Ever since the whole superGM thing came up it seems that rating and ranking were the only things people seemed to care about. And then there was the addition of engines to live streams in which the engines were supposed to help spectators understand the games but instead lead to the rather cold assumption that if players played non-engine moves they weren't playing well. There seems to be a bigger disconnect to the players now than there ever was despite the game's advancement.
Nakamura and Judit Polgar undeserving of all the credit they get?
Sort:
FromMuToYou wrote:
"If we say that men are naturally superior to women in chess.."
Why would we begin with a faulty premise?
It may have not sounded as I wanted (I specially hate how it sounds if we remove the last two words in that statement). It's obvious that men and women have physiological and sex-related differences. While men are in average better at specific things, women are in other things, too, just because of the average height, brain-related and hormonal differences, etc. And that specially applies when you want to know the limit, how far each one can potentially go.
The premise may be faulty or not , but the rest of the statement reflects the intention of it.
yes Nakamura is #3 now but the #3 4 and 5 and changing hands frequently. #1 and #2 are very stable now, with a gap of about 25 points between #2 and #3 and about 50 points between Magnus and Levon.
Charlotte wrote:
bean_Fischer wrote:
CP6033 wrote:
bean_Fischer wrote:
Polgar can easily beat Carlsen. Period.
lol you can't be serious. Given the rating gap of about 200 points there is absolutely NO way Polgar could beat Carlsen in a match. you were joking right?
Rating doesn't mean anything, it just measures past performance. It's not ranking like General, colonel, captain, sergeant. Of course general commands colonel command captain commands sergeant.
If you want to discuss intelligenly, you will not discuss abt rating at all, but only chess play and chess moves. If this is all abt rating, tehy don't have to play chess at all.
Why do you say she will no way defeat Carlsen? First, she is a female. Second, she is 200 points lower. Third she is getting to 40. All these things are against her.
Carlsen has all the things in favor of him. So No problem, CArlsen will defeat her, zap.
But one thing you forget, Carlsen is a human, so is Polgar. Human vs human. Brain vs brain. If he chickens out, Carlsen should never play chess anymore. And don't give this rating, that rating.
you're funny,
thanks, I accept it as a compliment. Ok, I get it. First she is a female, that's true. Second, ppl percept that a female can't defeat male. Well, it probably is not true. But, the perception is that atm.
I don't despise female at chess. I just state ppl perception. Maybe it could change once Polgar defeats Carlsen convincingly to shut them up.
Could a staff member lock this? there is clearly no more point in arguing with each other,(if i had know this would happen i never would have started this thread),
Khzx wrote:
bean_Fischer wrote:
CP6033 wrote:
bean_Fischer wrote:
Polgar can easily beat Carlsen. Period.
lol you can't be serious. Given the rating gap of about 200 points there is absolutely NO way Polgar could beat Carlsen in a match. you were joking right?
First, she is a female.
Well, this is undeserved discrimination, you would probably get mopped all over the floor by this female, your mom is female.
you are a jerk. That's why I don't take your comment seriously. And I wonder why mod such a jerk like you to participate in this discussion.
I have written a ticket. Here is the response.
We try to respond to all messages within 24 hours. We appreciate your patience. You will receive an email response as soon as we have reviewed your message. Thank you!
| Your Contact Info | |
|---|---|
| Ticket # | #407442 |
| Chess.com Username | bean_Fisher |
| Email Address |
| Subject: This guys bully me. | |
|---|---|
| Dear support, This guy (Khzx) bully me. Please take appropriate action. He wrote: Well, this is undeserved discrimination, you would probably get mopped all over the floor by this female, your mom is female. http://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-players/nakamura-and-judit-polgar-undeserving-of-all-the-credit-they-get?page=5 Post #90. Thank you. Regards, bean_Fischer |
Dec 1, 2013
0
#89
MagicianFromRiga92 wrote:
OK ,lets get back on topic here ,
I used to wonder how good Judit Polgar would be against the top male chess players until I found a tournament which they participated in Nakamura was not there ,but some of the other top talents where there ,
FIDE World Chess Championship 2005 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Judit Polgar comes in last place and simply good out played in most of the matches ,so saying that she could beat Carlsen after what Carlsen just done to Anand is the most hilarious comment I have ever seen .
you need to get out more, maybe go for a walk or something 
CP6033 wrote:
I mean Judit has the highest rating for women, but why don't people pay for attention to players who are a lot better than she is?
Who would that be?!
Judit isn't just the highest rated player she's the greatest of all time nobody is going to take that away from her even when she walks away from the game and stops playing compeitively look at her career and stats.
She writes books and works with small children and kids she's also a very,very good ambassador for Chess like Magnus Carlsen the positive message they send people about our game helps counter the really negative and dark stuff going on with cheaters.
A couple of Polgar's greatest achievements:
http://www.tatasteelchess.com/history/recent/year/2003/standings/1
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chesscollection?cid=1008117
blueemu wrote:
Twinchicky wrote:
... games of Anand, Aronian, Ivanchuk, and especially Carlsen are "dry technical affairs".
Here are a couple of Ivanchuck's "dry, technical" games:
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1594902
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1406152
The second one is against a former World Champion.
This. I don't really have a opinion on everything else in this thread, but I've never thought of Ivanchuck, or heard him described, as dry.
Aronian and Ivanchuk are probably two of the least dry top players of recent decades.
Judit Polgar recently played in the world cup, and lost to the #3 american? i don't remeber exactly, a quite strong 2600. what do you think about that? Is it because Judit just had a bad tournament, or that she isn't as good as she used to be. or because she isn't and was never as good as the player. I would say maybe she is a bit out of shape, and that she isn't as good as she used to be. your thoughts?
fabelhaft wrote:
Aronian and Ivanchuk are probably two of the least dry top players of recent decades.
Ivanchuk is an interesting guy. Very strong at the top, but he has had some losses due to the clock, more than is usual. He is a very interesting player.
Dec 1, 2013
0
#96
CP6033 wrote:
Ivanchuk is an interesting guy.
On a good day, Chucky is the best chess player on Earth. On a bad day, he's the best chess player on Planet Ivanchuk.
not quite on earth but yeah.
Dec 1, 2013
0
#98
CP6033 wrote:
not quite on earth but yeah.
"On a good day".
Remember that he beat both the world's #1 ranked player (Carlsen) and the world's #2 ranked player (Kramnik) in the Candidates.
If only Chucky didn't have so many bad days...
yes, he is an interesting fellow, very strong at times, but at others he doesn't quite make the cake. but yeah he is definately strong.
"If we say that men are naturally superior to women in chess.."
Why would we begin with a faulty premise?