The post that was quoted here has been removedI cannot agree with you more, Duchess64, even if some of what you say is controversial.
"While I would encourage female players to participate in open
tournaments (including male players), I would not oppose the
existence of some female-only chess events as long as they
would encourage more women and girls to play in chess events."
...is also my dilemma. I don't want any gender apartheid. Women can play in mens tournaments, men cannot play in womens tournaments. I'm okay with this with your very good motivation. When the purpous is to bring in more women into the world of chess it's okay, but when a woman tournament is arranged to give women a chance to play with themselves, then it's gone over the line.
What about tournaments for black people, for jews, for blondes, for whatever and exclude the chess players not meeting these criteria? That cannot be Caïssa's intentions.
If women are to play separate chess, not to be mixed with men shows similarities with moslem women not being able to pray with the men in the mosque, women not allowed to be priest in certain christian churches, and so on. Women not being as 'divine' as men.
I want everyone to play in the same tournaments, no matter gender, race, religion ... anything. We are all one in chess.
(I like hearing women's view in this matter!)
Originally posted by FabianFnasHey FF,
I cannot agree with you more, Duchess64, even if some of what you say is controversial.
"While I would encourage female players to participate in open
tournaments (including male players), I would not oppose the
existence of some female-only chess events as long as they
would encourage more women and girls to play in chess events."
...is also my ...[text shortened]... .. anything. We are all one in chess.
(I like hearing women's view in this matter!)
surely we are all one; but solely in chess??
I was just looking at the first round results of the Chess Olympiad going on in Dresden right now (and by "right now"I mean from the 12th-25th of November, not necessarily at this very second).
There is a "men's section" and a "women's section." Judit Polgar is playing first chair for the Hungarian team in the men's division.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=5014
Originally posted by EladarLOL, how about male players who got all their points from ONLY male opponents?
As long as women play a majority of their games with Men, then there's no real danger of over inflated ratings, but if a player gets most of her points from the women's only games, then there is an issue.
Surely, that must count as 'rating inflation' in marshmallow land where you live?
Originally posted by CrowleyIn fairness though, doesn't he have a point? If very few female players competed in open divisions, then comparing male and female ratings could be misleading, just like comparing a 2400+ rated player on a small online chess community with a 2400+ International Master.
LOL, how about male players who got all their points from ONLY male opponents?
Surely, that must count as 'rating inflation' in marshmallow land where you live?
Just to clarify my position, I have not heard an argument for women being physically/mentally less able than men at chess on average that could not be accounted for by other explanations (e.g., sociological pressures, economic pressures, lack of same-sex role models). Absent such an argument, I strongly suspect that the average woman has the potential to be just as strong at chess as the average man.
Okay with that out of the way, I'll venture to ask the question, "How commonly do high rated women (say FIDE 2200+) to play against men?"
Originally posted by black beetleNo no, not only in chess, but in every area of activities (perhaps not in some activities, but I don't want to get the auto-moderator punish me).
Hey FF,
surely we are all one; but solely in chess??
I see every human being as an individual, with his/hers unique properties, whereof gender is one and chess abilities is another, amongst others. I cannot ever say that "Ah, you're a woman, then you are not as good in chess as me, because I'm a man." because I cannot ever prevew any properties of another fellow being of the sole reason that he/she belongs to a specific group of human beings. Everyone is unique.
Originally posted by FabianFnasOh fine then FF dude, everything 's fine for this miserable Telerion's lackey😵
No no, not only in chess, but in every area of activities (perhaps not in some activities, but I don't want to get the auto-moderator punish me).
I see every human being as an individual, with his/hers unique properties, whereof gender is one and chess abilities is another, amongst others. I cannot ever say that "Ah, you're a woman, then you are not as ...[text shortened]... he sole reason that he/she belongs to a specific group of human beings. Everyone is unique.
If female-only chess events were abolished today, there
would be fewer female players in chess events tomorrow.
Would chess be better if there were even fewer female players?
A simple solution would be to exclude closed events from chess ratings. Women can still have their events, just have a seperate women's rating. If you have a national event, let it count towards a national rating. These ratings would be similar to your ratings at internet sites and would in no way determine if one reaches IM or GM status.
It seems only natural to me.
Originally posted by EladarThis subject of female only events is not very imporntant. Unless a larger percentage of the female population takes a sincere interest in chess, and starts participating, men will still rule the chess world regardless of weather there are a large amount of female only events or not.
[b]If female-only chess events were abolished today, there
would be fewer female players in chess events tomorrow.
Would chess be better if there were even fewer female players?
A simple solution would be to exclude closed events from chess ratings. Women can still have their events, just have a seperate women's rating. If you have a national ...[text shortened]... s and would in no way determine if one reaches IM or GM status.
It seems only natural to me.[/b]
😏
As I said earlier, as long as women aren't able to artificially inflate their rankings by playing alot of their games in women only events, then I don't see a real problem. I was just suggesting a way to make sure that no one is able to work the system to achieve a certain level.
I think the solution I provided would be superior to simply giving people points. Compare apples to apples.
It is only logical that at the mid levels all women's scores would be too low. There are alot of bad guys playing at lower levels. Therefore they are giving their points away inflating other scores.
The question comes when you've reached the top of the women's world. You simply take everyone's points.
By having different ratings for each kind of event, you do away with comparing apples to oranges.
But no, we need to play the pc game.
The post that was quoted here has been removedIn all sincerity Duchess, this is some great info you're sharing. I truly am impressed by your knowledge of this subject (honestly).
It would be nice to see a distribution for the understatement of women's ratings. Perhaps on average women's ratings are understated, but different ratings intervals could be overstated (or more greatly understated).
Edit: Oops, I see Eldar has already touched on this.