< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 57 OF 77 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Sep-04-11 | | achk: HSOL was faster :P |
|
Sep-04-11
 | | HeMateMe: Ah, final 8. Thank you both. With so many heavies not playing, she has real chance to win this year, and I think, get an auto seed into the next Candidates matches. |
|
Sep-04-11 | | Blunderdome: <Except that those people are all fully active, while she's semi-retired.> Since the January 2011 rating list was published, she has 24 rated games. That's more than Anand, Topalov, or Gelfand, and probably some others as well. |
|
Sep-04-11
 | | alexmagnus: To get to the Candidates she has to "only" reach the semifinal and, in case of a loss there, win the 3rd place match. |
|
Sep-04-11
 | | alexmagnus: But I wouldn't agree with <With so many heavies not playing, she has real chance to win this year>. Polgar is 33rd seed in this tournament. Only one KO event was won by a player seeded below 32 - in 1999, when the winner Khalifman was seeded 36th. |
|
Sep-04-11
 | | alexmagnus: Seedings of the semisinalifts of KO events:
1999:
Winner 36
Losing finalist 31
Losing semifinalists 5 and 46
2000:
Winner 1
Losing finalist 4
Losing semifinalists 3 and 46
2002:
Winner 19
Losing finalist 4
Losing semifinalists 1 and 15
2004:
Winner 27
Losing finalist 3
Losing semifinalists 1 and 18
2005:
Winner 3
Losing finalist 9
Losing semifinalists 2 and 4
2007:
Winner 11
Losing finalist 5
Losing semifinalists 10 and 17
2009:
Winner 1
Losing finalist 7
Losing semifinalists 12 and 22. |
|
Sep-04-11
 | | alexmagnus: <semisinalifts> semifinalists even :D |
|
Sep-04-11 | | twinlark: <Polgar's peers are Anand, Gelfand, Ivanchuk, Topalov, Kramnik. Gender is irrelevant. > That'd be nice if there was more than one woman in the top 200, but that very rarity makes her stand out. Of course it is a man's world, and it's a serious blight on chess that the game generally is so seriously hostile to women playing. Have you read the <Grandmaster Experiment> that's linked in the bio? It sheds some extra light on this touchy subject. |
|
Sep-04-11 | | Petrosianic: <and it's a serious blight on chess that the game generally is so seriously hostile to women playing.> Pretty much the opposite is true. Almost every chess club I've belonged to has had free membership for women, even ones who have been playing for years, and no longer need to be attracted to the game. They go out of their way to recruit women, but women tend to be more interested in social games, like Bridge. A typical Bridge club is nearly 50/50 men and women. |
|
Sep-04-11
 | | HeMateMe: It might be that you can't talk much at a chess club, which discourgages women from...you know, there's no way you can approach this topic without appearing sexist or ignorant, it's just a no win subject. I'm glad we have Judit, wish there were twenty more female players just as good. I still remember looking at video of a blitz tournament, I think it was the Moscow blitz two years ago, when Kosteniuk was womens world champion. The game is Polgar v. Kosteniuk. As Polgar approaches the table, with a sort of predatory grin on her face, AK has this very nervous look (the REAL womens champ has arrived) and doesn't make any eye contact. It's a subtle thing you wouldn't notice, unless you are really looking for it. |
|
Sep-04-11 | | Maatalkko: BAM! ... next round. Hah <Beholder>, what did I say? <Aug-29-11
Maatalkko: I bet Judit will beat Movsesian, and I'm even going to go out on a limb and predict a victory against Karjakin. She was very sharp at the Euro Championships and against Jimenez.> Bring on the next round, Lysyj or Dominguez, either way I think the Judit train still has a ways to go. |
|
Sep-04-11 | | twinlark: <Petrosianac> <free membership for women> It's a sort of band-aid remedy to a much more serious problem, mainly cultural, I suspect where most women's upbringing generally works contrary to the ethos required for consistent and top flight chess. Thankfully, this is changing.
Incidentally, it could be argued that chess discriminates in favour of women, not only because of free membership as you cited (and I don't think that's a systemic issue), but also because there are women-only events which of course excludes men. Moreover women have access to <eight> titles, while us poor under-privileged males have only four to which we can aspire...tragic hey? Not having a life, I did a study of the FIDE public database and the thing that struck me is how small the player pool of women is, and the thing that struck me statistically was that while there are just as many women with titles as men, comparatively, it's because most of these titles are WFMs. Women are under-represented not only numerically, but also percentage wise, amongst the IM and GM community. |
|
Sep-04-11 | | Amulet: <HeMateMe:
Moscow blitz, Polgar v. Kosteniuk>
Is this the game?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWJU... |
|
Sep-04-11 | | Petrosianic: <It's a sort of band-aid remedy to a much more serious problem, mainly cultural, I suspect where most women's upbringing generally works contrary to the ethos required for consistent and top flight chess.> Maybe, but the game of chess can't be blamed for women's upbringing. So, that wouldn't constitute the game itself being hostile, would it? |
|
Sep-04-11 | | Thanh Phan: <twinlark> <HeMateMe> Think part of, mainly cultural also upbringing are much of the problem. Time are now the kids gain time learning and playing chess. That might help more. About talks at chess clubs, yes it can become awkward, more of from both sides appear shy or unsure how to react around each other. After a few whiles are more relax, most after games and replay what happen in-game. |
|
Sep-04-11 | | twinlark: <Petrosianac> Maybe hostile is the wrong word, but chess has very much been a boy's club, catering to <their> upbringing, which is <very> different to the way women are acculturated. Even as recently as 1988, FIDE wouldn't allow women to play in the men's teams, and on and on including Fischer claiming he could cite Knight odds to any woman and Kasparov saying "...but she is, after all a woman. It all comes down to the imperfections of the feminine psyche. No woman can sustain a prolonged battle.". As an incidental contrast, that most detested of World champions, Alexander Alekhine, actually married a chess playing woman and was his most steady companion in life and his only durable marriage. Between the time I started chess in 1968, and quite it temporarily in 1980, women were extremely rare in chess clubs. It's changing, but there's a few centuries of inertia and momentum to overcome. |
|
Sep-04-11 | | twinlark: <Than Phan>
Thanks for your insight. The internet has no doubt sped up the loosening of cultural restrictions and constraints of women playing chess, as it can be played from the safety of the PC, and then women may probably feel freer about going to the local chess club. And even backward countries like Australia (chessically speaking) teach chess in most schools without discrimination as such. Also, Susan Polgar's chess school for girls in New York has contributed as well, in the USA anyway. But how long will it be before there are ten women in the top 100 (instead of the 1 in 200 we now have), let alone anywhere near equal representation? It certainly won't be happening under the current leadership of FIDE, and most likely and unfortunately not in our lifetimes. Which is a real pity, as chess really should be able to provide the level playing field for mixed gender competition. The article <The Grandmaster Experiment> that's linked in the bio makes an effort to find out why there is such a gender difference and what separates patzers from GMs. It's a very interesting article, as some of it was based on spending about a year with the Polgars. |
|
Sep-04-11
 | | HeMateMe: I just can't buy the upbringing thing, in this day and age. Every couple I know, kids or no kids, both parents work full time. Every guy would love to have a wife who makes as much money (demanding, highly skilled job) as he does. I just can't see a stigma against women. I attended a huge school in the midwest, with a total grad + undergrad enrollment of 55,000 students. MY classes were full of women, at least 50%. I just don't think women are discouraged these days from delving into college, technical professions, or other high stress vocations, including chess. That may be different in other places; I'm just referring to the USA. I really think that girls just don't like a game that requires you to sit patiently, not talk, and not relate to your opponent. We really are built differently, and more men than women find chess to be a fun game. |
|
Sep-04-11
 | | HeMateMe: <Amulet> Yes, thats the game. Thanks for posting. Man, AK looks HOT in that red bouse...OOPS, this is the Judit page, mea culpa... |
|
Sep-05-11 | | twinlark: <We really are built differently> Since you're not talking about physical build, clearly you're talking about mental/social "build", right? Well, that's precisely the point. It's not that the innate or inborn architecture or anatomy is structured to favour boys playing chess and women not, it's that the acculturation process, the way we're wired or "built" mentally and socially, is what makes the difference. Laszlo Polgar set out to prove that genius is acquired not innate, and his success with his three daughters may not prove his case, but it certainly supports it. I suggest you read the <Grandmaster Experiment> - it's an <interesting and informative> article - if you want to continue this thread, so that we're on the same page both literally and metaphorically. |
|
Sep-05-11
 | | kingscrusher: I am so happy for Judit to knock out the top seed in the World cup! |
|
Sep-05-11
 | | alexmagnus: < Laszlo Polgar set out to prove that genius is acquired not innate, and his success with his three daughters may not prove his case, but it certainly supports it.> Does it? After all, the three sisters were taught exactly the same program yet reached a completely different level. The only claim the Polgar experiment supports is that everyone can reach 2400 with enough training :D |
|
Sep-05-11
 | | HeMateMe: genetics + hardwork + personal desire, a real enjoyment of the process of reaching the goal. |
|
Sep-05-11 | | twinlark: <alexmagnus>
With due respect, there are so many things wrong with that. <HeMateMe: genetics + hardwork + personal desire, a real enjoyment of the process of reaching the goal.> I think they found that all things being equal, genetics is fairly irrelevant except in cases of specialised physical sports like high jumping. Also, the main thesis that Laszlo Polgar worked on, that seemed to be confirmed by the study, was the intense focus and concentration on a field of activity from an early age. |
|
Sep-05-11
 | | alexmagnus: <With due respect, there are so many things wrong with that.> What exactly is wrong? They ended up on a different level - around 2400, around 2500 and around 2700 respectively. Two of three didn't come higher than a "usual" female top player (Zsofia not even there... Honsetly, who would ever mention Zsofia Polgar if not for her sisters? Maybe only in connection with that one tournament in Rome...). |
|
 |
 |
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 57 OF 77 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|