Chess
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
Gender differences in chess
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=7826
Read the top part, but the scientific study begins at "Debunking Myths about Gender and Mathematics Performance". Makes for interesting reading.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=7826
Read the top part, but the scientific study begins at "Debunking Myths about Gender and Mathematics Performance". Makes for interesting reading.
That was a good read, well done. I used to play chess all the time, but I havent in years, this could be the place to get back into it again.
You know, in the age of 3000 rated computers, the way we decide the result of a chess game is somewhat silly.
A chess game can either be a win for white, a win for black, or a draw. In traditional scoring, a win counts as 1, a loss as 0, and a draw as .5. In modern scoring systems, in order to encourage exciting chess, the win counts as 3, and the draw as 1.
The problem with all of this is that chess is a minefield. You can make 39 good moves, and one move spoils the whole thing. So in chess, tactics plays an overwhelming role. Shouldn't the game have a more strategical balance? I suspect that Go is far more strategical in that a tactical error only spoils a sector and not the whole game. How strategical a game is probably a function of board size, and of course connectivity of influence among "quadrants".
Consider the alternative. When a game is played, a computer (like the rybka or other chess superclusters) goes over the game and keeps track of the evaluation at each move. I claim that the score a player gets should not only be based on whether he wins or loses, but on the quality of the game he plays. So say I am winning for 39 moves and I blunder and lose. Say Rybka says that for those 39 moves, my average advantage was 1.25, or one and a quarter pawn. I claim that the result (in modern scoring) should be, 2.00 for you, and 1.00 for me. The winner rounds up and the loser down. The idea is that this makes chess less like Mine Sweeper and more like, well, Chess! A variant of this was computer assisted chess, but that seems too far removed from what human beings like about chess, the human element.
One advantage of this is that older players can also compete with younger players, since age tends to kill tactical vision, but strategic thinking is mostly intact.
A chess game can either be a win for white, a win for black, or a draw. In traditional scoring, a win counts as 1, a loss as 0, and a draw as .5. In modern scoring systems, in order to encourage exciting chess, the win counts as 3, and the draw as 1.
The problem with all of this is that chess is a minefield. You can make 39 good moves, and one move spoils the whole thing. So in chess, tactics plays an overwhelming role. Shouldn't the game have a more strategical balance? I suspect that Go is far more strategical in that a tactical error only spoils a sector and not the whole game. How strategical a game is probably a function of board size, and of course connectivity of influence among "quadrants".
Consider the alternative. When a game is played, a computer (like the rybka or other chess superclusters) goes over the game and keeps track of the evaluation at each move. I claim that the score a player gets should not only be based on whether he wins or loses, but on the quality of the game he plays. So say I am winning for 39 moves and I blunder and lose. Say Rybka says that for those 39 moves, my average advantage was 1.25, or one and a quarter pawn. I claim that the result (in modern scoring) should be, 2.00 for you, and 1.00 for me. The winner rounds up and the loser down. The idea is that this makes chess less like Mine Sweeper and more like, well, Chess! A variant of this was computer assisted chess, but that seems too far removed from what human beings like about chess, the human element.
One advantage of this is that older players can also compete with younger players, since age tends to kill tactical vision, but strategic thinking is mostly intact.
Only in NYC do you have chess clubs like these:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q....706214,-73.998756&spn=0.081722,0.188828&z=12
Running a hedge fund on the top floor, then coming down stairs for a few quick blitz games after market closes. Aaaaaaaaaah.....
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q....706214,-73.998756&spn=0.081722,0.188828&z=12
Running a hedge fund on the top floor, then coming down stairs for a few quick blitz games after market closes. Aaaaaaaaaah.....
I used to live around the corner on West 3rd and MacDougal. You obviously have no idea where that little smelly chess store is located. There are no hedgefunds being operated in the vicinity. There was another chess store across the street, The Chess Forum, that I preferred. The owner was a Lebanese named Imad, a good guy. Both places were frequented by the same degenerates, which most chess players are. A couple of blocks away is Washington Square Park, where the hustlers hang out and try to get passersby to play blitz for money. I was never tempted to take advantage of them because they looked so desperate.
You like to romanticize a lot about chess, which is OK I guess. I've been around chess most of my life and probably know it a lot differently than you do. The best decision I ever made in life was to give up serious chess when I entered college. It wasn't so much a conscious decision but that I got sucked in by the fraternity parties and getting laid as much as I could. I played in a few weekenders and represented my university in a regional scholastic tournament, which I won, but that was it.
Every once in awhile I drop in at my old chess club and see a lot of familiar faces; all of them have lower ratings now and most aren't doing well financially. I still remember them as cheap bastards but I pick up the tab every time we go eat afterwards to catch up. The conversations don't leave the chess world much and without the chessboard on the table to focus our attention on, we have little in common. I used to have to give time odds when I was younger. Now I lose more than I win playing 5 minutes straight up, and it hardly matters. People who take chess too seriously are generally fucked up and have a hard time dealing with life outside the 64 squares. I know a lot of people who love chess but chess does not love them back.
for those few who understand german.
A german comedian makes fun of a bavarian chess club, with the help of an pro chess player kid.
its too funny..........
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GC_3llEJodQ
A german comedian makes fun of a bavarian chess club, with the help of an pro chess player kid.
its too funny..........
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GC_3llEJodQ
No I don't. I am glad that in such an expensive city, people still find a way to make chess work.
Then I would be the first. I have no problem with that.
Chess attracts all sorts of people. Thankfully, it has shown to be a sanctuary for people that have nothing, or have had a rough life, or even some mild form of mental illness. I know children whose life has been turned around by chess. Chess is extremely popular in prisons, where it has been shown to heal the criminal mind. On the other side of the spectrum, you have professional people that come down and play blitz during their lunch time. Chess has no bias or prejudice.
Yep. Washington square chess players, if they can make a buck here or there for their smokes, they are happy.
"Nosce te ipsum"
For me it has been a life long love affair. So few of us can make a really good living from the game, that we rationalize giving it up. I gave competitive chess up because competitive bridge suited my psychology better. But I hold chess in the highest esteem for the sheer pleasure and beauty that is the game. It asks nothing of me, and no matter where I go in the world, I know that I can walk into a chess club and have built in friends.
Chess is a friend, an art, a science, a sport, a social event, to me. Chess, like life, is what we make it.
Quote from HATEtheRisk:
for those few who understand german.
A german comedian makes fun of a bavarian chess club, with the help of an pro chess player kid.
its too funny..........
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GC_3llEJodQ
my german's not the best but hilarious just same!