Chess Scotland Noticeboard

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 5:11 pm Post subject:

Good post Phil.

Let us have another look at that table where the top players
re-locate to:

1 Israel
2. Canada
3. Switzerland
4. Netherlands
5. Sweden
6. USA
7. Britain

And now the number of times one of those countires have won the Olympiad.

USA last won it in 1974 - a bit before you lot allowed computers
to take over your minds.

Holland - won it in 1937. (no comment).

And that's it.

Hmmmm..... Nothing much there.

Out of sheer curiousity, just to make it complete.

Let us look at Mother Russia (No.46) on the computer list.

I wonder how many times they have won it.

Oh dear 30 times including every event from 1982-2002.

I think it's best if you guys really stop trying to justify your
constant use of computers.

Every time you all post I'm finding more ammo and knocking you back.

Be aware that from now on every time you leave the set in the box
and train via a box you will have this nagging doubt in the back of your mind.

"Is this really doing me any good.....Is this really doing me any good."

I can always point to all the great players who never even heard of a
computer.

You cannot deny or disprove this. It's a solid 100% fact.

So far you have been clinging to Magnus Carlsen like a baby does
to it's blanket.

Go to a mirror.

Look in the mirror.

You are NOT Magnus Carlsen.

Paul Denham · Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:43 pm Post subject:

Think we should all agree that there is room for both perspectives on this debate and that neither is unequivocally wrong.

I for one have used the board and set a bit more since we started the debate... something I needed to do anyway.

The reasonable no of people from 1360 players all the way up to a Grandmaster and former British Chess Champion showing some support for the view that use of computers in chess training is not in itself a bad thing, show that what Geoff would see as the arguments against his points are not chess heresy.

I want to leave this debate for now with one question for Geoff. I have a nice wee pocket set (magnetic wooden pieces and wooden folding board which I use from time to time. Does this count as getting the board and set out or does the much smaller scale invalidate the usefulness of using this pocket/travel set?? (In all seriousness I don't think its very effective as close hand tactics (minor pieces close to pawns etc etc) are all compressed into something ... well... erm... the size of a postage stamp)

I only use it when preparing for the Liliputian Open Chess Championships and analysing my games afterwards from that event. Wink

PD

SteveHilton · King Joined: 24 Jul 2007 Posts: 443 Location: Greenock

I think that some reality is needed in this debate.
The fact is that there is increased competition for our free time, certainly a lot more than I started to play Very Happy

!!

This to me makes a different marketing approach necessary in order to get people of whatever age especially juniors to take up the sport a more aggressive approach is needed now.

I confess that I do not have the solution to my own thoughts on this but can only recognise the problem.

Steve Hilton
Secretary General
IBCA

Phil Thomas · King Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 758

Great to read that post Geoff,

I can tell that I'm winning the debate when you start to compare me with a baby.

Firstly up to 1990 there was a Soviet Union team competing in the Olympiad. Then from 1992 there was a Russian team. The Russian team came first in 1992 to 2002, 2nd in 2004, 6th in 2006 and 5th in 2008.

The stats that you produced showing that Russia was 48th in the list of computer ownership was data from 2006. Yes 2006 the year in which Russia came 6th in the olympiad. Their worst performance since ...

Secondly some speculation. The value of computers to chess players was much greater in 2006 than when Russia last won the Chess Olympiad in 2002.

Thirdly I wrote on January 10th that
….. to produce an impressive number of grandmasters a country needs most of the following.

1. A well established chess playing culture.
2. Significant state support or alternative sponsorships deals.
3. Harsh winter weather.
4. Access to computers and the internet.
5. Relocating Grandmasters.

Showing that item 5 of the 5 items on this list fails to predict fully success in the Olympiad does not disprove my hypothesis.

I think most of the readers of this notice board will agree that Russia has historically scored highly under points1, 2, 3,

Would you agree with that statement Geoff?

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 2:15 am Post subject:

Hi. Phil

Re-read my post.

Cannot see me comparing YOU to a baby.

My statement reads:

I think it's best if you guys really stop trying to justify your
constant use of computers.

So it was not aimed at you in person, it was aimed at the collective. The Borg.

I know I'm winning the argument as you are now make false comparisons.

You are quoting the Soviet Union and then Russia which is splitting hairs.
(clutching at straws).

Russia. came 6th in 2006.

I cannot see your point.

Are you saying that Russia came 6th because the other 5 teams
finishing above them all used computers to train their players.

Fritz won the 2006 Olympiad? Is that what you are saying?

Does Chessbase know this?

Now this bit,

"….. to produce an impressive number of grandmasters a country needs most of the following.

1. A well established chess playing culture.
2. Significant state support or alternative sponsorships deals.
3. Harsh winter weather.
4. Access to computers and the internet.
5. Relocating Grandmasters.

Showing that item 5 of the 5 items on this list fails to predict fully success in the Olympiad does not disprove my hypothesis. "

I think most of the readers of this notice board will agree that Russia
has historically scored highly under points 1, 2, 3,

Would you agree with that statement Geoff?

OK let me think about it.

Agree on No1.

½ on point No2 (no sponsorship in Russia - I have seen 40's and 50's
Russian mags - no adverts)

You are not having 3. the harsh winter conditions.

Show me an Eskimo Grandmaster.
Not some bloke who comes from Iceland, an Eskimo.

Hi Paul.

A Pocket set does not count either. It has to be a set you play OTB with.

Now before one of The Borg start hitting their keyboards.

(read in a squeaky girlie voice)

"Fischer used a pocket chess set."

Go to the mirror.

Look in the Mirror

You are not Fischer either.

Paul Denham · Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 8:42 am Post subject:

Geoff,

I have a nice wooden set in the house bought from the Old Chess Suppliers shop in Hope Street.

Apart from Bearsden - my club and all those I have visited play with plastic board and sets.

I too have a plastic board and set pretty much identical to those used in clubs/congresses?

Will I get diminishing returns if I use the wooden one over the plastic one?

Re Russian sponsorship of the 40's & 50's..... thing they might have had a teensy weensy bit of state support on that one... Botvinnik's letter fawning over his loyalty to Stalin in 1948 and all that good stuff. Formation of the Central Club in Moscow around that time etc etc.

Yours in Chess

Paul (I am not Alekhine. I am not Capablanca. I am not Kramnik) Denham.

Phil Thomas · King Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 758

admin · Site Admin Joined: 09 Jan 2007 Posts: 1386

William Hulme · Queen Joined: 08 Mar 2007 Posts: 84

Stop it! I've just spilt my coffee Laughing

Stuart Blyth · King Joined: 11 Sep 2008 Posts: 209

I think Geoff's argument has wider implications.

I bet everyone has been writing their posts using computers/word processing software.

Oh you fools!! You idiots!!

Why have there not been complaints lamenting the falling standard of English?

Would the quality of the posts (both grammatically and in terms of content) not greatly improve if posters had to write it out with pencil and paper first?

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 3:53 pm Post subject:

Hi Paul.

Sponsorhip is when companies give money to chess and players.

Ie. Chessbase pays re-located GM's to write nice things about all the ways
a computer can help you improve.

And the Borg cannot read between the lines that this guy,
who learned his Chess without the aid of the comouter is writing
what they want because he wants the money.

And the Borg are happy because it makes learning how to improve
so much easier.

The fact that it is totally worthless and damaging is beyond them.
A GM wrote it on Chessbase. All is good in the land of the Borg.

Re: Chess Set.

Two chess sets and you are starting to us them to study.

Go to the mirror.

Look in the mirror.

You are looking the a future Scottish Champion.

Hi Phil.

"can we agree in general that Russia has harsh winters.
can we agree in general that Russia state support helped development of their top players. "

I think I know where this is going...however...

As a large portion of Russia is in the Artic Circle then 'parts'
of the country do indeed have harsh Winters.

Yes the state did help and support development of it's top players.

This started in 1920's and without the aid of computers Russia
went on to dominate the Chess World.

Alex McFarlane · King Joined: 13 Mar 2007 Posts: 413

For once Geoff is irrefutably correct. The Borg never used computers. He did try but couldn’t get the same top spin so he stuck to using his tennis racquet.

So the moral is – always use the right equipment but avoid meeting women in cupboards.

Phil Thomas · King Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 758

When the Russian state gave money to chess and chessplayers it had asimilar effect to a company doing the same thing. I guess though the advertising campaign would have differed a little.

Actually it was Boris in the cupboard at a Japanese restaurant with a Russian model. An easy mistake to make.

Reference the Russian climate. Its not the latitude more the location in the centre of a large land mass. Moscow is roughly as far south of the Arctic circle as Perth. According to the BBC site Moscow will have a maximum temperature of minus 17 degrees C on Monday. While Rejkyavic just south of the Arctic circle will on the same day peak at plus 6 degrees Centigrade.

Stuart Blyth · King Joined: 11 Sep 2008 Posts: 209

Maybe that's it?
Could 'land-mass-effect' be the missing factor, the missing piece in the jigsaw, so to speak?

Mind you, how many GMs are produced on lighthouses?

Geoff Chandler · Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 10:52 pm Post subject:

Hi ALex:

"For once Geoff is irrefutably correct....."

When was the the other time?

Hi Stuart.

"...how many GMs are produced on lighthouses?"

That is becuase there is no one to play with except a
computer and everyone knows...etc. etc. etc.

Hi Phil.

"When the Russian state gave money to chess and chessplayers it had
a similar effect to a company doing the same thing...."

Well yes and no.

The Rissian 'stipend' could be stopped at anytime and the player
(and family) could be relocated to 'Harsher Climes' or simply had his
job taken away from him.

A company would simply cancel the contract and risk getting sued.

Perth is on the same latitude as Moscow. OK.

Where are you going with this?

Perth should the same amount of GM's as Moscow?