12879 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
If bullshite could fly, this thread would be an airport.
Consider instead the slogan of Smith College -- "A Century of Women on Top."
The earth suffers from underpopulation, so get to making babies.
What the jellow ?! Are your kidding me?
If I can get back on topic here...something about if women's world championships and titles are insulting...what does it say when the best woman in the world won't complete for the women's championship and the woman who won it cannot do a basic bishop/knight mate? Seriously I am asking since I cannot answer this...at least not until I go to the ladies room
@Zborg - Where are the admission forms for that College? Do they accept older students? :-D
The women (Hou / Ushenina) played (in many male tournaments in the year) and also double dipping in the mens 2013 WCC cycle .. get knocked out in the 1st rounds, take the cash... then go on to play their own womens WCC.
The mens WCC cycle winner got 100k for the recent long gruelling tournament... the womens WCC pot is 200k Euros.
This is "equality" in 2013.
Your info is skewed. You're comparing the prize money the top male player received with the entire pot for the women's WCC.
2013 WCC pot: 510k Euros. 1st Place: 115k Euros.
2013 Women's WCC pot: 200k Euros. 1st Place: 120k Euros.
The women's WCC champion gets more than the WCC champion because the distribution is different. The distribution for the WWCC is split between two at 60/40. The WCC divides it amongst 8 top players.
WCC 2nd Place: 107k Euros.
WWCC 2nd Place: 80K Euros.
All it says is she's like the rest of us. We're not all going to agree with everything said. Yes, it seems insulting on the surface, but as i had mentioned, it has a purpose. She might not have considered it.
There are male GMs that have also failed to do the B+N mate.
You seem to ave very good understanding of her. Actually, you don't even have a clue.
Does woman want WWCC? Don't answer it. You are not entitled.
I'm entitled to my opinion. Do women want a WWCC? Women participate in it, so i would think there are at least some that do.
Edit: You're going to have to troll harder if you want to p888ed me off.
To win the same money as 2400 that a man wins at 2600? Yes, I think most women are interested.
Ron Burgundy put it perfectly:
"I'm a man who discovered the wheel and built the Eiffel Tower out of metal and brawn. That's what kind of man I am. You're just a woman with a small brain. With a brain a third the size of us. It's science."
Do we know who discovered the wheel? A woman's brain is smaller, but not by 1/3.
Wow. Lighten up, Sunshine. That was clearly a joke.. even mentioned the comedy from which it was drawn from...
This whole thing took a pretty bad turn. When people are actually arguing if the quality of play is currently anything close to the same in the WWCC as the WCC. That's not sexist, it's just a fact.
My only question is why do men even care? Yeah, currently women on the averages, play at a lower level than their counterparts. They have their own comeptitions so that women can win. We do the same thing in athletics, where the disadvantages are even more pronounced. Maybe one day, it will be uneccessary. That day is not now. So yeah, women should have their own league. And no, it's not insulting. It's accomodating.
Post #229: I would instead say he has every right to answer it, just that it's unlikely to be as accurate as a woman's answer in this case. But anyone can evaluate the accuracy of his answer as they see fit. If for example it's inaccurate for a person to say that these titles are taken as an insult by most women, or ought to be, then the people reading such a statement can simply decide to not adopt that opinion.
@Goldenturd - I wouldn't call it a joke, since it seems he wants to get me mad. That's what trolls do. It's a big joke to them. It doesn't bother me though. After i type my say, i'm off to the next post or thread to read.
Yeah, i don't think anybody is arguing whether level of play is equal to the WWC. The problem seems to be people think they don't deserve the amount of money they receive. The fact is, the WCC does have a larger pot, but they distribute it differently. If the WCC distributed it the way the WWCC does (60/40), then the WCC champion would be winning about 200k more than the WWCC champion. It's the distribution that makes it seem unfair. Any money they generated for the pot, the players deserve to win. So even if they were total beginners, but people were willing to pay and sponsor the event so that the pot was $1 mil, then the players deserved it.
@Elubas - Yes. I may not be accurate or even right, but i do have a right to speak my mind (with limitations). If what i said was wrong, then simply prove me wrong or don't believe what i said. I don't mind; I'm just offering a different opinion, and hopefully a correct one.
Edit: @Elubas - No one woman can answer for all women either. Asking for women's opinion on it is only better because one can begin a tally. However, without a significantly large sample size, it doesn't mean much as statistical evidence.
Then I don't disgaree at all. If a bunch of 8 year olds paid to enter a tourny for kids only and ended up with a bigger pot than both of those, I'd think that's fair, too.
As for the joke... if you haven't seen the movie (pretty funny, btw), he's quoting a character that is chariacature of 70's chauvenism resisting a woman who is superior to him at his proffession (and clearly his intellectual superior).
Anyway, threads about dead. To sum up: womens's events are fine. Women seem to have less of an affinity for chess in general, reasons debatable. Statistics would insist that eventually a woman will win a non-women's championship. And finally, why do men care that much?
Great summing up, @GoldenT. Username too.
A summing up containing many errors, so not that great really, actually pretty dumb.
Anyway it seems our favourite bottle blonde is struggling, perhaps not surprising given the rating differential.
@GT - Nope, haven't seen the movie. There's more that's being said which makes his posts more trollish than just being a joke. I'll leave it at that.
There could be many reasons why men "care." One reason could be to point out the 'fairness' of it, and use it as a counter argument to the gender wage dispute. I'm sure you and others can come up with more reasons if you think about it.
studying opening theory
by ViktorHNielsen a few minutes ago
12/11/2013 - Topalov-Kramnik, Dortmund 1996
by Arad1376 a few minutes ago
Chess Is Garbage, Here Are My Own Openings
by chessbond001 3 minutes ago
Black to move - what result?
by ViktorHNielsen 4 minutes ago
Who is better Paul Morphy or Magnus Carlsen
by diablo09 4 minutes ago
Need help analysing :)
by messi2 5 minutes ago
what the #$%^was he playing and how did he win?
by QueenTakesKnightOOPS 5 minutes ago
Find the shortest mate
by Mate_in_X 4 minutes ago
Terrible Lag in the UK
by totallyworst 10 minutes ago
QG - Tarrasch vs Albin Counter Gambit
by FromMuToYou 11 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!