Charity Cup Finals - Games and results

@WillScarlett well, all the people who criticized me for bringing up the minority issues in the Ukraine, regarding to Hungarians, Poles, Ruthenians, Russians and Romanians cannot criticize the Ukraine's policy which completely negates the claims of gender minorities, because, if the plight of Hungarians should be swept under the carpet, because the Ukraine is being invaded, then the plight of gender minorities should be swept under the carpet as well. I'm also skeptical about genders being changed by the individual's will, since biological facts are biological facts. The extra pair of XX chromosome, the genitalia, the hormones, the bone and muscle structure as well as many other things quite define what gender a person is of. Yet, I do support the right of the individual to believe in an alternative reality, however, these days the honesty of such beliefs is not always sound, given the fact that it is quite dangerous to be a man in the Ukraine.

A "modern" woman I find appealing - from some 85 years ago:

https://citizenfreepress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/4th-woman.jpg

I would have offered her a light ... but that would have been patronising .

Headline: Ukraine Blocks Trans Women Refugees: "They Are Men, Must Go Back & Fight"

"The Ukrainian government is refusing to allow transgender women to leave the country along with the millions of women and children refugees who have been streaming into Poland and other European nations. Instead, Ukrainian border guards are turning them back and forcing them to return home to join the fight."

"Their reasoning might sour some trans activists in the West: Ukraine's martial law requires all biological males between the ages of 18 and 60 to remain in the country and fight. And it makes no exceptions for trans women."

Wow! The Ukrainians know more about biology than Biden's Supreme Court pick !!!

@Leavenfish such an advice would not be meant to be condescending, nor patronizing. My advice, in its content would suggest that even though women did not fare well in this tournament, it is not a pattern they should assume for themselves. Yet, they do not have to listen to me, of course. They can form their own opinion, yet, it's not very healthy to assume that one cannot reach the very top because she is a woman. I'm a blonde man with blue eyes. Yet, if I see blonde men with blue eyes being trashed in a tournament by others, I do not assume that I would be incapable of performing that due to such similarities. The reason for that is that I do not identify myself with my hair or eye color, but rather with my individual entity. So, if I perform badly in tournaments, then I draw conclusions about my abilities, yet, if people sharing my gender/age/nationality/race or whatever trait, then, should they perform for better or worse, I make conclusions only about their individual persons.

I also respect the choice female chess player did. But, respecting a choice only means that I do not question their right to make that choice and accept the fact that they have made that choice. Yet, I can agree or disagree with their choice.

@Keshava I assume that everyone is able to see who is a woman and who is a man. Some are choosing to not see it, this is why we see some male athletes competing in women's sports events. There was a South Park episode where Cartman started to act like a physically and intellectually challenged kid, so he would be admitted as a contender of the paralympics. It was funny back then, when the world was still normal.

What is a woman? President Biden's supreme court pick implied that it takes a biologist to answer that question. All this talk about Women's chess becomes mute if a 2700 GM decides to identify himself as a woman, takes the title and is celebrated as the strongest woman player since Judit Polgar!
ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWtGzJxiONU
ref: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMNSZPcjsbA

@Michael Jones
I agree with your view.

I cannot watch a single chess game, because of stress of Ukraine :(

Well, to a woman, such advice might come dangerously close to ‘mansplaining’! I don’t think young ladies should pay much attention to what either you or I think they ‘should’ do. Everyone wants something different out of the game. But for young in any sport, role models are very important.

What we see among most all the top female players, is that they CHOSE to play on the Ladies Circuit (for lack of a better phrase). A small percentage might opt to play occasionaly in a large Open tourney or even the smaller where they would find themselves playing better (sometimes MUCH better) males.

But it is are – they CHOSE not to. Lets respect that.

Why? My guess is that as long as they are active as ‘chess professionals’ they simply need to make money from their pursuit in order for it to remain a viable option. Playing in such tourneys with far stronger men seems to be less of an option when you think of it that way. Fair enough - especially when it comes to OTB tourneys and the travel expenses and time expenditure. But that's just my best guess.

@Leavenfish you are making a point, of course, since it is sad to see the results of women in this tournament, but I still believe that it is good to invite women. I tend to think that Michael Jones's points are quite right and I do like to see matches contrasted by all sorts of attributes, gender included. The battle of the sexes was interesting, because both the men's and women's team had a chance up to the very last moment. Yet, this is also interesting, because we can see how the best women today (Polgár and Yifan being inactive) fare against the best male players. If we mainly identify ourselves with our individual entity, rather than a group identity, than such misfortunes will not affect us seriously. So, I would advise female chess enthusiasts to not take the results very seriously in concern of their own individual abilities. It may well be possible that the female players were beaten hardly here, but that does not mean that female chess enthusiasts would not be capable of faring better, as long as they are talented and work hard.

@ lajosarpad said “I think it is a good idea to invite ladies, this way they have the opportunity to prove themselves”

Of course you would have a solid point if they were named Judit Polgar or even Hou Yifan , In their prime, they could hold their own and even be a threat to to win tournaments against the top male players. In the absence of lights like these…arguments like I allude to can and will be made because of results like we are seeing.

Tingjie, Kosteniuk and even Wenjun simply are not good enough to finish much better than where their ratings indicate they will likely end up.

I brought this up because of the argument that some have made in the past (read the Alexi Root articles and some of the things said in the comments) that these kinds of results might just work to reinforce stereotypes that ‘women are just not as good as men’ – and all the baggage that comes with that….when it’s really just a function of ones strength as alluded to by their elo.

Doing well in and winning tournament against regular male GM’s within reach of their own ratings is one thing and something to fairly celebrate. I mentioned that I love such tournaments. But when a young girl looks up to a Kosteniuk, Tingjie or Wenjun and sees their heroes always ending towards the end of the crosstable against men or boys (who are simply a LOT stronger than they are), it might well be disheartening….maybe even reinforce some idea they have heard and think ‘I can try as hard as I can…but, how can I ever be as good as a man if my hero’s can’t”?

The organizers get more eyes on their tournaments with the ladies and the social media types (think Hansen) …but at what cost?

Women are never going to progress beyond 2600 if they only play against other 2600s - they need to gain experience against 2700-2800s in order to reach that level themselves, as Polgar demonstrated. Most current female players haven't very often been given the chance to do so (although Hou Yifan has competed in some elite level invitational tournaments, with a win over Caruana to her name), so it's hardly surprising that the first few times they do so, they fare poorly. The answer to this is not to stop inviting them: it's to keep doing so. I'm sure the more often they face the top players, the more their results will improve.

@Leavenfish I think it is a good idea to invite ladies, this way they have the opportunity to prove themselves. It was not a successful showcase this time, but maybe it will be the next time.

Stereotypes in general exist because a group of people believe in some collective statement, like "all Russians are guilty", or "women are weaker in chess", etc. The validity or invalidity of such claims does not really depend on how comfortable we are with them, it rather depends on facts instead. In terms of women in chess, we have seen that women can play very well, but the highest level of female chess never reached the highest level of male chess so far, Polgár and Yifan (both inactive) could pressurize even the best male players, but only Polgár could achieve the opportunity to play for the world championship in the 2005 San Luis FIDE world chess championship and she placed last at that point.

So, at this point it is factually accurate to state that female chess tends to be weaker than male chess on the highest level now, but I'm not sure about the reasons. Short believes that the male brain is better suited for chess. I do not know whether he is right. But I do know that since there is a Women's World Chess Championship, where one can become a World Champion with much less effort than in the World Championship, there are reasons for women not to work quite as hard as men while training. Polgár seems to agree with this, since in a 2011 interview she said that in the past she was never interested in Women's World Championships, but in recent years (i.e. just before her 2011 interview), "the mentality of a couple of the women players has changed".

@Leavenfish

"Serious question...although given the level to which 'discussion' can sometimes decent here, I hope it can stay civil."

Frankly, this largely depends on you and Aighearach, especially in light of earlier discussions.

"Just as I feared <sigh>...NOT the place for a real discussion."

Absolutely correct. But this criticism is valid for many. For instance, you earlier accused me with whataboutisms, yet, the thoughts you attributed to me were not expressed by me, so it was a baseless criticism. And, in another discussion I have asked you a genuine question and you accused me of being a troll. The same Aighearach, who displayed a lack of willing for a civilized discussion here into your direction, took the opportunity that you accused me of being a troll and started to lie about my world view, stating obvious false statement after obvious false statement. So, both you and me and everyone else should at least try to behave in a civilized way. It is not quite consistent to lament about the lack of willingness of others to engage into a civil discource, when you displayed the same behavior you are lamenting about. Aighearach seems to be beyond hope, but who knows? Perhaps I'm wrong.

References:
https://en.chessbase.com/post/fide-president-arkady-dvorkovich-speaks-out-against-the-war-in-ukraine
https://en.chessbase.com/post/russia-and-belarus-teams-suspended-from-fide-competitions

narrow miss for Pragg .... still good performance by the Young Indian Trio ...

Leavenfish wrote: "Still, a very real argument could be made that a competition like THIS one...might, among other things, serve ultimately and inadvertently to only strengthen some existing stereotypes."

And then failed to make any such argument. I'm not sure what you are angling at, but it doesn't seem to be a "real discussion".

@Aighearach. Just as I feared <sigh>...NOT the place for a real discussion.

@Leavenfish
That's a very low-brow type of discussion. All you said was, "Ugga wugga? Wugga! Stereotypes."

I'm curious why didn't instead single out Jones, who is also at the bottom of the crosstable. Or Praggnanandhaa and Hansen, who are both lower rated than Jones.

Oh, right, we know why. Everybody knows why.

Serious question...although given the level to which 'discussion' can sometimes decent here, I hope it can stay civil.

Organizers are free to invite whomever they want...and for most of these the Magnus groups seems to be apart of, the invites seem to be largely based on 'marketability'...but should the ladies even be being invited?

I mean, mixed competition is all fine and good and most everyone is for it - the resent competition in Gibraltar springs to mind. Very good and I enjoyed watching the games. But, that was a different animal as there they were playing men roughly the same rating. Here they are playing WAY out of class (rating wise) and it shows in games and overall results.

I guess if I were a woman, I would love to be asked to compete although I can compete against men in open tournaments. It's a quick online payday and I would like the competition. But that's just me.

Still, a very real argument could be made that a competition like THIS one...might, among other things, serve ultimately and inadvertently to only strengthen some existing stereotypes.

well done praggnandha ....

Are the Chinese women playing chess past midnight?

@Michael Jones I think Northwolf only visited this page to leave this comment.

I also consider classical chess more interesting than rapid or blitz, nevertheless, even the quicker formats can be interesting. I would like to remind myself and others about the fantastic game between Carlsen and Karjakin in the tieabreaks of their world championship match, where Carlsen has beaten Karjakin with a brilliant Queen sacrifice and a rare pattern of mate.

@Theochessman: you reckon Ding's king march against Carlsen, or Hansen's queen and rook beating Navara's two queens, are "not really interesting"? What does it take to satisfy you? And @northwolf, you're posting on the page showing the live games, so you clearly are following it.

@theochessman, any event with Magnus is interesting.

Pfff....rapid chess, 4 rounds a day.
That's not really interesting.
There's enough speed chess on the internet already.

racism cup..i wont follow.gens una sumus but without russian,iran,philistine,african.latin.