Anne Marie Charbonneau 
Alex Lenderman and Abby Marshall, bughouse partners
Greg Braylovskiy
(Anne Marie and) Evan Rosenberg
Chris Williams having a tough evening at the bughouse tournament. Later, I had this dream that someone was in my room, yelling "we can hang out here, she's asleep."
Evan eating a strawberry
Evan and Pascal look at chess
Angel Lopez
Abby, Pascal, Marc Esserman
Hilariously, this is what my opponent laid out on the board at the beginning of round 3 Sunday morning. He was very nice when I asked if he would mind eating it somewhere else.
34 comments:
But seriously what is the rule about eating and/or drinking at the board? Is there a rule? Assuming a water bottle is okay but I've seen people eat pizza at the board which seems rude to their opponents.
Is chess the only game where so many people think it is OK to multi-task at the same time as a competitive game!? I play sometimes at a coffee shop and so it is common for both sides to be drinking coffee and eating pastry but in a serious rated game?! C'mon - sit down and play and don't run off to the bathroom or go smoke after every move.
This is an interesting point in light of the discussion about the alleged cheating incident involving bathroom/smoking breaks. There is part of me that thinks if Roger Federer can play a set of tennis that lasts an hour without taking a bathroom break, why can't chess players make it that long?
Huh, rules on eating/drinking at the board I would think come under the rubric of distraction/annoyance, generally speaking. But really, people shouldn't need a rule for this kind of thing. It's just sleazy to get crumbs all over the place, greasy fingers TOUCHING THE PIECES (*hurl*), etc. Even if I'm just having one of those little breakfast bars, you'll always see me a good ways away from my board when I'm eating.
And while I'm on the subject of manners, one of the things that actually helped me decide in favor of going out to Minneapolis for the HB tournament was the fact that there was a dress code in the rules. It would be nice to have that in some of these other events. (Of course, the pity was that even at the HB, it wasn't really enforced...) I've been known to go semiformal for some games and even entire tournaments. I remember at Foxwoods last year, my opponent and I both wore ties to our game, so I feel that we jointly won the sartorial contest. (Unfortunately for me, my opponent won the actual game as well, and rather easily to boot.) Another reason for me not to eat at the board: tie != napkin.
How about a rule that combines the dress code with the food restriction?
You can either eat at the board or wear clothes but not both.
maybe its me but anne marie and amanda mateer look alot alike. if those of you who dont know who amanda mateer is, look at a blog elizabeth did earlier this year in january about the US chess school, she was a guest for a day
This blog is titled USCL news and _______.
So lets start some. I heard that Alex is engaged to Abby.
I had the same problem on Saturday when my last round opponent pulled out some nasty smelling wrap from Mickey D's and started eating it at the table on my move. I asked him not to eat it at the table. He did put it away. Common curtesy would sense that eating something messy and smelly at the board is rather rude.
I have no problems with an opponent eating a candy bar or cookie at the board, but anything taht requires a utensil and napkins should be eaten outside the tournament room. I do recall one evening at the Marshall a player on an adjoining board eating sushi, complete with soy sauce, wasabi and chop sticks while playing.
I almost always bring some kind of fruit with me in my bag & sometimes I eat it during the game. I remember once bringing some really crisp vegetables without realizing how much noise it would make eating them.
I would have moved had anyone asked, but luckily no one complained because I was really sick that day & starving too, but the whole time I was imagining that they thought I had done it just to annoy them. I try not to do anything to annoy anyone & I generally expect the same from others. One persistent recurring nuisance is the random spectator with a pocket full of loose change who feels the need to jingle it constantly (or intermittently). I once got up & asked one of these guys for change for a dollar just to quiet him down. I don't think he ever suspected why I'd need all that change in the middle of the game, but it worked because he stayed quiet once I bought some of his coins.
What, exactly, is the difference between chess and food?
I think it was me eating the sushi at the Marshall. Forgive me, Polly.
Philip, the dress code at the HB Global applied only to the Open Section. At least that's how I recall it, but I am very confident my memory is accurate. (I played in a lower section and wore jeans and sneakers all the time, with no problem.)
But, I too was favorably impressed by the various efforts the HB organizers made to have a comfortable, professional atmosphere at that event. Too bad they folded up shop soon after.
Anon: It didn't bother me. I was actually impressed by the manual dexterity demonstrated using chop sticks and playing chess at the same time. Besides, unless you're picking up the pieces with the chopsticks, one doesn't have to worry about food particles all over the pieces. :-)
Why didn't Obama's bailout plan include mention of Paul Truong. After all he did bail out all those fortune 500 companies...
Here's the newest USCL news and ______ rumor:
Pascal never uses a computer to analyze because he is actually a cyborg, part human, mostly computer. He actually beat me in a game with his cyborg chess part turned off. That was embarassing.
Is Paul Truong too big to fail?
Seriously, I suspect this might be a really good time to get some grant proposals written. Assuming you have something shovel ready of course.
@Anon on 2/25 13:07:
Well, since the player info sheet apparently is no longer to be found in my records and has probably disappeared from the Web by now, I can't really substantiate it, but I remain in respectful disagreement with your recall of the dress-code applicability at the HB. In any case, even accepting your premise, there was a certain slackness in the enforcement even in the Open section there. There was one IM (who shall remain nameless) that I remember in particular, who spent much of that tournament in an outfit that was unusually scruffy even by the everyday patzer's standards, apparently without sanction. Oh, well...
Anne Marie Charbonneau was rated in the 1500's, but that was based on a small number of tournaments. She played very well in Round 6.
Is she under rated?
http://www.chess.ca/memberinfo.asp?CFCN=113051
It seems a little unfair that they used her old (2001) USCF rating when her current Canadian rating is over 1950.
This tournament is notorious for this sort of thing. Many "unrated" Russian experts have played board four.
No biggie, it's still the most fun tournament there is.
-Matt
Canadians should add 50 points to their CFC ratings, and add "amen, hallelujah" to the Pledge of Allegiance.
They do not resemble each other at all.
"Anonymous said...
maybe its me but anne marie and amanda mateer look alot alike. if those of you who dont know who amanda mateer is, look at a blog elizabeth did earlier this year in january about the US chess school, she was a guest for a day
February 24, 2009 5:09 PM "
A fellow famous for "touring the 50 states" used to noisily eat one or two smelly quarter-pounders and leave extensive crumbs on himself and all around the board. Joy. Nice ambassador.
Philip, I stand corrected - the published dress code for the HB Global indeed applied to all sections (http://www.seniorchess.zoomshare.com/3.html, see "Player Attire" ). That text makes clear it was a voluntary code, though - therefore it's an oxymoron to speak of "slackness in the enforcement."
I must have confused the dress code with the No Early Draw Rule, which appears immediately beneath it in the linked document. The latter is a subject I've had far greater exposure to (in terms of reading and particicipating in discussions on various chess blogs) than the former. It was the draw restriction that was confined to the Open Section, for obvious reasons.
I'm not sure the reasons are obvious, but I didn't really think about it a whole lot. For one thing, I think the "no early draws" rule distorts the game no matter what section it applies to.
The rule that "Players are not allowed to talk to spectators or other players during tournament play." is long overdue. It seems that it's buried in the official rules somewhere, but never enforced. One thing I hate is anyone within earshot or visual range of the (my) game discussing it while the game is still in progress as though it were a spectator sports event. This is especially annoying when my opponent has no clue how to proceed & master level players are spraying the place with all kinds of hints & clues. I actually walked over to a couple of them once to join the conversation & they immediately shut up, so I suspect they had an interest in the outcome.
ATH, in Swiss System tournaments there is no rule against talking during your game. You're not supposed to talk ABOUT the game itself, of course...but I think even that rule is only implied, not explicit - something like, "Players may not receive help from anyone while their game is in progress."
In professional (closed, generally round-robin, FIDE-rated) events, it's different: There, talking generally is banned during play.
But you will find very few active players who sympathize with your wish to ban talking during amateur events. I speak with authority, because I tried it a few years ago and discovered the overwhelming majority of active (and inactive) tournament players I spoke with felt that a talking ban would interfere with the social experience, and thereby diminish their overall enjoyment from participating in a tournament. In a memorable phrase, one critic of the proposal to ban all talking (and cell phones and iPods) from tournament halls wrote, "He wants to turn chess tournaments into Guantanamo Bay!"
Anon...
"
ATH, in Swiss System tournaments there is no rule against talking during your game. You're not supposed to talk ABOUT the game itself, of course...but I think even that rule is only implied, not explicit - something like, "Players may not receive help from anyone while their game is in progress."
"
Not to "go Lizzy" on your ass, but
there is an explicit rule about talking about a game in progress.
At least there was way back when they had printed rule books.
"
But you will find very few active players who sympathize with your wish to ban talking during amateur events.
"
I guess I wasn't clear about this part. Talking is fine as long as it's not within earshot, & as long as it's not about a game in progress (That's actually in the rules). As far as "interfering with the social experience" goes, I'd have to say that that's fine as long as no money or rating points are involved. Otherwise, it's crap. The typical entry fee will buy a lot more social experience just about any place where there's not all that chess stuff involved.
Cell phones & iPods are annoying in ordinary circumstances & orders of magnitude more so in chess tournaments. BTW, cell phones & iPods have also been credited with "interfering with the social experience" of life in general.
Whoever made that absurd remark about Guantanamo Bay either doesn't play much chess or has never been in an enemy combatant detention camp.
just to clarify, "going Lizzy" means to
a. be right?
b. be an insufferable asshole who won't shut up when she's right?
c. hate people who talk at tournaments?
@Anon, thanks for digging up that copy of the HB regs. So I did misrecall after all.
Ok, I was fully prepared to say:
To "go Lizzy" means to voice strong objections in the form of an acerbic, detailed, elaborate point by point rebuttal to a post containing some misleading erroneous information or thinly veiled insults disguised inadvertently or otherwise as a seemingly casual remarks.
(e.g. http://lizzyknowsall.blogspot.com/2007/09/i-could-beat-their-reporter.html a.k.a. the now legendary LaRocca incident of Sept. 2007);
but I'm equally comfortable with "All of the above".
The rules are very explicit about not receiving outside help. I can't quote chapter and verse because I don't have my rulebook with me this weekend. The rules are fuzzier about talking in the tournament room. There are some generalizations about spectator conduct, and a lot stuff gets lumped under "annoying or distracting the opponent". Stinky food and opponents probably fall under this. Yapping spectators may fall under outside assistance if they say something that helps one of the players.
There's certainly lots of other stuff about general distractions & annoyances, but the issue of analyzing games in progress is specifically addressed.
It seems, as I suspected, it's not really a fuzzy area at all.
I found two relevant passages in a recent edition of "The Official Rules Of Chess" by Eric Schiller:
12.3 "No analysis is permitted in the playing room when play is in progress, whether by players or spectators."
13.7 "Spectators and players in other games are not to speak about or otherwise interfere in a game."
Lizzy -- USATE games 2 & 6 analysis still to come I hope? The analysis of the four games so far has been very informative and entertaining.
Larocca incident revisited-lol. Larocca analyzes games and inadvertanly touches off a nerve when he criticized Lizzy in a game she got killed in. Lizzy tries to check Mark's rating but because she cant spell or because it is spelled tricky, she figures he in unrated. She unleashes a long tirade of insults and acts generally snobish since this guy doesnt have any rating only to find out he is rated higher than her....oups
LOL indeed.
The discussion got silly based on a comment (the now well known) LaRocca had made about Lizzy's 25. ...f4 combined with the dreaded bad move question mark. I don't think 25. ...f4 is a bad move if it's followed up correctly which wasn't done in the game or the analysis. It's true she lost the game, but it wasn't because of her move 25.
Things begin to take a specious turn when Lizzy points out that she can't find LaRocca's rating. There's no mention of his being unrated, but she does seem to use this as a way to challenge his credibility.
Except for the attention getting: "This is absolute drivel.", the "long tirade of insults" was actually a laundry list of her reasons for playing 25. ...f4 including a comment about her perception of LaRocca's tone.
I'm going to skip the silicon
analysis & go right to "So I think it's not unreasonable to claim the situation is murky and the evaluation is tricky." This deserves another LOL. Call me old fashioned, but I thought 2100 players were supposed to be good at figuring this stuff out.
I guess that makes me a reverse rating snob.
& just for the record, I know Mark LaRocca & he really is a great guy with a passion for chess analysis, & Elizabeth Vicary is an outstanding competitor (Click here for brilliancy.) with enough imagination & insight to keep this blog alive.
Besides what would the internet be without the occasional merciless hammering of someone for flimsy reasons.
I typed "Ron Young", "notorious", "chess" and "cheater" into Google and was rewarded with this page. Thank you for your service to the community.
Post a Comment