I will take a short break till next week, Monday. I think a lot has happened in a short time and you will want some time to celebrate that fine run by our new NM Roshan Singh.
On Monday, I want to shift focus to the coming MCF AGM. From the information that I have, I think this will be the most important event in Malaysian chess ever.
Look at the officials we have now. Do you think they have a plan to take Malaysian chess to new heights? Well if I am right then after the AGM we will be stuck with them till they retire from old age or something similar. If I am right, they can never be removed again. So it's important you understand this.
Till Monday then. All my best.
ps: In the meantime, look at this version. Here. On Monday, I'll tell you what they don't want you to know.
Thursday, May 31, 2012
NM Roshan- A FGM commentary.
Actually what have we all learnt from Roshan?
I hope his amazing run will add to the already strong body of evidence that ratings are not an accurate measure to predict results especially here in Malaysia. There are still too many distortions in our system.
I also hope that this has added more credibility to FGM's method of evaluation. I believe that I have shown that the weaponry does count.
Am I trying to put anyone down after the fact? I don't think so. I think you will find that I argued that Li Tian would have problems before the fact.
So what is my point? I think that if you go right back to the very beginning of this blog, the message has been consistent. We need a strong pool of talent for us to move to the next level. And we need more tough internal competition and correct training. So we cannot afford to knock out our own players using non chess criteria.
If we look carefully, we will see that a number of our older Juniors have been convinced that the big numbers are true. They have been "convinced" that the "Jimmy method" has validity. Of course his arguments is combined with intimidation and lies.
And when he vouched for Li Tian, a number believed him. And so they have been knocked out of the race by a Jedi mind trick and not by chess.
All of our older Juniors can make a come back. We need all their talent to develop our first GM. They just need to revisit and correct some previous wrong assumptions and raise their game. Li Tian can come back from this. He is still young. But his trainer needs to wake up to the new world instead of being stuck in 1986.
Nobody can play God and predict which Junior will come out on top. Just give them a chance to fight it out in healthy competition and not interfere. Roshan has proven he has the right tools for this level. But this is just the beginning. There are more levels to go.
We now know that Jimmy is not quite here anymore and needs to wake up. But what is still puzzling me is that Peter Long agreed with Jimmy to push for Li Tian as the strongest Junior before the fact. I know that at the time of Asian Youth last year, Roshan was with Peter.
So how come Peter didn't even know the strength of his own student? Why back another horse when you have a Champion in your own stable?
So I submit that their judgement; both Jimmy and Peter's are fundamentally flawed. So let none of us play God. Lets just have good healthy competition to show which method is more correct. On the table we will find the answers.
I hope this will also mean that more Juniors will come back. A little more tweaking and all will have a shot. Don't fall for all that rubbish they are spouting.
Look at competitor analysis and look at mental strength. That is the way forward. In chess the only accurate measure is on the table in healthy and clean competition. That is a big part of the beauty of the game. If you get it right, you win. If you believe in yourself and develop your judgement, you increase your chances.
Don't let them set that glass ceiling ever again for you. Don't let these small minded people define you. The final result rests with you and who you are.
I hope his amazing run will add to the already strong body of evidence that ratings are not an accurate measure to predict results especially here in Malaysia. There are still too many distortions in our system.
I also hope that this has added more credibility to FGM's method of evaluation. I believe that I have shown that the weaponry does count.
Am I trying to put anyone down after the fact? I don't think so. I think you will find that I argued that Li Tian would have problems before the fact.
So what is my point? I think that if you go right back to the very beginning of this blog, the message has been consistent. We need a strong pool of talent for us to move to the next level. And we need more tough internal competition and correct training. So we cannot afford to knock out our own players using non chess criteria.
If we look carefully, we will see that a number of our older Juniors have been convinced that the big numbers are true. They have been "convinced" that the "Jimmy method" has validity. Of course his arguments is combined with intimidation and lies.
And when he vouched for Li Tian, a number believed him. And so they have been knocked out of the race by a Jedi mind trick and not by chess.
All of our older Juniors can make a come back. We need all their talent to develop our first GM. They just need to revisit and correct some previous wrong assumptions and raise their game. Li Tian can come back from this. He is still young. But his trainer needs to wake up to the new world instead of being stuck in 1986.
Nobody can play God and predict which Junior will come out on top. Just give them a chance to fight it out in healthy competition and not interfere. Roshan has proven he has the right tools for this level. But this is just the beginning. There are more levels to go.
We now know that Jimmy is not quite here anymore and needs to wake up. But what is still puzzling me is that Peter Long agreed with Jimmy to push for Li Tian as the strongest Junior before the fact. I know that at the time of Asian Youth last year, Roshan was with Peter.
So how come Peter didn't even know the strength of his own student? Why back another horse when you have a Champion in your own stable?
So I submit that their judgement; both Jimmy and Peter's are fundamentally flawed. So let none of us play God. Lets just have good healthy competition to show which method is more correct. On the table we will find the answers.
I hope this will also mean that more Juniors will come back. A little more tweaking and all will have a shot. Don't fall for all that rubbish they are spouting.
Look at competitor analysis and look at mental strength. That is the way forward. In chess the only accurate measure is on the table in healthy and clean competition. That is a big part of the beauty of the game. If you get it right, you win. If you believe in yourself and develop your judgement, you increase your chances.
Don't let them set that glass ceiling ever again for you. Don't let these small minded people define you. The final result rests with you and who you are.
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
The different routes: Learning to play to win first.
I prefer the route of learning to win first before you learn to draw. But this is a longer route. Lets see why.
When you play to win first, you would start off with different tools. You would choose tools as white and as black to give you the best chance to win. So you will be experimenting. You will be learning more about yourself and what your gifting is.
But you will also lose more times than you will do if you start off with fixed "drawish" weapons. It is higher tension games. This also trains your nerve and equally important judgement.
And yes, your rating will also take a hit for the simple reason you will crash many times and lose early on using this route.
So why would I encourage taking this route? I believe this is the route that bears the better fruit in the longer term. It is more akin to the GM runs that I have seen. You have better control of strategy when you can win with the weapon that gives you the best chances as both white and black, when you need to win, to make that run.
So now you understand why I am not in favour of starting out with "drawish" weapons at the outset. The popular method here is to play one opening till you are very familiar with that opening. Nothing wrong with that. But why choose "drawish" weapons to start out? So you don't lose in the beginning? So you have big rating numbers? Isn't that short term thinking?
Here is the trap. When you reach that high number and you only have "drawish" tools and a limited repertoire, you can be ambushed. It's only a question of time till we find the way to beat you. You are a sitting duck.
And when you have the higher numbers and you hit the ceiling with "drawish" tools and only then you realise you need winning weapons too, you will realise perhaps too late that that beautiful number that you have will take a massive hit till you too have the weapons to win at the higher levels still.
Upside down. You cannot have tournament strategy unless you have all the weapons you need to win and draw as the tournament requires to get to the goal that you have set. But you start off with winning tools first. Now why is this so hard to understand?
If you think you are right, so be it. But when I do it my way, you attack my players, you try to "ban" them. And now you even cry victim as bullies often do and sing accolades to yourself. Like I say, leave the kids out of this. Pick on someone your own size. Not quite liking it now I see. Not easy pickings as young children.
If you are as confident of your methods as I am confident in mine, then prove it on the table. There is no need for the blog war. This argument can only be settled on the table. Don't you think? Why so scared? This is just chess isn't it? Your thinking against mine. Your method against mine. No need to attack my players, no need to "ban".
When you try that you have already lost. That shows you do not have the confidence to meet my players on the table. So you need all those bags of tricks to try and win on the blogs etc. etc.
You should be relishing the chance to show how great you are on the table. You should even be giving my players free entry so you can shut me up for good by showing in the full glare of the public, just how lousy my methods are. So that's my tip to you since you are very slow on the uptake. Try it. It works if you are that superior.
ps: Come to think of it, you should also relish the chance to show your amazing superiority by dazzling us in selection. In fact you should insist on all the titled players competing to show us why you deserve to play for Malaysia instead of hiding behind that number. Now that is chess. So what are you guys talking about?
When you play to win first, you would start off with different tools. You would choose tools as white and as black to give you the best chance to win. So you will be experimenting. You will be learning more about yourself and what your gifting is.
But you will also lose more times than you will do if you start off with fixed "drawish" weapons. It is higher tension games. This also trains your nerve and equally important judgement.
And yes, your rating will also take a hit for the simple reason you will crash many times and lose early on using this route.
So why would I encourage taking this route? I believe this is the route that bears the better fruit in the longer term. It is more akin to the GM runs that I have seen. You have better control of strategy when you can win with the weapon that gives you the best chances as both white and black, when you need to win, to make that run.
So now you understand why I am not in favour of starting out with "drawish" weapons at the outset. The popular method here is to play one opening till you are very familiar with that opening. Nothing wrong with that. But why choose "drawish" weapons to start out? So you don't lose in the beginning? So you have big rating numbers? Isn't that short term thinking?
Here is the trap. When you reach that high number and you only have "drawish" tools and a limited repertoire, you can be ambushed. It's only a question of time till we find the way to beat you. You are a sitting duck.
And when you have the higher numbers and you hit the ceiling with "drawish" tools and only then you realise you need winning weapons too, you will realise perhaps too late that that beautiful number that you have will take a massive hit till you too have the weapons to win at the higher levels still.
Upside down. You cannot have tournament strategy unless you have all the weapons you need to win and draw as the tournament requires to get to the goal that you have set. But you start off with winning tools first. Now why is this so hard to understand?
If you think you are right, so be it. But when I do it my way, you attack my players, you try to "ban" them. And now you even cry victim as bullies often do and sing accolades to yourself. Like I say, leave the kids out of this. Pick on someone your own size. Not quite liking it now I see. Not easy pickings as young children.
If you are as confident of your methods as I am confident in mine, then prove it on the table. There is no need for the blog war. This argument can only be settled on the table. Don't you think? Why so scared? This is just chess isn't it? Your thinking against mine. Your method against mine. No need to attack my players, no need to "ban".
When you try that you have already lost. That shows you do not have the confidence to meet my players on the table. So you need all those bags of tricks to try and win on the blogs etc. etc.
You should be relishing the chance to show how great you are on the table. You should even be giving my players free entry so you can shut me up for good by showing in the full glare of the public, just how lousy my methods are. So that's my tip to you since you are very slow on the uptake. Try it. It works if you are that superior.
ps: Come to think of it, you should also relish the chance to show your amazing superiority by dazzling us in selection. In fact you should insist on all the titled players competing to show us why you deserve to play for Malaysia instead of hiding behind that number. Now that is chess. So what are you guys talking about?
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Is it Ek Teong, Leong or Jimmy in Dubai 1986?
Ref: Here
I am confused. Here. If it was not Jimmy who won the best board, then it would show that he has taken credit from someone else by not correcting Ilham's first post. It would also show that this modus operandi has been used for a long time. It's best we get clarification from either Ilham or Jimmy.
ps: It is true Jimmy, I am more focussed on how to bring Malaysian chess forward in today's internet world than the past. I also see that today's generation of players is the result of the inputs of the last generation. Where everyone else is moving forward, there is a glass ceiling being set up here.
I am confused. Here. If it was not Jimmy who won the best board, then it would show that he has taken credit from someone else by not correcting Ilham's first post. It would also show that this modus operandi has been used for a long time. It's best we get clarification from either Ilham or Jimmy.
ps: It is true Jimmy, I am more focussed on how to bring Malaysian chess forward in today's internet world than the past. I also see that today's generation of players is the result of the inputs of the last generation. Where everyone else is moving forward, there is a glass ceiling being set up here.
What does Roshan's win over Li Tian tell us?
Ref: Here.
I suggest it tells us that it is not about the ratings. In Malaysia there are some guided by going for ratings in tournaments. This is probably because the selection criteria still favours those with higher ratings. But those that go that route are not fighters.
We know that the Juniors improve in spurts, many are hampered from a solid run by exams and other commitments. So each year we see one pipping another. That is normal. That doesn't mean one is better than the other. Not yet.
We know that our IM's are not that strong from the last SEA games selection, from Kelantan Close, from Brunei and from a recent tournament where an IM won the best blogger prize.
Our IM's are weak because of a lack of competition. They rely on ratings gotten from history. And our Juniors are pushing against that glass ceiling. There are even other players coming up the ranks like Zaidan and now Ken Yew.
We also know that a problem with our Juniors is consistency. I suggest that this is because of 2 problems. One is mental toughness and the second is weaponry. If Li Tian had been playing white the results may have been different.
But make no mistake, the juniors are very close to taking over the mantle. As I have argued before, their experience in Asean, Youth and World tournaments have given them the methodology to win. But they don't have the luxury of uninterrupted runs because of studies.
But after 20, we pull the rug; after substantial investments have been poured into them. When they have more time to improve and pose a serious challenge we set the glass ceiling. The ideal selection for the Olympiads is one where all who want to go should compete for the place. This is good for all. The competition keeps both the IM's and the aspirants sharp.
Now what we are seeing is MCF trying to repair that shattered glass ceiling again for reasons best known to them. And for that same reason they are failing the chess community and failing the Nation.
I suggest it tells us that it is not about the ratings. In Malaysia there are some guided by going for ratings in tournaments. This is probably because the selection criteria still favours those with higher ratings. But those that go that route are not fighters.
We know that the Juniors improve in spurts, many are hampered from a solid run by exams and other commitments. So each year we see one pipping another. That is normal. That doesn't mean one is better than the other. Not yet.
We know that our IM's are not that strong from the last SEA games selection, from Kelantan Close, from Brunei and from a recent tournament where an IM won the best blogger prize.
Our IM's are weak because of a lack of competition. They rely on ratings gotten from history. And our Juniors are pushing against that glass ceiling. There are even other players coming up the ranks like Zaidan and now Ken Yew.
We also know that a problem with our Juniors is consistency. I suggest that this is because of 2 problems. One is mental toughness and the second is weaponry. If Li Tian had been playing white the results may have been different.
But make no mistake, the juniors are very close to taking over the mantle. As I have argued before, their experience in Asean, Youth and World tournaments have given them the methodology to win. But they don't have the luxury of uninterrupted runs because of studies.
But after 20, we pull the rug; after substantial investments have been poured into them. When they have more time to improve and pose a serious challenge we set the glass ceiling. The ideal selection for the Olympiads is one where all who want to go should compete for the place. This is good for all. The competition keeps both the IM's and the aspirants sharp.
Now what we are seeing is MCF trying to repair that shattered glass ceiling again for reasons best known to them. And for that same reason they are failing the chess community and failing the Nation.
Monday, May 28, 2012
A death blow to private organisers?
The massive influx of older players returning were I believe, a direct result of selection. For the first time it was no longer private reserve. Keep improving your chess and anyone has a shot at the senior team. And this was good for the private organisers too. Classical and other tournaments flourished.
What is going to happen to private organisers now if you are not tied to the apron strings of MCF. And what will happen to those that want to be independent and sever that apron string?
After 18, the chances reduce drastically from the already slim chance of making the National Junior squad. At below 20 there is only one place available for national representation as official player. After 20, it now looks like no point in improving. Almost zero chance.
Somebody at facebook said "NATO" to me. No Action, Talk Only. To which I replied, "DONT". Do Only No Think.
Is this only the beginning of the reverse of our fortunes? Here.
So who is thinking through our chess policies? Any guesses? At one point it seemed like it was Peter Long. Now I think it may be more like the reality show, "My Big Fat Obnoxious Boss"
Looks like its back to the age group tournaments again for numbers. And for that we can thank MSSM. What is the incentive now for the older players to improve? Will the trend for NC2012 continue?
What is going to happen to private organisers now if you are not tied to the apron strings of MCF. And what will happen to those that want to be independent and sever that apron string?
After 18, the chances reduce drastically from the already slim chance of making the National Junior squad. At below 20 there is only one place available for national representation as official player. After 20, it now looks like no point in improving. Almost zero chance.
Somebody at facebook said "NATO" to me. No Action, Talk Only. To which I replied, "DONT". Do Only No Think.
Is this only the beginning of the reverse of our fortunes? Here.
So who is thinking through our chess policies? Any guesses? At one point it seemed like it was Peter Long. Now I think it may be more like the reality show, "My Big Fat Obnoxious Boss"
Looks like its back to the age group tournaments again for numbers. And for that we can thank MSSM. What is the incentive now for the older players to improve? Will the trend for NC2012 continue?
Selection criteria after the fact.
Of course there will be a selection criteria. They can't send off a team without putting up some sort of criteria. But criteria after the fact is manipulation. Say I want someone to have a shot. Say if I want a bargaining chip to be able to pass to someone and say see I have given you a shot; then they will want criteria after the fact. If my horse wins, no problem. NM goes. If he is top 5, I will say top 6 for playoff etc.
And so politics enters chess. Now do you know why you are not Chief Arbiter Najib? Ref: Here. Or would you need more information?
Mere speculation or competitor analysis and profiling? What have we learnt from chess? We cannot see into the minds of the opponent so we need to learn to reason. We need some basis to predict what our opponents response to our opening will be. We need to "guess" what strategy he will employ. We need to know if there is a plan behind a seemingly harmless move.
The better your profiling, your competitor analysis, the more predictive it is.
So are all these moves because the "player" is dumb or is it because of a deeper plan? Does the plan benefit the chess players or is it only to secure the place of certain officials? That is the question isn't it?
To see the plan, if any, one needs to understand a little about the coming AGM and the new COS (Commisioner of Sports) regulations. I will tell you what I know after this posting. But in the meantime have a look at this. Here. This is one version.
After understanding COS, you will also understand why Greg supported the SEA games selection by telling all and sundry about what happened at the last Olympiad. Think about it. How would I know what to write about unless I was told by someone who was there? And you will also understand why he doesn't want a strong team for the coming Olympiad. Their performance is irrelevant. What is good for the players and the Country is not relevant.
Premeditation? Are we all just pawns in their political game? What happened to the quality of chess?
Coming post. MCF, the iron rice bowl.
And so politics enters chess. Now do you know why you are not Chief Arbiter Najib? Ref: Here. Or would you need more information?
Mere speculation or competitor analysis and profiling? What have we learnt from chess? We cannot see into the minds of the opponent so we need to learn to reason. We need some basis to predict what our opponents response to our opening will be. We need to "guess" what strategy he will employ. We need to know if there is a plan behind a seemingly harmless move.
The better your profiling, your competitor analysis, the more predictive it is.
So are all these moves because the "player" is dumb or is it because of a deeper plan? Does the plan benefit the chess players or is it only to secure the place of certain officials? That is the question isn't it?
To see the plan, if any, one needs to understand a little about the coming AGM and the new COS (Commisioner of Sports) regulations. I will tell you what I know after this posting. But in the meantime have a look at this. Here. This is one version.
After understanding COS, you will also understand why Greg supported the SEA games selection by telling all and sundry about what happened at the last Olympiad. Think about it. How would I know what to write about unless I was told by someone who was there? And you will also understand why he doesn't want a strong team for the coming Olympiad. Their performance is irrelevant. What is good for the players and the Country is not relevant.
Premeditation? Are we all just pawns in their political game? What happened to the quality of chess?
Coming post. MCF, the iron rice bowl.
Sunday, May 27, 2012
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
