|
Aren't "men's" titles and events just open events that women could play in if they wanted to? I don't know the WHY of it - it is, I think, probably very complicated - but I mean, top FIDE woman is Hou Yifan, who doesn't even play, and she's 2628. Next is 2568, Ju Wenjun, current world champion. I mean, 2568.. that's like, 80 points lower than #100 men's, poor Wijk punching bag Loek Van Wely. So saying all that suggests that I would be on FIDE's side, but I really don't think there's any men who had been chomping at the bit to "become trans" so they could snipe a women's title. It reeks of "fixing" a problem that doesn't exist and being very transphobic while doing it.
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 00:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:27 |
|
|
regulargonzalez posted:Isn't that also the implication behind having a woman's division at all? Or WFM titles? The implication in your statement is that both of those should be eliminated and everyone of any gender compete together with no segregation of any type. Well, you've got the "men are annoying" reasoning too
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 00:33
|
|
|
regulargonzalez posted:Isn't that also the implication behind having a woman's division at all? Or WFM titles? The implication in your statement is that both of those should be eliminated and everyone of any gender compete together with no segregation of any type. Not necessarily. A women's league can open up interest in a sport where men dominate, since male dominated spaces are... not great, usually, and drive women away.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 00:44
|
|
|
of course, nonbinary people just can't play, right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 00:46
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:Not necessarily. A women's league can open up interest in a sport where men dominate, since male dominated spaces are... not great, usually, and drive women away. This has been my observation about chess clubs and chess events. Especially by contrast to scholastic chess where I see a lot closer girl-boy parity than adult female-male. I conclude they get driven out over time by the scene being annoying af.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 00:50
|
|
|
silvergoose posted:what the *gently caress* FIDE Well that has completely killed my desire to play chess ever. Time to play mahjong, I guess?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 01:08
|
|
|
totalnewbie posted:Aren't "men's" titles and events just open events that women could play in if they wanted to? Yeah it just seems like an insanely stupid thing to make an official proclamation on (especially one that boils down to ''we're a little scared of trans people''') when there were zero people thinking this might somehow be a problem On the topic of the chess world being a lovely place for women, Chess.com and Lichess have stopped supporting the St. Louis Chess Club after the whole 'years of unchecked/covered up abuse' thing: https://www.chess.com/news/view/wsj-chess-servers-end-support-for-saint-louis-tournaments
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 02:28
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:"Women's brains are innately inferior" is the direct implication of the policy My understanding is that -- as far as non-athletic events go -- the women's side being weaker than the men's is all to do with systemic discrimination (boys are encouraged to play sports and games more than girls are, boys are more likely to get opportunities than girls, girls are more likely to be made to feel unwelcome and face harassment and abuse (speaking of that) and so on.) Which means trans competitors are even further disadvantaged, regardless of how they identify. If the goal is to "level the playing field", this does the opposite. It's clear the goal is to discriminate. FIDE not recognizing trans women as women is awful enough, but the rest of that list is just disgusting. fisting by many fucked around with this message at 02:40 on Aug 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 02:37
|
|
|
fisting by many posted:My understanding is that -- as far as non-athletic events go -- the women's side being weaker than the men's is all to do with systemic discrimination (boys are encouraged to play sports and games more than girls are, boys are more likely to get opportunities than girls, girls are more likely to be made to feel unwelcome and face harassment and abuse (speaking of that) and so on.) Which means trans competitors are even further disadvantaged, regardless of how they identify. If the goal is to "level the playing field", this does the opposite. It's clear the goal is to discriminate. I'm sure that's part of it but what about women's brains...? But seriously, you just have to look at the fact that 15% of USCF (and probably FIDE, or even if it's a little higher..) members are women. So yeah.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 02:57
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:"Women's brains are innately inferior" is the direct implication of the policy There’s also time travel logic involved in stripping trans men of titles that they already won.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 04:04
|
|
|
There's a reason this is being done this year and not last year or the year before, and its not because cis women are suddenly being displaced from the top of female competition.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 05:17
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:There’s also time travel logic involved in stripping trans men of titles that they already won. I left you a message in the bike thread by the way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 05:18
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:There’s also time travel logic involved in stripping trans men of titles that they already won. I understood that to mean a trans man can't continue to hold a woman's master title (eg. WGM, WIM), which, okay, sure, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 06:01
|
|
|
FIDE and top male GMs have long held that men are inherently better at chess than women. This decision isn't surprising, it's just them saying the quiet part out loud
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 09:36
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:Well that has completely killed my desire to play chess ever. Time to play mahjong, I guess? If I let old, white men determine what I enjoy by their actions, I wouldn't like anything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 15:45
|
|
|
Leperflesh posted:of course, nonbinary people just can't play, right? They wield the mental power of both genders and cannot be stopped by mere grandmasters
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 16:14
|
|
|
Control Volume posted:They wield the mental power of both genders and cannot be stopped by mere grandmasters I'm bigender. So yes. Definitely. Very true and thank you (please do not look at my rating 🙂) But there's enbys who are agender... truly unstoppable. They bear none of the mental burdens of Gender. They are untethered. And they are coming to play Chess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 16:50
|
|
|
Hey, I'm getting into chess after not playing since I was like 7. I have an account on lichess and chess.com, what is the standard format for laddering and getting them juicy elo points? 10 minute games?
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2023 08:29
|
|
|
Mikojan posted:Hey, I'm getting into chess after not playing since I was like 7. There isn't really a standard format, they're all populated enough that you should just play the one you wanna play
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2023 10:03
|
|
|
You reportedly get higher elo from rapid as compared to blitz, because better players typically play blitz.
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2023 15:08
|
|
|
Mikojan posted:Hey, I'm getting into chess after not playing since I was like 7. If your goal is to improve, play the longest games you can make time for, think really deeply, and spend time going back over your games to see where things went wrong. Rapid (10+0, 10+5, or 15+10) is popular for people doing this. If your goal is to just jam games because pushing pieces around is fun and relaxing and you don't particularly care about winning and losing or your rating, just play a bit of everything and see what time control you find most fun and comfortable. I personally play 10+5 when I'm hoping to learn something and improve, 2+1 when I don't really care about the outcome or thinking and just want to watch pieces zoom around, and 5+5 when I have 20 minutes before a meeting and want something in-between. Also keep in mind, Lichess and dotcom use different rating systems. Until you get into the 2000s, your Lichess rating will be 200-300 points higher than on dotcom. e: I made a post a few months back about getting into the game as an adult with a goal of getting better. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3986136&userid=190861&perpage=40&pagenumber=2#post532741302 The only thing I'd add to it from the past few months is the book "Everybody's First Chess Workbook" is fantastic. Huxley fucked around with this message at 16:43 on Aug 21, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2023 15:27
|
|
|
blitz makes you go faster which is how i routinely lose 200 elo points in half an hour when i play on 2 hours of sleep while listening to music and making whooshing noises when i move pieces
|
|
#
?
Aug 21, 2023 19:23
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:You reportedly get higher elo from rapid as compared to blitz, because better players typically play blitz. Well, that explains my experience on lichess. 1500 rapid players are substantially worse than 1200 blitz players, even with twice as much time to think.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 02:25
|
|
|
Thanks, I'll get into some 10 minute rapids and see where it gets me. I played a correspondence with a friend (1600 ish elo on lichess) that is getting me into chess. Honestly I didn't do that bad according to stockfish but made a blunder on a king move here:  I moved my king the the corner and went from -5 evaluation to being mated in whatever amount of moves. My main issue with chess is that I like to play as black since I can get away withg being more reactive. As white I don't know what I'm supposed to be doing the first 10 moves or so. I guess I should maybe learn an opening or 2? Huxley posted:https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3986136&userid=190861&perpage=40&pagenumber=2#post532741302 thanks for that! Mikojan fucked around with this message at 07:07 on Aug 22, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 07:04
|
|
|
The more obvious problem, to me, is that moving the king loses your queen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 12:05
|
|
|
Nvm
regulargonzalez fucked around with this message at 12:52 on Aug 22, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 12:48
|
|
|
Mikojan posted:Thanks, I'll get into some 10 minute rapids and see where it gets me. If you figure something out with respect to playing White, let me know! I've studied a number of openings but they never lead to the strong positions the content creators assume they will because the video is like "Go here, your opponent goes here, go here now, your opponent goes here now, go here, your opponent will go here Or here" and then when I play a game (bot), they do something else and then I don't even know
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 14:00
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:If you figure something out with respect to playing White, let me know! I've studied a number of openings but they never lead to the strong positions the content creators assume they will because the video is like "Go here, your opponent goes here, go here now, your opponent goes here now, go here, your opponent will go here Or here" and then when I play a game (bot), they do something else and then I don't even know just learn the main 3 or 4 vienna lines with white and the 3 or 4 caro kann lines with black. if the opponent does something weird you can either punish it or it's just a chess game
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 15:16
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:If you figure something out with respect to playing White, let me know! I've studied a number of openings but they never lead to the strong positions the content creators assume they will because the video is like "Go here, your opponent goes here, go here now, your opponent goes here now, go here, your opponent will go here Or here" and then when I play a game (bot), they do something else and then I don't even know No. 1, seriously stop playing bots. Bots play fast, and that makes you want to play fast, and you aren't learning anything playing fast. Bots also don't make human mistakes, they make computer mistakes. That may get you pretty good at spotting computer mistakes but it isn't helping you against humans. Losing 100 games against humans will improve your game exponentially vs beating the computer 100 times. Every game you lose against a human is an investment in your future. As far as e4 e5, I've found I really enjoy the Scotch for this! It's really just 3 moves, and nearly everything black can do is a slight mistake except for a the mainline, which I've very rarely seen (at Lichess 1400, around chess.com 1100-1200). And when Black goes off the main path, you haven't hung any piece out in a crazy spot or anything, you can just start following your opening principles and play the game. It isn't like the Vienna Gambit or whatever where you have to remember a ton of very specific pins to get winning positions. It's just very basic chess that opens up the center and gets confrontational quickly. Its big plans are "give them the chance to be wrong for 2-3 moves, develop naturally, castle, rooks to the center," which is about all you can ask of an opening at our level. The Scotch is 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4  From here the correct mainline for black is take the pawn, you take back with the Knight and then they play either Nf6 or Bc5. But almost NOBODY makes it this far. Let me show you your two most common positions after the screenshot above. You'll get a lot of this:  After you trade everything on d4 (they take with the pawn or the Knight, we take back, they take back and we end the sequence with a Queen on d4 that they can't chase off with Nc3). You have a central queen they don't have a great move for chasing off, you're one natural move away from castling, and the next 4-5 moves play themselves into the early middle game (Bc4, Nc3, Be3, o-o, Rd1; just be aware of where to put your Queen when they attack it). You will play this exact game so so many times. You won't win them all because this isn't a trappy win in 5 moves opening they can just fumble their way out of. You still have to play. But it does almost guarantee you'll have a better idea of what to do after 3. d4 than they do for the next 5-6 moves. Your second super common position at low Elo (again, down here with me) is this:  You take on e5, they take back and then you trade Queens.  If they take back with the King they lose castle rights, if they take back with the Knight they drop their pawn on e5. Again from here we develop naturally, castle and hope to play well in the middle game. The big issue with 1. e4 is they have a bunch of perfectly reasonable responses that aren't e5/Nc6. If you are playing e4, you need to have an idea of "what to do" against c5, c6, d5, e6, and both flavors of 2. Nf6 (the Russian and the Stafford Gambit which I see about twice as often as the Caro). ANYWAY, even those ideas don't need to be more than 3-4 moves deep, but you have to understand opening principles first. Develop your pieces toward the center, don't move a piece twice in the opening, move as few pawns as are necessary to get your pieces out, castle, rooks to the center. Because 100% of the opening prep we need at our level is 1. 4-5 moves covering their most common responses and their correct responses 2. Opening principles for when things leave your very limited prep 3. And build on this over time via playing (and losing) games
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 15:24
|
|
|
Feel free to pause the video and find the ONLY winning move for white while I give you a few seconds. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 15:49
|
|
|
Huxley posted:No. 1, seriously stop playing bots. Bots play fast, and that makes you want to play fast, and you aren't learning anything playing fast. Bots also don't make human mistakes, they make computer mistakes. That may get you pretty good at spotting computer mistakes but it isn't helping you against humans. Losing 100 games against humans will improve your game exponentially vs beating the computer 100 times. Every game you lose against a human is an investment in your future. this is true but sometimes i do like playing the maia bots on lichess. they are supposed to play "human" and they feel that way more often than not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 15:53
|
|
|
What if you're too scared to play against humans because you tie your value and intelligence as a person to the outcome of the game? I play against my brother cause he let's me do takebacks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 15:54
|
|
|
Here's my Beginner White Rep as a Lichess study. https://lichess.org/study/65Ax9UYI/Pi5y6h8E Stolen from here: https://www.reddit.com/r/chessimprovement/comments/q8v7gp/building_habits_openings/ Which is just a compilation of the openings recommended by the Building Habits youtube series mentioned earlier. This covers nearly everything I'm likely to see against 1. e4 (except the Scandi). Almost every line is 4-6 moves covering likely responses and ends at the point where natural development should take over. This amount of opening prep should probably cover everything I need to know about openings for the rest of my life, frankly, because I might not ever reach the level where I need more than this. With black I play the Accelerated Dragon against e4, an early c5 against the London, and I'm still back and forth between the Slav and the QGD (but you get presented with a Queen's Gambit only about 4% of the time down here so it doesn't really matter much).
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 15:57
|
|
|
Okay. Every time I've been within striking distance of 1400 blitz on lichess before, I've gotten overconfident, blundered everything and sank back to 1200 within a couple days. But this time will be different! This time I'll be extremely self aware while I blunder 20 games in a row.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 16:45
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:Okay. Every time I've been within striking distance of 1400 blitz on lichess before, I've gotten overconfident, blundered everything and sank back to 1200 within a couple days. Stop trying to get to 1400, start trying to get to 1500. Next time you're at 1398 you won't be 1 win short of your goal you'll still be like, 20, and you don't have to sweat it. It also helps to pick a number of games you're willing to lose in a day, then don't go over it. If you cut yourself off at 3, whether you're 10-3 or 0-3, you can't tilt away a whole week's worth of progress. Perry Mason Jar posted:What if you're too scared to play against humans because you tie your value and intelligence as a person to the outcome of the game? You have to get over this feeling within yourself. My solution was, 1) I only play long games when I'm in the mood to learn, not just play or certainly not to win; 2) be grateful for horrible losses, because the games you'll never forget how you lost are the ones you gain the most improvement from. One thing I read said to literally, out loud, say "thank you" to the computer after a bad loss. Be grateful for the hard ones because they light your path forward. Look at this horrible game I lost: https://lichess.org/SmzXZ3IxahxZ He hung a piece in the opening, I traded down into a winning end game, but couldn't force off the last 2 Rooks. He terrorized my loose pawns, and then I tunnel visioned promoting the a pawn so much I hung back that piece. When I realized I couldn't stop his two outside passers I made a noise like an animal dying, it hurt my heart so bad. But after, I took 10 deep breaths, said "thank you" out loud, then went and played Mario Kart with my kids. The next day I pulled it up to review with the mindset of, "what can I learn?" And there's a TON of stuff for me in there. Huxley fucked around with this message at 17:00 on Aug 22, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 16:57
|
|
|
Huxley posted:Stop trying to get to 1400, start trying to get to 1500. Next time you're at 1398 you won't be 1 win short of your goal you'll still be like, 20, and you don't have to sweat it. Sorry I'm already 3 losses in and screaming too loud to hear you
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 16:59
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:Sorry I'm already 3 losses in and screaming too loud to hear you lol I just edited that post to add: "It also helps to pick a number of games you're willing to lose in a day, then don't go over it. If you cut yourself off at 3, whether you're 10-3 or 0-3, you can't tilt away a whole week's worth of progress." And I mean ... do as I say not as I do lol I'm the same degenerate as everyone else. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 17:01
|
|
|
Perry Mason Jar posted:What if you're too scared to play against humans because you tie your value and intelligence as a person to the outcome of the game? Yeah that’s me and playing humans terrifies me, my chess.com rating is just a picture of a toilet. I used to rage but it stopped affecting me. And being used to online games means there’s One Official Correct Mode while having all these modes frightens and confuses me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 17:47
|
|
|
the trick to playing against humans is that, rather than playing in order to demonstrate your skill or intelligence, you should be playing to make your opponent feel bad and look stupid that way when you win, lol you got them, and if you lose, oh well, you'll get the next one
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 19:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 22:27 |
|
|
cock hero flux posted:the trick to playing against humans is that, rather than playing in order to demonstrate your skill or intelligence, you should be playing to make your opponent feel bad and look stupid There's basically infinity people who are better than you at chess, and infinity people who are worse than you, so just play somewhere that you can get a close game and have fun. The purpose of a rating is to facilitate fun matchups, not to evaluate your worth.
|
|
#
?
Aug 22, 2023 19:51
|
|
