Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Only Chess Forum

Only Chess Forum

  1. 12 Mar '09 21:27
    This post is not as “DEBATABLE” as my earlier post and may consequentially be viewed as inflammatory, but it is NOT. I have read (in my Ravenous appetite for all things chess) that women can be just as good as men at chess, or that a woman may one day hold the title of World Chess Champion. That makes me UPSET beyond words. I am here to ONCE AND FOR ALL declare that those things will NEVER EVER happen. EVER. There is no chauvinistic tone in my voice whatsoever. It is a FACTUAL as saying that a man will never ever ever breast feed an infant. It defies the LAWS of HUMANITY. Here is why:

    Note: I could write forever on this, but I will paraphrase the key points. Also, there are innumerable articles backing up what I say. Find them yourselves, I wont hold your hands anymore. Now, let’s get down to brass tacks:

    It all starts the evolution of the species from tens of thousands of years ago. Males evolved differently. We were the hunter/gatherers. Females were the nurturers. Males have the killer instinct--it is INNATE. Now, this is not to say that females cannot be killers, but they are not NATURAL born killers. Chess is WAR.

    Females’ brains do not work in the same way as men’s. Men are instinctually more ANALYTICAL. The continuation of the species depended on men solving problems and inventing things. Women are more FEELING oriented. They raised the children, managed the relationships, and understood EMOTION. Feelings and emotions get you NOWHERE in chess.

    This is not to say that a woman cannot excel in chess. They can. But as I earlier posted, they will never achieve ELITE status. Please, do not misunderstand me. I am not disrespecting women, but I AM disrespecting anyone who feels that a woman can rise to the TOP of a field that is PREDETERMINED to be controlled by a man. You may as well say that one day the 3 toed sloth will displace the cheetah as the fastest land animal. AINT GONNA HAPPEN.

    Heck, POLGAR is only rated 2693, hasn’t even broken the ELITE 2700+ mark. And a “paltry” 2693 rating gets you ranked tied for 34th place on the men’s list.
  2. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    12 Mar '09 21:34 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by cheater1
    Heck, POLGAR is only rated 2693, hasn’t even broken the ELITE 2700+ mark. And a “paltry” 2693 rating gets you ranked tied for 34th place on the men’s list.
    http://www.controltheweb.com/polgar/

    "Ranked as high as #8 in the world as recently as October 2005 , with a FIDE rating as high as 2735, Judit (Judith) Polgár is also the first woman ever to play for the World Chess Championship title, in 2005."

    Yes, she broke 2700, and yes, she used to be #8 in the world. That's elite.

    As usual, you are just blatantly wrong about basic facts known to most serious chess players/fans.
  3. 12 Mar '09 21:44
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    http://www.controltheweb.com/polgar/

    "Ranked as high as #8 in the world as recently as October 2005 , with a FIDE rating as high as 2735, Judit (Judith) Polgár is also the first woman ever to play for the World Chess Championship title, in 2005."

    Yes, she broke 2700, and yes, she used to be #8 in the world. That's elite.

    As usual, you are just blatantly wrong about basic facts known to most serious chess players/fans.
    How DARE you contradict HIM? Didn't you see that he said this wasn't "DEBATABLE"? (And how did Judith DARE to become one of the best players in the WORLD? That's UNNATURAL!)
  4. 12 Mar '09 21:51 / 1 edit
    never mind
  5. Standard member Palynka
    Upward Spiral
    12 Mar '09 21:56
    Originally posted by cheater1
    This post is not as “DEBATABLE” as my earlier post and may consequentially be viewed as inflammatory, but it is NOT. I have read (in my Ravenous appetite for all things chess) that women can be just as good as men at chess, or that a woman may one day hold the title of World Chess Champion. That makes me UPSET beyond words. I am here to ONCE AND FOR ALL dec ...[text shortened]... TE 2700+ mark. And a “paltry” 2693 rating gets you ranked tied for 34th place on the men’s list.
    What's with the CAPS?
  6. 12 Mar '09 21:57 / 1 edit
    I don't care, women will always be better looking!
  7. 12 Mar '09 22:08
    Originally posted by Palynka
    What's with the CAPS?
    They are MANLY!
  8. Standard member MetBierOp
    Dutch
    12 Mar '09 22:34
    Originally posted by cheater1
    This post is not as “DEBATABLE” as my earlier post and may consequentially be viewed as inflammatory, but it is NOT. I have read (in my Ravenous appetite for all things chess) that women can be just as good as men at chess, or that a woman may one day hold the title of World Chess Champion. That makes me UPSET beyond words. I am here to ONCE AND FOR ALL dec ...[text shortened]... TE 2700+ mark. And a “paltry” 2693 rating gets you ranked tied for 34th place on the men’s list.
    Gee "only" 2693..

    No thats not top of the world.
    But wait....
    What if I gun down the current top 34 on the FIDE list?? Then allready you would be wrong.

    But let me leave the sarcasm out for a while.. The reason I am reacting is,... to help you.

    If you would make a SERIOUS post on the different thinking abilities between men and woman you could really start a discussion and perhaps a serious one. Now you are just blanting and blurring nonsense. Nobody will take you serious on whatever subject, like that. Most likely the only ones to react will aim at destroying your nonsense statemens. This instead of thinking about the subject given for discussion. If you want to change that, start with the following.

    1) If you have an opinion either give it and explain your reasoning and be open for feedback or keep it to yourself. Currently you are talking like you are an "expert", which you are certainly not.


    2) Stop making statements like "there are many articles backing me up" Name the articles, explain why they back you up and list links for referral.

    I don't feel the need to tutor you further.

    So feel free to take the advice, or keep ranting on if you really enjoy that.
  9. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    12 Mar '09 22:38
    Originally posted by Nordlys
    How DARE you contradict HIM? Didn't you see that he said this wasn't "DEBATABLE"? (And how did Judith DARE to become one of the best players in the WORLD? That's UNNATURAL!)
    It is TRUE...what chance do I have against WELL-TIMED caps for emphasis? I am afraid I am going to get PWNED in this debate any second...
  10. 12 Mar '09 22:46
    Originally posted by cheater1
    This post is not as “DEBATABLE” as my earlier post and may consequentially be viewed as inflammatory, but it is NOT. I have read (in my Ravenous appetite for all things chess) that women can be just as good as men at chess, or that a woman may one day hold the title of World Chess Champion. That makes me UPSET beyond words. I am here to ONCE AND FOR ALL dec ...[text shortened]... TE 2700+ mark. And a “paltry” 2693 rating gets you ranked tied for 34th place on the men’s list.
    Of course chess is war, which is why extremely aggressive men choose to play chess where they push pieces of plastic towards the other guy, but in an aggressive fashion. That's why I gave up contact sports for chess. Not nearly as aggressive
  11. 12 Mar '09 22:47 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by cheater1
    females’ brains do not work in the same way as men’s. Men are instinctually more ANALYTICAL.
    you can't compare such brain potentials between the genders unless the PATRIARCHY of the society (including all the content of relevant ideological apparatuses and the ways in which they are produced and reproduced) is completely DESTROYED and a whole new generation is built upon that society. the current one is "F U * * E D UP", to put it in the patriarchal discourse.
  12. Standard member RECUVIC
    international loser
    12 Mar '09 22:55
    Judit Polgar was rated at 2735-[FIDE] July 2005 aged 29 years --
  13. 12 Mar '09 23:35
    First off, LETS DEAL IN THE PRESENT!!!!!!!! Polgar, as I said before, is 2693. This is 2009, people.

    http://ratings.fide.com/top.phtml?list=women

    She is currently tied for ranked 36 in the world.

    http://ratings.fide.com/top.phtml

    Even at her pinnacle, 2735, she made it to #8. I WILL retract my statement that she will never be elite. 2735 ranked #8 qualifies her as elite. Dont ever say I wont admit when I'm wrong. That's the difference between me and everyone else here.

    However, she has sunk to 36. She got close, but as you all know, rankings are a very complicated thing. To become a number one contender at 2735 is just as hard as being a number 1 contender at 1735. A 2735 with her record is LIGHTYEARS away from challenging the #1.

    I stand by my FACTS.
  14. Standard member wormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    12 Mar '09 23:59
    Originally posted by cheater1
    This post is not as “DEBATABLE” as my earlier post and may consequentially be viewed as inflammatory, but it is NOT. I have read (in my Ravenous appetite for all things chess) that women can be just as good as men at chess, or that a woman may one day hold the title of World Chess Champion. That makes me UPSET beyond words. I am here to ONCE AND FOR ALL dec ...[text shortened]... TE 2700+ mark. And a “paltry” 2693 rating gets you ranked tied for 34th place on the men’s list.
    take it to troll forum, spanky.
  15. Standard member RECUVIC
    international loser
    13 Mar '09 00:08
    'hasn't even broken the elite 2700+' is a direct statement from the original poster of this thread. It would I am reasonably certain be considered preferable by most players if this poster would ensure the accuracy of their statements,before stating that they stand by their facts. Statements claiming to be based on facts which are not accurate, are not facts.