Joining Shirov and Carlsen, Aronian tosses his own open letter into the ring here to protest against FIDE adding a new candidates tournament to the world championship cycle. Someone in the comments said Aronian was saying he would drop out of the GP if they didn't reverse the changes, but he doesn't say that or anything like it. He expresses his "disappointment" and points out that the canceled GP events of Doha and Montreux have found replacement sites (Elista and Yerevan). There's no ultimatum, just a calm letter of protest. A few clips.
With the [General Assembly's] recent actions, it seems that there is a democratic deficit within FIDE. The GA did not consult the players currently taking part in the Grand Prix in their decision processes. Please keep in mind a very important point - these players, including myself, have a legally binding agreement with FIDE regarding the World Championship cycle and the Grand Prix. Therefore it is FIDE's duty to consult the other party of the contract - the participants.
Does this mean that the chess players have lesser rights than others? The GA appears to act with no concern for the players. The decision to suddenly change the World Championship cycle has damaging effects on the career plans of leading chess players. It is also reasonable to ask: why should we go through several tournaments over several years and fight for a place in a tournament that another player gets by losing a match? The GA's decisions remove the motivation for players like myself to take part in the World Championship cycle. . . .
It seems that FIDE was on the right path towards a reliable World Championship cycle, which had the support of leading players and chess federations worldwide. However, with the GA's recent actions, FIDE has left the right path and will lose its credibility in the eyes of chess players world wide - not to mention, ruin its efforts to be recognized as a sport by the IOC. I hope that the above arguments will be heard before finalizing the decisions of the GA.
FIDE losing credibility in the eyes of chessplayers would be like Paris Hilton losing the respect of the Christian right. Anyway, it's great Aronian is speaking out. But we'll see if action is also on the menu if FIDE continues their usual habit of completely ignoring the players.
Nice comparison of style: Carlsen made direct contact with FIDE, and withdrew when he saw they weren't willing to enter a dialogue.
Aronian plays subtle manoeuvers, keeps his options open, and lets them mull over his unspoken threat.
It's a pity they didn't consult with each other.
Quoted from Aronian's open letter:
"The GA's decisions remove the motivation for players like myself to take part in the World Championship cycle."
and in the comparison that Aronian tossed up in the hypothetical where the rules were changed in a marathon:
"The runners thus lose motivation to run and consequently distrust the rule makers."
I, and perhaps others as well, read the 'loss of motivation' as Aronian considering to drop out of the World Championship cycle if the changes are not retracted.
Nice to see another World Class player speaks out. And that he mentions the funny "candidate because match-loser" clause.
These stupid rematch and buy-in clauses by Topalov and Kramnik stink.
Chess players of the World unite! If I had a few bucks too much like Bill Gates, I knew how to create a new FIDE. But as the saying goes: I whistle the song of the one who pays me. And as long as chess players see a nice income by playing the remainer of the Grand Prix they wont resign from it.
In fact, Aronian is the first top-GM to send an open letter considering the changing procedure for World Championship. Shirov's one was mainly on Ivanchuk case. As for Carlsen, he just made public his private correspondence with FIDE officials, nothing more. And he did it in his blog, so one must be thankful to ChessBase for publishin'it.
Maybe that is why Levon's appeal sounds (for me) more thoughtful. At least there is no place for caprice-like - "Going to the new venue Elista in wintertime and over Christmas was not something Magnus wanted to do".
zero ego,
I think you are right, and if he does indeed drop out then that would definitely make the Grand Prix meaningless for the purposes of a world championship cycle. No disrespect to the other participants, but (without much room for argument) that would mean that two of the top three players originally included could not be playing. It remains to be seen how other events will affect the third player (Ivanchuk).
"These stupid rematch and buy-in clauses by Topalov and Kramnik stink."
i think you misspelled "kamsky" there. technically, kramnik has no clause naming him yet, unlike three other fellows.
is it just me, or do topa fans seem to forget the gift he's been offered, while us kamsky fans seem to forget that kamsky strangely also got this exact same deal? while kamsky is a super-gm, he's not _elite_ the way topalov is - whatever us fans like to believe, kamsky isn't up there with anand, topalov, ivanchuk, carlsen, kramnik and morozevich. [no, kamsky's 1,5-0,5 in some 2 game semi-final doesn't make that untrue.]
auto-qualification for someone who is just barely top-20 in the ratings must look even worse in the eyes of people like radjabov, aronian and ivanchuk, who all have consistently performed better than kamsky since the latter's come-back in professional chess.
does anyone think a bookie would give me decent odds on a bet that kamsky and topalov were somehow lead to understand (by kirsan) that if they came nicely to terms regarding their semi-final match, something nice would happen? if i visited a bookmaker and brought The Mighty All-knowing Oracle of the Past, introduced the bookmaker and the oracle to each other, i'm sure the bookie would've given me about 1,0 times my money back on such a bet.
kamsky qualified for the semi-final of the 2007-2010 cycle - good for him! he's done NOTHING YET to deserve any "semi-final" event in the 2008-2011 cycle. those two things are unrelated. kamsky has so far scored the same number of grand prix points in TWO (2) events as aronian scored in ONE (1). surely, we must provide kamsky with a semi-final spot - that's only logical. duh.
Carlsen played on Aronians clubteam this year. They are friends. Aronians protest-letter to FIDE shows that Carlsen is not alone among the super-GMs.
Apart from that, I am sure Aronian will complete his Grand Prix contract, whatever motivation. -Simply because Armenia just announced that they will host one GP tournament i 2009. FIDE president Kirsan Ilyumzhinov has personally thanked Armenia president Serzh Sargsyan for this act. The big boys have been talking together...
Topa should talk again about this charade, he already said that he was against changes in the cycle.
He doesn´t need the loser match clauses at all ,he should make that clear so everybody can stop complaining about him and start understanding that this changes are made for another player.
No, I did not misspell "Kamsky". Kamsky qualified by winning the World Cup. All players who took part in the World Cup knew that the winner will play Topalov in a semi-final match of the World Championship.
The question remains why Topalov got a semi-final wild card.
And Kramnik already got his shot at the title in Bonn. Why? I like Kramnik and think he was a worthy challenger, but still there was no logical reason why he should have a match afer losing the title in 2007. I know there were probably a lot of political reasons.
If you don't like Kamsky, that's your problem. He qualified square and fair, not by some dubious right noone else has.
Seems to me that players are finally beginning to come around to Garry Kimovich's way of thinking...
What's the point of having organized chess and a unified World Championship title when FIDE can render it meaningless by changing conditions and structure however it wants, whenever it wants, even in the middle of an announced cycle? Chess professionals must think they are stuck in real-life version of "Don Quixote"...
Paul Franklin,
Kamsky qualified for this cycle, but not the next one (unless he becomes world champion). If we consider the question of who is "more elite" to be a non issue then what we have is
1. Kamsky qualifying for cycle 1 and receiving a spot in cycle 2 as a gift.
2. Topalov receiving spots in both cycle 1 and cycle 2 as gifts (as far as I can tell, this is unprecedented. Not even Karpov got this, as he had to win the super final against Sokolov in 1987 to receive his 1990 quarterfinal match spot).
"I like Kramnik and think he was a worthy challenger, but still there was no logical reason why he should have a match afer losing the title in 2007."
Because he didn't lose his title in a match.
i certainly don't dislike kamsky. i dislike that so many seem to mix up the two different cycles we are talking about here. let me repeat some of what i said:
"kamsky qualified for the semi-final of the 2007-2010 cycle - good for him! he's done NOTHING YET to deserve any "semi-final" event in the 2008-2011 cycle. those two things are unrelated."
carlsen didn't withdraw from anything concerning the 2007-2010 cycle. aronian isn't complaining about rule changes for the 2007-2010 cycle. so why are you talking about "kamsky qualifying fair and square"?
until last week there were nothing in the rules that 3 players from the previous cycle went directly to the "semi-final event" of the next cycle. there didn't even exist any such event until last week, and there is no presedence nor reason to giving the losers of both the semi-final and the final another free shot in the next cycle.
true, kamsky has been _trying_ to qualify for the 2011 wc final, but with rather moderate luck so far:
shared 8-10 (of 13) in the first grand prix
shared 3-4 in the second
people with a better start include:
wang yue shared 1-3 and shared 3-4
aronian unshared 1st (played only one)
carlsen shared 1-3 (played only one)
radjabov shared 8-10 and unshared 2nd
gashimov shared 1-3 and shared 8-9
mamedyarov shared 4-5 (played only one)
all the above have collected more points than kamsky per event they've played so far.
we need a new Chess Organisation including the amateur chess, and all the local structure in the conutries. This should be established by a "Klub der Willigen". So France, USA, Germany, England, India ... could establish a new Organisation. The other countries then may take part or not.
In this new organisation the structure should guarantee the dominance of the sport over other interests like power.
Actually I wouldn't mind at all if Anand now decided to break with FIDE and that a new Grand Prix/WC cycle was announced. The new GP should be based on already existing strong tournaments (Corus, MTel, Linares & Dortmund + possibly one more). The winner of the GP 2009-10 can then challenge Anand in late 2010.
Doesn't this seem easier than creating new tournaments to establish the challenger?
In my perfect world I would like to add some details to my idea:
I'd like the above tournaments to have the same format (single round robin, 10 players). I'd like all tournaments to be forced to invite the top 8 in the latest ELO-list (allowing for one participant from the tournaments previous class B + one invitee for the organisers). I'd like all GP-tournaments to have either an open B-group of their own or licensing this possibility to another tournament.
All we need is for Anand, the other top 7 players in the world and the four organisers of the above mentioned tournaments to agree on this format and we're off to a bright new future!
Mind you: of course I do demand a 20% tax paid to ME on all price funds if this idea comes through. ;-)
To SetNoEscapeOn :
"2. Topalov receiving spots in both cycle 1 and cycle 2 as gifts (as far as I can tell, this is unprecedented."
No, it is not - Kramnik. Three spots and counting.
I don't think Kamsky should get automatic qualification to the candidates tournament. He is just WAY TOO WEAK!
As long as Radjabov does not qualify I am happy!!
Anand should threaten FIDE with an ultimatum: Change the qualifier system to what it was by Dec 31 2008 otherwise I resign my World Championship title and ask my lawyers to send Ilyumzhinov a big "F*&k you very much letter".
But Vishy has no balls...his wife is the one who calls the shots in this matter...in fact if it wasn't for the wife Vishy wouldn't even be World Champion...as they say Behind every succesful coward their is a woman....
sab,
"No, it is not - Kramnik. Three spots and counting."
Which three are you referring to?
who is to judge that Kamsky is necessarily weaker? he just thrashed ivan 'takenopiss' chuk like a schoolkid
FIDE keeps screwing up things,i dont expect many players agreeing to this system. Bringing in both Topalov and kamsky is unfair to other players.
Anand should be the only one, who is assured of a spot, its nice to see that after all those yrs of neglecting the most important player of the previous generation !
@mehul : you give enuf proof of your idiocy, take your brains out of your balls and start making sense.
I propose a new Federation of Chess, administered by the people of the whole world. It would be a free federation because it would be open and supervised by everybody with desire to join in the group. It would be founded by donations and be based in the net, in the same way that Wikipedia does.
To simplify things, the champion or best player will be decided by his rating, as in tenis. The players affiliated into it will receive a rating, and with the help of a well-designed website, (made and administered with free open software), it is feasible to keep a track on the many aspects of the game with a reasonable budget.
I think this world effort could work if the organization gains enough support among the chess people. Someone voluntering to the group would experience a feeling that he's helping to keep running the game she loves.
FIDE is the last of the corrupt whelps of the Versailles Treaty still living. End it now. Let the World Championship be the personal property of the World Champion. National Federations are advanced enough to support their faviorte contenders. Chess fans Know quality when we see it.
@fierro:
The only thing that i agree with you is that the best player should be the one with best ranking, like tenis.
That makes me wonder, what would be the lists of champions if you consider only rankings?
"what would be the lists of champions if you consider only rankings?"
given that we only have official ratings from around 1970, the list would've been this:
fischer
karpov
kasparov
kramnik
topalov
anand
looks familiar, doesn't it? i count kramnik, because he reached shared 1st and because i see no reason why fide's random tie-break criteria should mean anything for this hypothetical list, anyway.
or if we should include all the changes, it'll just become like this:
fischer
karpov
kasparov
kramnik
kasparov
topalov
anand
topalov
of course, topa's two periods are very, very brief compared to everyone before him except kramnik (reign: 3 months)
in terms of time heading the list:
1. kasparov
2. karpov
3. fischer
4. topalov
5. anand
6. kramnik
but anand clearly spent more time during his best years in kasparov's shadow, compared to topalov, so one shouldn't put to much weight on such a ranking.
frogbert, I guess you used the official FIDE list, not the (even more recent) live rating list. Otherwise, your list(s) fail to mention Carlsen and Morozevich .... .
However, Carlsen's time may be still to come. And Morozevich is of course a very strong player, but I doubt that he will ever become world champion no matter what the system is - maybe excluding knockout lotteries.
Nice move by Aronian. Hope some others who have many points in the GP join as well, like Wang Yue.
SetNoEscapeOn,
>> No, it is not - Kramnik. Three spots and counting.
> Which three are you referring to?
With Kasparov, Topalov and Anand.
Shared first doesnt make it for the purposes of that list.I ll have to remove Kramnik , sorry.:)
GP was a failure and lost credibility even before it was started
Anand
Topalov
Kramnik
Morozevich
Shirov
they did not give a damm to GP and if Carlsen is added to this list is it going to make a difference, GP will continue with or without Carlsen's presence.
he is still not a credibile match player to match the above 5 players, may be in future he will have a say and people in FIDE will hear his voice as a champion but not now as a 18 year old.
and he is not the first player to revolt actually it was Morozevich
and Aronian is not pulling out he now values his chances after Carlsen is gone
"Shared first doesnt make it for the purposes of that list.I ll have to remove Kramnik , sorry.:)"
nonsense!
i decide who i put in my hypothetical list of "world champion by being rated number 1".
so kramnik is there, for 3 months, no doubt about it.
thomas, true, i excluded the live rating list, since "world champion for a day" didn't make too much sense to me. and even if sometimes more accurate and correct than the official rating list, the live top list is still only an unofficial list.
oH goD, anotheR posteR whO can'T bE bothereD tO begiN heR sentenceS witH capS. wheN thE punctuatioN, etC., getS tO bE aS baD aS thE contenT we'rE iN reaL troublE...rapidlY slidinD towarD BabeL iN herE.
I have to agree with Greg.
frogbert, I agree with you that "the live rating list is fun, but overrated" - this was actually the point I wanted to make .... .
On the other hand, one can start (or continue) arguing about the difference between "World Champion for a day" and "World Champion for three months" .... and we should not forget that the official FIDE lists are also just snapshots at (arbitrarily pre-defined) moments in time. Not sure either just how long Topalov's two periods as number 1 were.
"In the old days of Fischer, Karpov and Kasparov" such things did not really matter. Over the last few years, with the world top so close to each other, temporarily leading the rating list does not mean that much any more.
So maybe the World Champion title itself (no matter under which system) also should not be 'overrated'. In the present situation, it would also mean 'one of the best' but not necessarily 'simply and clearly the best'.
BTW, it seems that in my earlier post I forgot Ivanchuk who also was #1 on the live rating list at some moment in time. I would say 'same as Morozevich, he is a strong player but unlikely to ever become World Champion'.
hehehe, thomas - i didn't exactly make any stand on whether or not the live rating list is overrated. like you correctly state, in principle there aren't too many differences between the live list and the official list - the latter is also simply a rather random snapshot of one given moment. (the main difference is that one is official and covers everyone, and the other is unofficial and only cover some 30 players.)
also, consider that the official list might be manipulated by organizers simply by holding back rating reports when that is convenient, or making sure that rating reports are sent as early as possible when that is convenient.
the above isn't any theoretical possibility - it happens, and probably more than people realize. for instance, there are no clear rules on when rating reports for leagues are to be submitted, and which rating numbers to use for calculating rating changes for the various stages, when a league is played over the best part of a year - for instance october to may/june as in the german bundesliga. the chinese league season also is very long.
from my experience with rating league games in various countries, i've seen up to 5 or 6 _different_ ways of doing this - and the two previous versions of the chinese league even used two different submitting "strategies" even if the series itself did not change in any significant way. accidentally, i must presume, in both cases they made the choice that was most advantageous (in terms of gaining/preserving rating) for the majority of their 4 top players - wang yue, bu, ni and wang hao.
a recent example from north-america: nakamura lost nearly 9 rating points in montreal in august/september, in an event that finished almost two weeks before the deadline of the october rating list. but no rating report was sent, thereby making sure that nakamura was above 2700 in the october list.
if the rating report had been sent (as i think it should have been), nakamura would still not be officially 2700+ in any official list. so, when being 2700+ due to a technicality like delaying a rating report (i assume on purpose, actually) - how much weight should one put on the "accomplishment"?
of course, it can be argued that the official lists are "random" points anyway, but with fide using arbitrary limits like "2700" for qualification criteria on certain occasions, it creates a potentially unfair difference between players that are "good friends" of some organizers, and those who are simply "victims" of some organizers routines, good or bad.
obviously, if some player _gained_ a number of points in an event, enough to make the player pass some arbitrary fide limit (say 2700 again, used at least twice by fide as a cut-off), an evil organizer could purposefully _delay_ the report in order to make the player NOT get his rating gain for that specific list.
in my opinion, this very real (and actually employed) possibility of manipulation, in some ways make the official fide list _less_ trustworthy than the live list, for the top players. of course, my view obviously is biased, but at least i know a fair bit about how these things work, both in theory and in practice. :o)
greg koster,
what is the convention where you come from regarding capitals and names? :o)
are greG Koster, Greg kosteR, GREG koster, Greg Koster and greg koster equivalent?
btw, in norwegian "koster" means "is dusting" or "is using a brush" (of some kind). so, if you were an american indian (or from another people that happen to give people names with meanings like "who dances with wolves" and so on), your name might become this, taking the norwegian meaning of "koster" into account:
"greg koster" - or greg-who-is-obsessing-with-the-tiny-articles-sometimes-found-on-the-surface-of-things-instead-of-focusing-on-the-actual-thing-itself
(which-usually-is-more-important-than-the-dust-on-its-surface ...)
accidentally, the norwegian word "dust" means "jerk" - but that must indeed be considered totally irrelevant. :o)
spelling mistake!
greg-who-is-obsessing-with-the-tiny-Particles-sometimes-found-on-the-surface-of-things-instead-of-focusing-on-the-actual-thing-itself
particles, not articles, of course.
Greg is right , your punctuation is as bad as your content.
When you don´t punctuate properly you are saying to the reader that you don´t care how hard can be your posts to read.
For example if your post is more than one or two sentences long i just don´t reed it , because , if you don t care enough to punctuate , why would i read it?
Double and triple posting all the time gives the sensation that you feel that this forum is your property.
You should learn to behave in forums , is not so hard.
In tHe olD, Old Days everyOne enjoyeD THe fReedom tO Spell anD wrIte aS He pLeased, uNtil soMe Pedant camE Along, Arguing thAt standardizeD wriTing mAde It easIer To focuS On tHe actual-thing-itseLf.
The sUbsequent loSs oF poinTless, "look-aT-me" sentenCe construCtions waS A catastrophE froM whIch tHe languaGe Has Not yeT Recovered.
"For example if your post is more than one or two sentences long i just don´t reed it , because , if you don t care enough to punctuate , why would i read it?"
Wow, I have underestimated the irony potential on this forum. Congratulations, Manu!
wow catastrophe of language, we're dooooomed!
OMG, finally one of gReG KoStEr obsessions, probably an unresolved result of his anal phase, gives us something of worth!
keep the fight gregy!
Sorry about the late reply.
I think the reason why the loser of Kamsky-Topalov is included into the candidates tournament in 2010 is because the new cycle already started without the old having finished.
Lets face it: Topalov would qualify by rating anyways. And Kamsky? Well, another lucky loser. Unless of course he beats Topalov and Anand and will face the winner of the candidates tournament.
But get me right: I do not like these priviledges some of the players get.
Actually Kamsky is among Grand Prix participants and he would possibly play the next World Cup as well.
Did anyone see that 800-lb gorilla dash through the room just then???
I think he was wearing an XXXXXXL "I JUST BEAT IVANCHUK!" T-shirt. Sure wish he'd stuck around to talk with us.
@chesshire
What s your problem dude? , If you want to be heard or read you should at least try to make it easier for everyone, just common sense .
Encrypting the message doesnt make the content more valuable , it just makes it more annoying to read.
About Aronian´s letter , its ok i guess , it would be awesome if one of the big ones does something similar .
By big ones i meant Anand , Topa & Kramnik.
The problem/irony is, Manu, that your post is full of typos and punctuation errors, in a post where you castigate someone ELSE as follows: "When you don´t punctuate properly you are saying to the reader that you don´t care how hard can be your posts to read."(sic).If YOU don't care enough to correct the errors, why should WE "reed" you??
I got it the first time genious , but maybe you can appreciate the difference between something done on purpose (in every freeking post no matter how painfully long it may be)and the tipical punctuation bugs that happens when you write being at work.
But nevermind , see u , thx 4 ur insight.
Mig, could you please write a small piece of something to give (meta-)discussions about punctuation, small vs. capital letters, deliberate vs. unintended typos, .... their own separate thread??? ,:)
Then everyone can decide whether that one is worth following (it can be fun) or should simply be ignored.
I haven't seen anyone mention this, but has anyone else entertained the idea that the invited-player spot might entice a certain 40-something out of retirement?
"For example if your post is more than one or two sentences long i just don´t reed it ,"
reedeeculous. but honestly it would've been great if manu actually was telling the truth - otherwise i don't understand how he can complain about the contents of my posts which he, according to himself, doesn't read due to their length. anyway, i'll stick to my economic usage of capitals and posts of three or more sentences - i was just handed another good reason to do so. :o)
"I haven't seen anyone mention this, but has anyone else entertained the idea that the invited-player spot might entice a certain 40-something out of retirement?"
jim geary, i would guess several people have mentioned that possibility by now, but i know for sure that it was mentioned more than two weeks ago, here: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/kibitzing?kid=P52948&reply=33015
quote:
"it can also be noted that this "highest rated" thingy can be used by (!) to reenter the cycle in the candidate finals - i haven't seen if the rules state anything about how long you must have been active (again) - obviously long enough to become world number one.
[...]
the organizer pick can also be used for re-introducing kasparov, or - which i guess is your hunch - kramnik."
the activity demand for staying in the top lists is a mere 4 games in the last 12 months, i think, but i didn't check if there is any extra requirement if you have been inactive for more than 12 months (like kasparov has). anyway, kasparov's 2812 should be more than enough, even if he drops a few rating points in the 4 (?) games he needs. both anand and topalov are "auto-qualified", so it's just about staying in front of moro/carlsen/ivanchuk (if the latter isn't "auto-disqualified" after the medical committee has delivered their "report").
obviously, there is at lesat one, big, important point that is missing in the so far _very_ rudimentary "regulations" for this "candidate event", and that is _which_ rating list will be used to decide the rating qualifier.
if fide does what i expect from them, then they will "randomly choose" a rating list in the past, so that they effectively can pick which player gets the rating spot. fide doing the only sensible thing, declaring _now_ some rating list in the future, so that the players actually can _fight_ for this qualification spot, would hit me as a real shock. normally, fide decisions and their internal "consistency" strike me as something coming from a weird, parallell, inversed universe.
@frogbert :
reedeeeculos? reedeeculos is to write a freeking book every time a person makes a small comment about you or your posts.
Thx for including me in the begining so i didnt have to read the hole thing.
@thomas :
you are right , im sorry , im stoping this now.
"obviously, there is at lesat one, big, important point that is missing in the so far _very_ rudimentary "regulations" for this "candidate event", and that is _which_ rating list will be used to decide the rating qualifier."
It's not quite conclusive, but if the organiser nomination is based on the January 2010 list you'd have to assume the ratings qualifiers would use the same list: http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5054
...
- The highest rated player, provided that he is one of the top six based on the FIDE rating list. If not, the qualifying spot goes to the Grand Prix 2008/09.
- Nomination by the organiser provided that the nominated player has a rating of at least 2700 in the FIDE rating list of January 2010
...
Why should the big K re-emerge now? There's nothing to entice him out now that there wasn't a few years ago. He would not be attracted by some advanced placement in the Candidates since he would be pretty confident of qualifying under any conditions, and anyway, he's done the WC thing. His political thing didn't get the success he hoped for, but then he wasn't expecting anything too big I think. The only thing I can envisage is a George Foreman type thing to briefly prove he is still the man at some stage in the future, (maybe if someone like Carlsen threatens to outshine his legacy) or if he gets really bored with what he is doing now. Both seem unlikely. Sigh.
I agree, is annoying to read messages without capital letter in the first word of a sentence; if besides the message is too long then more consfusing.
manu, you are a funny little guy. you've added a tail of personal attacks against the majority of my recent posts for more than a week now, regardless of the topic. why do you do that? seemingly because i claimed topalov was among the persons being favoured by the newly introduced "candidate event" - a claim that hardly is debatable. and i also said that a number of people found his admission to a match against kamsky controversial.
for your own good, it would be helpful to grow up and learn to accept that people might disagree with you for a reason. attacking people with all kinds of irrelevant stuff like "length of posts", typographic conventions and petty personal accusations, simply because you don't like their opinions... well, i would become rather impolite if i were to describe such behaviour properly, so i won't bother. let me know if you intend to start writing anything sensible here - i'm too busy to spend time quarreling with some tope-head.
Nice try by Aronian to satisfy his friends and fans, but it is like trying to bring down a airliner by trowing a stone at it, a very long shot!. FIDE will be cruising on as business as usual, and the way I see it, they even get stronger and more unified in next couple of years.
Not being pedantic here, but capitalizing at the beginning of a sentence is an aid for those who scan posts looking for content. Find a capital letter, read the first 6 to 9 words to see if there is something worth reading. Then jump to the next capital letter and repeat. It is much harder to scan for periods when trying to find where a sentence ends and another begins.
Having capitals makes the search for relevant information much easier when you have limited time available for the search. If writing without capitals is your personal preference or a type of prose, that's okay. However, it *seems* to fail in that the actual content does not catch the attention of the readers it could.
>>
This is quite essential and it is important to speak about it NOW, to force them to make rules beforehand. (Otherwise there can be an additional dirty scandal.) Those who are still on speaking terms with FIDE maybe could try. :-)
Sorry - some technical error...
My previous post was a reaction to the following:
if fide does what i expect from them, then they will "randomly choose" a rating list in the past, so that they effectively can pick which player gets the rating spot.
"Find a capital letter, read the first 6 to 9 words to see if there is something worth reading."
usually you can use my paragraphs to achieve the same effect, on a slightly coarser level. if you find nothing interesting in the first sentence of a paragraph, you have my permission to skip to the next paragraph. problem solved. :o)
"This is quite essential and it is important to speak about it NOW, to force them to make rules beforehand. (Otherwise there can be an additional dirty scandal.)"
mr golubev, i'm happy that you agree about this. in my opinion, this habit of creating "general rules" at a time when there already follows a specific outcome of that rule, was a major problem of how several similar qualification processes have been conducted by fide previously.
http://www.fide.com/component/content/article/1-fide-news/3578-bidding-procedure-for-the-world-championship-cycle-2009-2011
the bidding procedure for the "candidate semi-final" states that a player has to be 2700+ on the january 2010 list to be eligible for organizer nomination. hopefully they intend to use _the same_ rating list for deciding the rating qualifier. but this needs to be confirmed, the sooner the better, or this WILL become a problem.
@frogbert:
Im a funny little guy?
Ok , time to stop posting here.
""Find a capital letter, read the first 6 to 9 words to see if there is something worth reading."
usually you can use my paragraphs to achieve the same effect, on a slightly coarser level. "
Yes, but actually a capital letter is the main key to spot paragraphs. Is that much to ask to press the shift key once for each a few hundreds of strokes?
ritch, in your case i think the correct solution is simply to stop reading my posts. it won't be any big loss to your life, and neither to mine. :o)
Ritch,
You're sound like the intolerant sort of guy who'll hassle people who let their dogs crap on the sidewalk when you could just as easily walk around it.
You sound
Looks like frogbert [sic] has dug in his heels despite both polite and terse entreaties to communicate unfettered by the deliberate absence of structure. Since he admits a fetish for his wilfully ignorant style, he may well have sought this reaction to mask a more natural incoherence in his opinions and arguments; whatever the case, it's lucky for us that he had very little to contribute in the first place.
Thus we are freed from navigating the gummy morass of his posts. That's right! All of you! You are released from the manacles of frogbert [sic]! Go forth and capitalize on your free time!! ;))
I hate your extravagent English and your sophisticated points of views to the matters discussed!
Write in simple English with the help of a clear mind, so us the less sophisticated and less educated guys find the opportunity to grasp the idea that what the hell you are talking about!
Sincerely Yours, and Thanks you in advance!
OK no need for corrections, I am trying to improve!
{I hate your extravagent English and your sophisticated points of views on the matters discussed!
Write in simple English with a clear mind, so us the less sophisticated and less educated guys find the opportunity to grasp the idea of what the hell you are talking about!
Sincerely Yours, and Thanks you in advance!
OK, try not to nitpick, I am really pushing to my limits, it better go like this:
I hate your extravagent English and your sophisticated points of views to the matters discussed in this forum!
Write in simple English with a clear mind, so us the less sophisticated and less educated guys find the opportunity to grasp the idea of what the hell you are talking about!
Sincerely Yours, and Thank You in Advance!
Hovik, the next time your insanity bubbles over and you feel that awful urge to post, do address the comments at someone. It'll make you feel better. And me too.
Thanks you in advance.
the cat
clubfoot, koster, et al
it's funny that i've been able to communicate with others for more than a year without any serious hazzle about typographic conventions in _other_ chess-related sites. here it suddenly becomes a real problem to a couple of guys!
clubfoot, i think hovik2003 was talking to you in his latest posts. i might be wrong, but to me it seems like he was trying to make a parody of _your_ comments pertaining to _style_. as long as you think it's your duty to teach me how to write my posts, i'll support hovik's efforts to make you communicate less "sophisticated".
koster, i wasn't particularly impressed by your sh**y analogy. based on a couple of comments from mig, it unfortunatly seems like you're the persistant kind of guy. if you want to save yourself a notable number of key strokes, then the sooner you learn to live with a lower percentage of capitals, the better - for you. you are not more stubborn than me. :o)
Meow!
You reminde me of my neighbor's pussycat, very cute and cuddly joyful kind of a cat in the morning, but at some midnights turns to a real vampire crying and meowing all night sitting on the top of the partition wall, and it wouldn't stop before I throw one of my old shoes at him to disperse!
You know throwing shoe tactic really works!, the most recent example is that big Iraqi reporter throwing his new pair of shoes at president Bush in press conference in Baghdad, that too stopped the near ex-president for couple of minutes from complaining!
I laughed and bubbled up to the verge of insanity after watching that news cut and seeing your president's facial impression during the shoe attack!
A freindly word of advice:
Beware of bulldogs!
hoff, hoff, hoff!!
Yes, my friend, aren't Americany horribly ignorant about the rest of the world? Unlike your good self, who presumes that an English speaker must necessarily come from the USA. There are other countries, but ain't they all the same? You have shown these nasty Americans your superior knowledge and given them something to aspire to.
I have also learnt something - bull**** can also come from a bulldog!
Please don't throw your shoes at ME, I shudder to think what your dirty sole might have in store.
cheers
the cat
You should admit that was pretty funny for a bull**** though!
And please don't take it so personal, I was just joking!
Beside as Nigel Short once called us, we are only hillbillies!
Clubfoot,
Good advice, as always.
Cat,
--I recall the early days of the Iraq war watching the interviews with the Brit soldiers, all of whom sounded more articulate that the average U.S. college professor.
--And the personals ads in the London Review of Books make those in the NYRB look sick.
Scary!
"it's funny that i've been able to communicate with others for more than a year without any serious hazzle about typographic conventions in _other_ chess-related sites. here it suddenly becomes a real problem to a couple of guys!"
Frogbert, I think you are thinking (for example) in chessgames.com boards where in fact I have read you several times. But there is a notable difference: the style format in chessgames.com pages automatically adds extra blank lines between paragraphs. Here, neither you or the page style helps to differentiate each paragraph, making your long messages almost unreadable beyond the first two or three lines.
If after this you can't see the point in the capital letters issue, then I think Greg Koster is right with his dog-crap analogy.
Best regards
Is Frogbert going to be sentenced to .... capital punishment??
sorry couldn't resist. Hovik, no worries, pal. Post a link to that N Short/ hillbillies thing pls it sounds amusing. Greg, the anti-American stereotype, specially in other English speaking countries, is usually slow neural connections, as unfortunately exemplified by Mr B. Me, I think it's a rather big place so there must be brains of every calibre. It's interesting to hear at first hand what Americans think of it themselves. Do you others have the same opinions of US college professors? I've seen some pretty dreary specimens here too...
@chesshire:
I dont know about US college professors , but the US educational program is one of the simplest in the world (generally speaking), specially in the early stages.
For example: in the recent past , several movies had been cuted into simpler versions before they reach the american public.
I guess that when you run such a heavy consumer oriented society you dont want people to think too much.
Of course (and before someone jumps with knifes and etcs) this is just how the rest of the world sees USA , and we all know that all that countries are there just to fill the void.:)
"Is Frogbert going to be sentenced to .... capital punishment??"
i'm tempted to capitalize on that pun, but i might do it ELSEWHERE.