

Dear garvin

Where I respect someone I take their opinions on board. For e.g I disagreed quite volently with Gary and Ian on the subject of girls numbers in the NECG squad last year. However in the end because I respect them, their ability and their experience I conceded to have more girls last year and increased the ratio of girls in the Ergas squad this year. There is no doubt that few of those girls would have got in on merit.

You are entitled to have your opinion on titles I am entitled to disagree with you. You can consider my position fundamentally wrong, I can consider yours ill conceived. I never had any problem with you expressing your views - I had a lot of problem with the way it came out - sniffy remarks about Narelle.

If you would like to outline your position now, I am sure no-one would have any problems with it, and be happy to debate it. I actually believe you phrase your ideas clumsily rather than intending a personal attack, but that's the way it came out.

I still maintain that if you feel strongly then debating on this board is going to convince no-one and achieve nothing. I think the BB is great for a number of things but convincing FIDE and getting changes to awarding of titles by them is not one of them.

PHAT
13-09-2005, 06:17 PM
... then you would know my views on females and female nurturing.


Yes we know, and yes I agree with you. BUT, titles in adult chess ought to be awarded soley on merrit - same a university degrees.

arosar
13-09-2005, 06:21 PM
. . . same a university degrees.

Ha! That's what you think. Mate, look at all these Asians mate...who've basically inundated our uni system. Shesh!

I'm not even gonna bloody get started.

AR

jenni
13-09-2005, 07:03 PM
Yes we know, and yes I agree with you. BUT, titles in adult chess ought to be awarded soley on merrit - same a university degrees.

It's hard isn't it? - I used that arguement for NECG last year. That places ought to be on merit, apart from the 3 places we were holding for girls. I am very much in favour of doing extra things for girls and running girls only stuff so that they can win titles, trophies etc etc. I felt the boys were being disadvantaged by giving extra places to girls over and above what they would win on merit.

However it was pointed out that in athletics and swimming equal places are given to girls and boys and how could we hope to build up female strength except by getting decent numbers into the squad. I gave in (see I am not totally pig headed :) ) and in fact after the abysmal numbers of girls playing in the Aus Under 10 in Mt Buller, I became more converted to the concept. I still feel that girls development belongs at the state level and by the time we get to an Australian Elite Squad it should be on merit. However I am prepared to concede that we are probably a decade or two off that.

I actually don't have a problem that titles should be won on merit (although I do think we need male and female titles, because female chess world wide still has a lot of catching up to do). If the zonal titles vanished I wouldn't be fighting to get them back. However while they do exist it is crazy to blame people for going and winning them! The general feeling at the Zonal was that the guy who got the Im was well over due it and he was at IM strength.

Australians are at a huge disadvantage to Europeans as far as getting their FIDE ratings up etc. Laura Moylan has a zonal WIM - I think at that point her ACF was around 1800 and it is only since she moved to Sydney that her rating has gone above 2000. Her FIDE is still below 2100. Does anyone doubt though that she is actually significantly stronger than her FIDE suggests, given her strong results in Olympiad matches?

So in some ways, the existence of zonal titles helps to compensate Oceania players for the tyranny of distance - that they lack the easy opportunities Northern Hemisphere players have to get norms.

antichrist
13-09-2005, 07:12 PM
Keep at it Jenni for something you believe in.

Send a rocket in NSWCA's direction for demolishing the Women's Promotion Officer a few years back. What was wrong about this decision wasw that two activists were against the decision and probably would have taken the job on - maybe even as a team.

Thunderspirit
13-09-2005, 07:43 PM
I can confirm that 4-4-2 is not me. Nevertheless, 4-4-2 I will let you into a little secret, Jenni is the cheesecrap queen of the upper middle class hypocrisy circuit. She will talk all day about gender then turn around and argue that girls are superior to boys. When it comes to some non-descript ill informed gender stereotype that she herself has categorised for the rest of humanity she scores 10 out of 10, and as you are undoubtly aware is still stuck in the 70s vacumn of gender being a biological construct.

I have little doubt that when her yuppie spawn have finished their brilliant junior chess careers, that she will disappear into the kingdom of clouds, notably reserved for those suffering from ugly chess parent syndrome. I hasten to add, don't expect to much common sense on adult chess discussions from her, like most overbearing chess parents, she subsribes to the view juniors first adults never. :hand:

cheers Fg7


While Jenni and I may have differing opinions on this issue your attack on one of ACT Chess' most hardworking people is not justified. Over the past 10 years (more actually) she's done wonders for ACT Chess the landscape that has been completed recreated. From someone who lived through the changes there is probably no-one I can thank more for those changes than Jenni.

Back to the issue at hand. I'm a believer than any title in chess should be a reflection of a lifetime of hard work. In 1917 when Tsar Nicholas II 'crowned' the first batch of 'Grandmasters' there were less than 10 and they were to represent the very top of world chess. While the GM title today doesn't reflect such a small group of players there is no doubt that titles have become easier to come over the years. The 'FM' title is usual pay out point in this debate.
I'm sure there are FM's in Australian chess that dislike some others in Australian chess have a title having achieved at much softer requirements than others. I have also had similar discussion with IM's as well.
Two-Two-Four made an interesting point that players 1900 are not masters, and are best reasonable club players. 2000 FIDE is supposed to reflect an average club player by world standards (not a level of masterdom).
The US is obsessed with looking good and so have the USCF National Master title (2000) and USCF Master Title 2200. I have a book writen by a USCF National Master, which is a little embarrassing...

It's a bit of a two edged sword... If you play the zonal and you make the requirement you don't get to choose if you wish to accept the title. FIDE bill the ACF, and you recieve the title. While players can choose to play tournaments, like everything in life you must then take criticism if you are awarded a title which looks odd compared to your colleagues.

jenni
13-09-2005, 08:15 PM
While Jenni and I may have differing opinions on this issue your attack on one of ACT Chess' most hardworking people is not justified. Over the past 10 years (more actually) she's done wonders for ACT Chess the landscape that has been completed recreated. From someone who lived through the changes there is probably no-one I can thank more for those changes than Jenni.

.
Thanks Lee there were some interesting times weren't there? :lol:

Rhubarb
13-09-2005, 09:06 PM
I see you havnt been willing to justify why female players need seperate titles Jenni? Titles shouldnt be trinkets,they should be earned with blood sweat and tears. When Keg gets his IM title as i have no doubt he will,he will treasure it, sorry you missed out last year against bobby1972 Keg. :(442, thanks for your thoughts - yes I really will treasure getting the IM title if it happens - but I'm afraid, a la startor, I'm going to have to distance myself from your points of view.

Like a lot of people, I was upset in the early years after the sub-zonal split, not least because of the cynical manipulation by some of the players to get to 50% and the FM title. But since the 1 IM/2 FM cap, it's just not an issue these days. If players who are not quite IM or FM strength (both male and female) get the title by a good showing in the sub-zonal, then we should, as a sub-zone and as Jenni has already mentioned, consider this some kind of compensation towards the lack of genuine norm opportunities we get.

Besides, myself I've had two great chances to get the one-shot IM title, and at the rate I get norms (once every [erm] 14 years) that's a serious shortcut I want to take advantage of. ;)

It's been a long time since I begrudged anyone their FIDE title. For me, getting the IM title is now just a personal thing (although free entry would certainly be nice) much like trying to get one's rating over 2000, for example, and I don't really care about the devaluation any more.

P.S. You realise if you post controversially and anonmyously, you're just begging for an ID witch-hunt, particularly when you give out so many clues.

PHAT
13-09-2005, 11:57 PM
Ha! That's what you think. Mate, look at all these Asians mate...who've basically inundated our uni system.

It is not the fault of the OS students. If we are going soft on standards, then that is our fault.

PHAT
14-09-2005, 12:12 AM
While Jenni and I may have differing opinions on this issue your attack on one of ACT Chess' most hardworking people is not justified.

Listen Sir Galahad, JO is as tough as old boots and can handle FG7 on her own. Besides, an attack such as his on her is only typical BB sporting aggression. It is the heat in the kitchen and no reflection at all on her undoubted - even by FG7 - contributions to ACT chess.

four four two
14-09-2005, 01:00 AM
Let me say it once and for all,im not FG7. :mad:

Many of you people have failed to realise that FIDE has weakened the norm requirements for IMs and FMs/WIMs/WFMs for financial reasons,countries that have few titled players will gladly pay the fee to boost their number of titled players so as to lift their countries world rankings.

Jenni, have you looked at the fide lists for women?There are over 50 women above 2400elo,considering the particapation rate of women in world chess they are doing quite well.They dont need to be wrapped in cotton wool,full time professional female players are quite happy to compete on a level playing field.

Ps Keg,are you planning on playing in Brisbane or Queenstown or both? :)

auriga
14-09-2005, 07:55 AM
There are over 50 women above 2400elo,considering the particapation rate of women in world chess they are doing quite well.They dont need to be wrapped in cotton wool,full time professional female players are quite happy to compete on a level playing field.


can you read that much into that single statistic (50 > 2400 elo).
most of the top 50 are from eastern europe.
what is particaption rate of women in world chess?!
is it really doing that well.

Rincewind
14-09-2005, 07:58 AM
can you read that much into that single statistic (50 > 2400 elo).
most of the top 50 are from eastern europe.
what is particaption rate of women in world chess?!
is it really doing that well.

I haven't checked the list but I would expect just Armenia and Georgia alone to account for a good percentage of that 50 (on a per capita basis).

Lucena
14-09-2005, 10:10 AM
P.S. You realise if you post controversially and anonmyously, you're just begging for an ID witch-hunt, particularly when you give out so many clues.

I'm jumping on the bandwagon - I say it's fg7.

Bereaved
14-09-2005, 10:29 AM
Try again, I don't think that one is a winner.
or anything to do with FIDE titles??? :owned:
Take care and God Bless, Macavity

jenni
14-09-2005, 12:13 PM
I haven't checked the list but I would expect just Armenia and Georgia alone to account for a good percentage of that 50 (on a per capita basis).

I would think so. The Georgian girls are truly scary. Angela Song played one in the under 10's. Angela got into a really good position against her and the girl started kicking her under the table to try and distract her. I am glad to say it didn't work. :) The Georgians have put a huge amount of development work into female chess for years.

antichrist
14-09-2005, 12:23 PM
I would think so. The Georgian girls are truly scary. Angela Song played one in the under 10's. Angela got into a really good position against her and the girl started kicking her under the table to try and distract her. I am glad to say it didn't work. :) The Georgians have put a huge amount of development work into female chess for years.

One may say there was a little bit of justice there - what goes round comes round!

jenni
14-09-2005, 01:58 PM
JO is as tough as old boots

sigh ... and there was I thinking more shy Southern Belle. ;)

Denis_Jessop
14-09-2005, 04:25 PM
I would think so. The Georgian girls are truly scary. Angela Song played one in the under 10's. Angela got into a really good position against her and the girl started kicking her under the table to try and distract her. I am glad to say it didn't work. :) The Georgians have put a huge amount of development work into female chess for years.

Hi Jenni

Are you implying that the Georgians include below-board kicking classes as part of a holistic approach to chess instruction? :doh: :lol: :rolleyes:

DJ

koltara
14-09-2005, 04:30 PM
Libby, Garvin is trying to bait us into feeling sorry for him but I do not believe he should get away with it.

Usually when I disagree with someone on this BB I just let it go. However, I feel very strongly about this one.

We are all working to promote chess as a community in different ways, from different geographical locations. Garvin's comments are taking us ALL a step backwards - belittling the success of one of our hardest working chessplayers and also probably hurting her feelings in the process - did you consider that, Garvin?

Regardless of whether you meant it or not, quite a few people have taken offence at what you said. Grow some balls, retract the comments and congratulate Narelle on her achievement.

Coming from someone who called someone 'looking like a horse' just because that person expressed disagreement with someone you clearly very fond of ,you critisizing anyone of hurting someone's feelings is just a tiny bit hypocritical.

arosar
14-09-2005, 04:39 PM
Coming from someone who called someone 'looking like a horse' just because that person expressed disagreement with someone you clearly very fond of ,you critisizing anyone of hurting someone's feelings is just a tiny bit hypocritical.

That was Doro wasn't it?

AR

koltara
14-09-2005, 04:42 PM
That was Doro wasn't it?

AR
Oh sorry I got confused then.

jenni
14-09-2005, 05:06 PM
Hi Jenni

Are you implying that the Georgians include below-board kicking classes as part of a holistic approach to chess instruction? :doh: :lol: :rolleyes:

DJ

Well I don't know whether it is part of their coaching techniques, but those Georgian girls are tough cookies (fortunately so is Angela).

antichrist
14-09-2005, 05:12 PM
Well I don't know whether it is part of their coaching techniques, but those Georgian girls are tough cookies (fortunately so is Angela).

And she has her own tactics!

Alan Shore
14-09-2005, 05:18 PM
Don't really get the thread title... I hardly think Garvin's envious, I believe he was referring to the issue of devalued FIDE titles.

I mean, Greg has every right to be miffed (even though he's not shown it to his credit) - a FIDE Master should by rights indicate a great achievement and a rating of over 2300, not by some glitch in the system.

I just fear such titles will lose respect. If FM = 1900 rather than FM = 2300, it's not hard to see how this is occurring.

If the average of WIM and WFM are also brought down, then the same process occurs. Yes, these people have achieved these titles and congratulations to them - they fulfilled the requirements and I hope it further motivates them in their chess careers. However it is not the people who have achieved the titles that need be under scrutiny but rather the processes leading to their award.

So I hope everyone who's gone off all half-cocked can grasp the concept as I present it and see reason in what I say, instead of accusing people of 'petty envy'.

Rhubarb
14-09-2005, 06:15 PM
Don't really get the thread title... I hardly think Garvin's envious, I believe he was referring to the issue of devalued FIDE titles.

I mean, Greg has every right to be miffed (even though he's not shown it to his credit) - a FIDE Master should by rights indicate a great achievement and a rating of over 2300, not by some glitch in the system.

I just fear such titles will lose respect. If FM = 1900 rather than FM = 2300, it's not hard to see how this is occurring.

If the average of WIM and WFM are also brought down, then the same process occurs. Yes, these people have achieved these titles and congratulations to them - they fulfilled the requirements and I hope it further motivates them in their chess careers. However it is not the people who have achieved the titles that need be under scrutiny but rather the processes leading to their award.

So I hope everyone who's gone off all half-cocked can grasp the concept as I present it and see reason in what I say, instead of accusing people of 'petty envy'.
Huh?

I mean welcome back and all that Dion, but I thought I made myself pretty clear. (http://www.chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=69533&postcount=108) I'm not 'miffed'.

Alan Shore
15-09-2005, 12:28 AM
Huh?

I mean welcome back and all that Dion, but I thought I made myself pretty clear. (http://www.chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=69533&postcount=108) I'm not 'miffed'.

Geez, I just re-read my post, it did appear that way.. stupid me. Sorry for the miscommunication.

I meant to say you weren't but would understand if you were, (which you're not). What a thing to muck up on...

jenni
15-09-2005, 03:54 PM
. I hasten to add, don't expect to much common sense on adult chess discussions from her, like most overbearing chess parents, she subsribes to the view juniors first adults never. :hand:

cheers Fg7

I didn't read this bit, as it gets too boring to finish reading FG7's posts when he is in rabbiting mode.

However someone pointed it out to me and I am left wondering why if I am so anti adult I have been helping run an adult club for years now?

In fact for the last couple of years I have been the DOP for the tournaments. Now I know you are probably all rolling on the ground laughing at the thought. :lol: However it is not so bad. People like Ian Rout wanted to be able to concentrate on their game and I don't really care about mine, so it works quite well. Even a 5 year old can enter names and byes and do a draw, using SP. If there are any disputes I can't handle (and we very really have any) I can always call on Shaun, Ian etc to sort them out.

Probably the biggest thing I did wrong was this time last year when one of the adults managed to convince me I had stuffed something up and sent out a provisional draw that was different to the one I had at the club. Based on his complaints I swapped colours. Big mistake :wall:

We have a very co-operative environment in Canberra, where adults, juniors etc all work well together. For some years now parents have played a major role in running the ANU Festival and help at Doeberl. Adults provide invaluable assistance to the juniors as well.

I believe firmly in migration paths between the junior and adult environments and believe the most important measure of success of the junior environment is how many are retained as adults.

Nice to see that strong ACT junior Michael Wei has qualified to play in the Aus Championships, becasue he has won the ACT Championships. :clap:

WhiteElephant
12-10-2005, 03:43 PM
Coming from someone who called someone 'looking like a horse' just because that person expressed disagreement with someone you clearly very fond of ,you critisizing anyone of hurting someone's feelings is just a tiny bit hypocritical.

After your recent racist post which was deleted, I looked back through some of your other posts and found the above.

Please explain what you are talking about. I stand by everything that I have said and do not recall ever saying anyone looked like a horse. If I did hurt someone's feelings unintentionally then I would like to know about it so that I can clear up the situation.

WE

arosar
12-10-2005, 03:47 PM
He was talking about DoroPhil. He just thought it was you.

AR

WhiteElephant
12-10-2005, 03:49 PM
Oh ok cool I just bothered to read the rest of the thread :)

koltara
12-10-2005, 04:52 PM
After your recent racist post which was deleted, I looked back through some of your other posts and found the above.

Please explain what you are talking about. I stand by everything that I have said and do not recall ever saying anyone looked like a horse. If I did hurt someone's feelings unintentionally then I would like to know about it so that I can clear up the situation.

WE
I have never posted any 'racist post'. That was very accurate and the most easily verifiable fact, and I did not make any inferences from it and did not supply any of mine or anyone elses views on that matter. You obviously beleive that stating facts is racist.
As for the 'looking like a horse' - just like AR explained.

WhiteElephant
12-10-2005, 06:09 PM
I have never posted any 'racist post'. That was very accurate and the most easily verifiable fact, and I did not make any inferences from it and did not supply any of mine or anyone elses views on that matter. You obviously beleive that stating facts is racist.
As for the 'looking like a horse' - just like AR explained.

Your post was deleted. I assumed that the reason for this was because it was clearly uncomplementary to people of Lebanese origin. Perhaps it was deleted for another reason - I am not sure.

koltara
13-10-2005, 09:14 AM
Your post was deleted. I assumed that the reason for this was because it was clearly uncomplementary to people of Lebanese origin. Perhaps it was deleted for another reason - I am not sure.
My post would clearly not be uncomplementary to any reasonable person of Lebanese origin. I have pointed something out to AC which was relevant to his post and asked him a question. I have deleted a post for another reason - let me assure you.

antichrist
13-10-2005, 11:08 AM
My post would clearly not be uncomplementary to any reasonable person of Lebanese origin. I have pointed something out to AC which was relevant to his post and asked him a question. I have deleted a post for another reason - let me assure you.

Which post was it anyway?

Just as my posts would clearly not be uncomplementary to any reasonable person of French origin. Refer "antichrist the francophobe - split from World Junior Thread"

pull_my_finger
13-10-2005, 11:13 AM
Which post was it anyway?

Just as my posts would clearly not be uncomplementary to any reasonable person of French origin.
And rightly so! :lol: