A section to discuss matters not related to Chess in particular.
-
soheil_hooshdaran
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Post
by soheil_hooshdaran » Sat Jan 09, 2016 9:29 pm
Barry Sandercock wrote:Is the question about ' persistent' or 'consistent' ?
Ha!ha!
consistent...............
-
soheil_hooshdaran
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Post
by soheil_hooshdaran » Mon Jan 11, 2016 4:00 am
What's the difference between a 'chess expert' AND a 'chess master'?
-
Roger de Coverly
- Posts: 21339
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Post
by Roger de Coverly » Mon Jan 11, 2016 10:02 am
soheil_hooshdaran wrote:What's the difference between a 'chess expert' AND a 'chess master'?
Rating usually. It's something of an American concept, that players above an Elo of X are "masters" and below that "experts". The USCF awards a "National Master" title at 2200. Chess expert is a lower title for which their cutoff is 2000. Below that are "Class players".
A British player with a rating above 2000 would just refer to himself or herself as a two thousands player, or more likely use the national grading system and describe themselves as a one-seventies or one-eighties player.
-
Alex McFarlane
- Posts: 1758
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:52 pm
Post
by Alex McFarlane » Mon Jan 11, 2016 12:10 pm
Roger de Coverly wrote:A British player with a rating above 2000 would just refer to himself or herself as a two thousands player, or more likely use the national grading system and describe themselves as a one-seventies or one-eighties player.
An ENGLISH player might refer to themselves as a 170 or 180! I do not think that a Scottish or Welsh player would ever refer to themselves in that way. Even though I had an ECF grade of 170 why would I use an internationally meaningless term?
-
soheil_hooshdaran
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Post
by soheil_hooshdaran » Tue Jan 12, 2016 3:58 pm
Meaningless??
BTW, Iran has abandoned its national Rating system altogether
-
IM Jack Rudd
- Posts: 4835
- Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:13 am
- Location: Bideford
Post
by IM Jack Rudd » Tue Jan 12, 2016 4:05 pm
I have an ECF grade of 216. That doesn't mean anything to chess players unfamiliar with English grades. On the other hand, chess players around the world would understand a conversion of that to 2320 or so.
(This is substantially higher than my actual FIDE rating, which is 2255; my ECF grade gets bumped up by unrated events such as county matches and internal Barnstaple club games.)
-
soheil_hooshdaran
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Post
by soheil_hooshdaran » Wed Jan 13, 2016 7:39 pm
Being unrated just means the organizer didn't pay Fide to register it. White the registration fee for a tournament is just 200 pounds for Brits, it is 1'000'000 tomans for Iranis,which is more than a months wage of the typical worker, without substracting the expenses.
Being unrated saves on time and money, and can be a help, both for thhe average player who now can afford to take part in unrated FIDE events, and for the tournaments organizers, who now don't have to register the tournament in advance by several weeks or even months.
-
soheil_hooshdaran
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Post
by soheil_hooshdaran » Thu Jan 14, 2016 1:59 am
Where is the verb n:
"Absolutely ZERO truth to rumors that @JohnKerry apologized to Iran over Sailors. Nothing to apologize for,"
?
-
Barry Sandercock
- Posts: 1356
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:52 am
Post
by Barry Sandercock » Thu Jan 14, 2016 4:19 pm
Rumors (rumours ) and apologized are verbs.
-
MartinCarpenter
- Posts: 3053
- Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 10:58 am
Post
by MartinCarpenter » Thu Jan 14, 2016 4:59 pm
Rumors isn't in that sentence though surely?
What's happened there is that they've cut the sentence short by omitting 'there are' from the front of it. People do that sort of thing
(Actually they've done the same with the second sentence! Maybe its very common usage in America or something, I wouldn't know.).
-
soheil_hooshdaran
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Post
by soheil_hooshdaran » Thu Jan 14, 2016 5:51 pm
What's the most difficult aspect of attacking the King, as stated by IM & FST Andrew Martin after 1:10 minutes in:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up4-DxIU3W0
?
-
soheil_hooshdaran
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Post
by soheil_hooshdaran » Thu Jan 14, 2016 6:10 pm
and what is subject to what, in the next few minutes?
-
soheil_hooshdaran
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:24 pm
Post
by soheil_hooshdaran » Thu Jan 14, 2016 7:39 pm
what's "would shifty mood" in about 5:50 minute?
-
Roger de Coverly
- Posts: 21339
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Post
by Roger de Coverly » Thu Jan 14, 2016 9:41 pm
soheil_hooshdaran wrote:what's "would shifty mood" in about 5:50 minute?
If you are going to ask what Andrew Martin means in his videos, you will have to provide a transcript, or attempt to contact him directly through a PM.
-
Ian Thompson
- Posts: 3568
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
- Location: Awbridge, Hampshire
Post
by Ian Thompson » Thu Jan 14, 2016 10:23 pm
soheil_hooshdaran wrote:what's "would shifty mood" in about 5:50 minute?
He actually said "wood shifting mode", by which he meant White was moving pieces around without a good plan.
I am reminded of your previous post:
soheil_hooshdaran wrote:I attended a free lecture here in USA, and I understood very little. I suppose the problem is mostly do to my bad listening ability.