|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jul-04-06
 | | alexmagnus: Wow 7 pages of kibitzing... Never knew that to become (relatively) much kibitzed you just have to lose all your games in one national championship:-) |
 |
Jul-04-06
 | | technical draw: Wait just one minute here. If she has only ten games in the database and all are losses how can she have an 1889 rating? Huh? Huh? Maybe it's -1889? |
|
Jul-04-06
| | alexmagnus: Well, the database is horribly incomplete - because of that rule that one can't submit games in which both players are under 2200 unless it is played in some major tournament. Since K.Cottrell is under 2200 and played only one major tournament(in which the worst opponent was 500 points higher rated than her), she has only lost games here.. And rating inflation has nothing tio do with it, since on the low level the ratings are deflating (as the compenmsation for the inflation on the high level).
Can the "2200-rule" for submitting games be taken away? Then we have a really complete database. |
|
| Jul-04-06 | | TaricHall: I would personally like to see the 2200 rule lowered to perhaps include expert games. I personally enjoy analyzing expert versus master games, because I think there is a lot to learn in those games. Quite frankly, the IMs and GMs for the most part tend not to make the (slightly!) less subtle mistakes that an expert might on occassion make. Also, I had an opportunity to meet Kelly and her husband, IM Ben Finegold, and I think some of the comments here are terribly mean spirited. I got to watch her play and she has some raw talent that is being polished up! Note that just a few years ago her rating was half of what it is! More recently she beat a veteran master quite handily. |
|
Jul-05-06
 | | sisyphus: FINAL – Kelly Cottrell beat an expert in the last round of the World Open. She finished 3/9 against 2086 opposition for a tournament performance rating of 1961. |
|
| Jul-05-06 | | RookFile: A lot of people will tell you the toughest climb is from 2100 to 2200. |
|
Jul-09-06
 | | Landman: I'm finding 1400 to 2400 to be a bit tougher. ;) |
|
| Dec-06-06 | | Dr.Lecter: How can Kelly Cottrell have more comments than Ben Finegold, her husband? |
|
| Dec-06-06 | | Karpova: <Dr. Lecter: How can Kelly Cottrell have more comments than Ben Finegold, her husband?>
It's as simple as that: He's the better chessplayer |
|
Dec-06-06
| | Landman: Ben's presence in the US Championship wasn't quite as comment-worthy. |
|
May-28-08
| | alexmagnus: Kelly Cottrell, who got into the US Championship 2006 because of being the only woman in her qualifying zone... I call cases like this "the luckiest losers" - on is kind of "not qualified" for some competition but still gets to play - and has nothing to lose, how ever badly one performs. This is the only case of such a phenomenon in chess I know. At least two such cases happened in the German football/soccer (teams which never qualified for a competition had to play in that competition for really bizarre reasons - Tasmania Berlin (Bundesliga 1965/66) and TSV Gerbrunn (German Football Cup 2004)). If anybody knows more similar cases in chess, please post them here. Note, simply being an outsider (like in case of the computer ETABETA) is not enough for this list. The criterium is (sort of) lack of "regular qualification" for the competition despite such a qualification being existent <plus> being an outsider. |
|
Mar-15-09
| | alexmagnus: No more "lucky losers" in chess? (see my previous post for the definition). |
|
| Mar-15-09 | | Jim Bartle: Hadn't looked at Cottrell's page for quite a while.
In the 2006 US Championship she did not just lose every game, she insisted on playing every game out to mate, even when a seven-year-old could beat Bobby Fischer. |
|
| Mar-15-09 | | zanshin: See her pic at the bottom of this page: http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail... |
|
| Aug-10-09 | | Knight13: Hey hey!
So Women started complaning a century-and-more ago that they were being treated unfairly, that men were controlling the world, and wanted equal rights and whatnot. Why? Because it was to their disadvantage. So they started suffrages and protests and you-name-it. But now, women are actually getting the advantage in chess. They can be rated "You-Suck" and still qualify for US Chess Championship, like this one, and qualify for Denkers with far lower rating because of their gender. And have titles like WFM/WGM/WIM with a lot lower rating. And yet they're the ones who advocated gender equality. Now there's a case where there's no gender equality. Except that this time it's to their advantage, and to our disadvantage. And what are they doing?
NOTHING. No protesting that men and women are treated unequally at chess. Why? Because it's to their advantage.
Get my point? They're self-minded bastards just like us back in early 1900s when a lot of us were against women suffrage. And yet they tried to appear that they weren't self-minded bastards back then, and seemed to have worked. So much for "gender doesn't matter in chess." |
|
| Aug-10-09 | | Knight13: So now they're probably thinking, "you men are the stupid ones who designed this chess system, not us. Why should we care and 'protest'? (besides, it's actually good for us)" Yeah nice argument.
But...
We "stupid" men also designed the system back then when women couldn't have have jobs, no voting rights, no equality, etc." Oh, oh, oh, now you care and you're protesting and fighting.... Ahh.... Okay, now I know. |
|
| Aug-10-09 | | Knight13: So now they're probably thinking, "you men are the stupid ones who designed this chess system, not us. Why should we care and 'protest'? (besides, it's actually good for us)"
Yeah nice argument.
But...
We "stupid" men also designed the system back then when women couldn't have have jobs, no voting rights, no equality, etc." Oh, oh, oh, now you care and you're protesting and fighting.... Ahh.... Okay, now I know. So you all would keep your mouth shut with your heroic "fight for equal sex rights!" as long as it's to your advantage and to our disadvantage. Uh huh... So much passion on your part. |
|
Sep-25-11
 | | perfidious: <RookFile: A lot of people will tell you the toughest climb is from 2100 to 2200.> The most difficult hurdle I had was from 2150 to 2200-that is, to stay, because on the way, I went from 2125 to 2269 in two events, dropped back to expert, went over 2300, dropped back to expert again, then finally made master for good, all in a little over three years. |
|
Sep-25-11
 | | OhioChessFan: <RookFile: A lot of people will tell you the toughest climb is from 2100 to 2200.> I guess I'm not one of those people. ;) I am reminded of one of the funniest sitcom lines ever. Welcome Back Kotter, one of the girls in the smart class says "I've never gotten a B in my life." And Horshack replies "Neither have I!" |
|
Sep-25-11
| | perfidious: <OCF> Nice one!
Maybe the hardest for me was 2350, since I never made it.... |
|
Jan-26-12
 | | FSR: Sadly, the author of Game Collection: People that never won hasn't been seen in these parts since 2005, so Ms. Cottrell (11 losses in 11 games 2003-06) isn't in the collection. |
|
Jan-02-13
| | Landman: At http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail... is a recent picture of who <whiskeyrebel> is pretending to be. |
|
Jan-03-13
 | | WannaBe: "A biker guy?" A biker guy?!?! What the heck?!?!
Why I oughtta kick that writer's butt, like a real biker guy! Hey, I owned a 250cc once! |
|
Jan-03-13
| | perfidious: <WannaBe> Well, you're a wascally wabbit, so you have ride low to the ground. |
|
Jan-03-13
 | | tpstar: <People that never won> The usual candidate for chess futility is Colonel Moreau Surely Ms. Cottrell has wins to her credit but sadly she must be unaware of this database. =) |
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 8 OF 8 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
